Bill Overview
Title: American Port Access Privileges Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires port authorities that receive funding under the Port Infrastructure Development Program or Maritime Transportation System Emergency Relief Program to provide preferential berthing for loading and unloading certain vessels, including U.S. flagged vessels and those under contract to the federal government. The Bureau of Transportation Statistics may collect data on berthing and cargo practices at U.S. ports.
Sponsors: Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-3]
Target Audience
Population: All individuals involved in the U.S. port operations and supply chains that are influenced by these U.S. policies
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill targets port authorities receiving funding under specific programs, which suggests it will impact all ports participating in these federal programs.
- Port workers and employees involved in logistics and supply chains at these U.S. ports will be affected as their work schedules and operations could be altered.
- Shipping companies with U.S. flagged vessels or those under contract with the federal government will see operational changes due to preferential treatment.
- The cargo being loaded and unloaded may affect various industries dependent on the timeliness and efficiency of port operations.
Reasoning
- The beneficiary of this policy would most likely be shipping companies, especially those with U.S. flagged vessels. They stand to gain by receiving preferential treatment in berthing, which could speed up operations at ports and reduce costs.
- Port workers and those in logistical roles may see shifts in their work patterns, potentially improving job security if U.S. flagged vessels require more consistent support
- Employees of foreign shipping companies might see a negative impact as preferential treatment is given to U.S. flagged vessels, possibly leading to increased waiting times for their cargo.
- U.S. businesses dependent on imports and exports handled at these ports could experience changes in efficiency, impacting their supply chains.
- The policy, with its budget limitation, is structured to focus efforts on ports that already receive specific federal funding, rather than revamping all U.S. ports, hence the immediate effect might be somewhat contained, with ripple effects over time.
Simulated Interviews
Port operations manager (Long Beach, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy should streamline operations for American vessels, which might ease my job in terms of scheduling.
- I'm concerned about foreign vessels' reaction to these changes, which could lead to operational friction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Shipping company executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is a relief as it should lower operational delays for us at the ports.
- I'm hopeful that this leads to increased revenue through operational efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Logistics coordinator (Miami, FL)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried this policy might complicate my job with increased waiting times for non-U.S. vessels.
- It could mean more bottlenecks and customer complaints in the short term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Customs broker (Newark, NJ)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Being a customs broker, I'm indifferent as long as regulatory procedures are clear and consistent.
- However, any delays in container movement could affect timelines and my work rhythm.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Supply chain analyst (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With more preferential treatment for some vessels, there might be new patterns to analyze, which is exciting.
- It could lead to initial disruptions, but I believe it's manageable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Longshoreman (Savannah, GA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My workload could become more predictable, which is beneficial.
- Concerned about possible job loss if foreign shipping companies reduce port activities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Shipping consultant (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My business might see a downturn if companies decide to shift operations away due to policy unpredictability.
- However, U.S.-flagged ships are a clientele I can target more aggressively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Marine student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a student, this is fascinating to study, seeing policy directly impact operations.
- It's a model case for examining U.S.-centric policies versus global operational norms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Port authority official (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could enhance our port's capabilities by securing more funds through compliance.
- May require staffing adjustments to manage increased load from preferred berthing procedures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Importer (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about increased delays in getting my products if foreign vessels encounter longer wait times.
- We might need to adjust shipping routes to mitigate operational changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy affects all ports receiving funding, potentially leading to systemic changes in port operations.
- The data collection component is crucial for evaluating the policy's impact and requires sustainable funding.
- Shipping companies may experience changes in scheduling and routing due to preferential treatment.