Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8412

Bill Overview

Title: Freedom to Haul Act

Description: This bill exempts from federal-aid highway vehicle weight limitations a five-axle truck tractor-semitrailer combination vehicle operating on a segment of the Interstate System if it: has a gross vehicle weight of 97,000 pounds or less; has three rear axles on the tractor of such vehicle; and complies with the single axle, tandem axle, and bridge formula limits.

Sponsors: Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-18]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in the trucking industry, either directly or indirectly

Estimated Size: 4000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Long-haul truck driver (Missouri, USA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The Freedom to Haul Act means my trips will be more productive with heavier loads.
  • I worry about the safety aspects of heavier trucks.
  • If this means more wear on roads, it might lead to more delays in repairs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Owner of a small trucking company (Illinois, USA)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could help us with operational efficiency and profit margins.
  • It's an opportunity to be more competitive with larger companies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Logistics coordinator (California, USA)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's beneficial for scheduling and efficiency to have fewer trips for the same volume.
  • Potential concerns about the increased cost of possibly more rapid road deterioration.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

State highway maintenance worker (Texas, USA)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Heavier loads could mean we are busier and might require more resources.
  • It could lead to long-term job security but with increased workload pressure.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Independent truck driver (Georgia, USA)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm optimistic about the potential for increased earnings per trip.
  • There might be additional maintenance costs or safety concerns with heavier loads.

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 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Public policy analyst (New York, USA)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The bill is a step towards improving logistics efficiency.
  • More thorough studies are needed on long-term infrastructure impacts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Freight broker (Ohio, USA)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could make transactions more efficient and cost-effective.
  • There could be an initial logistical challenge adapting to new weights.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Supply chain manager (Colorado, USA)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased loads mean fewer trips, reducing time and costs.
  • Concerned about the potential for increased trucking charges from road wear impacts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Retired truck driver (Florida, USA)

Age: 63 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hesitant about changes due to safety concerns.
  • It's an interesting move that seems economically beneficial for the new drivers.

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

Environmental researcher (Washington, USA)

Age: 26 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Concerned about the environmental impact of increased truck weights.
  • There might be a need for policies mitigating emission impacts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)

Year 2: $82000000 (Low: $61000000, High: $105000000)

Year 3: $84000000 (Low: $62000000, High: $110000000)

Year 5: $88000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $115000000)

Year 10: $95000000 (Low: $68000000, High: $125000000)

Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Key Considerations