Bill Overview
Title: To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the extension of certain contracts to procure rail rolling stock, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill prohibits the execution and extension of certain contracts between public transportation agencies and rail rolling stock manufacturers to procure rail rolling stock.
Sponsors: Rep. Crawford, Eric A. "Rick" [R-AR-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals affected by changes in rail rolling stock procurement
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill affects rail rolling stock manufacturers who contract with public transportation agencies.
- Employees working in public transportation agencies will be affected.
- Passengers using public transportation may also be indirectly affected by changes to procurement strategies.
- The rail rolling stock manufacturing industry is global, with many countries involved in production.
Reasoning
- This policy affects multiple stakeholders, including public transportation employees, passengers, and manufacturers.
- Around 50 million Americans may be indirectly or directly affected, primarily those associated with rail transportation.
- Impacts may vary from high for rail manufacturers to low for ordinary passengers.
- Budget constraints suggest focusing on changes in manufacturer contracts and potential workforce shifts.
- Long-term impacts may alter local economies dependent on these contracts.
Simulated Interviews
Public Transportation Manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could complicate efforts to modernize our fleet as it limits our supplier options.
- With fewer bidders, costs might increase, and project timelines could extend.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Rail Manufacturing Engineer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy directly impacts our US operations; we risk losing contracts and needing to downsize.
- We need strong local partnerships to adjust.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Public Rail Passenger (New York, NY)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am worried about fare increases or service disruptions if the policy raises costs.
- So far, no immediate changes, but long-term effects are concerning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Rail Infrastructure Consultant (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to more local sourcing initiatives, which might be positive if managed well.
- The transition phase could be rocky for contracts and project timelines.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Local Government Official (Boston, MA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We're worried about budget constraints increasing due to this policy.
- We might need to lobby for higher funding to offset costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Rail Manufacturer Employee (Seattle, WA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We see uncertainty ahead in securing contracts which sustain our business.
- Our growth ambitions in the US market might be hindered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy challenges current procurement norms, providing an interesting case study.
- Monitoring its effects will be crucial for future infrastructure plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Commuter Advocate (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Little immediate impact on commuters, but any decrease in service reliability from contract issues is a concern.
- We prioritize keeping fares stable and ensuring service quality.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Public Transportation Rider (Denver, CO)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't affect my travel options much right now.
- I'm more concerned about potential long-term impacts on service quality.
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 |
Urban Economist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides a natural experiment in how market restrictions affect local economies.
- Expecting some mixed economic signals from increased local production efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
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 dependency of public transportation agencies on specific rail rolling stock suppliers.
- Potential disruptions to public transportation timelines due to procurement delays.
- Long-term impacts on domestic manufacturing if U.S.-based suppliers are affected.
- Possible benefits from stimulating domestic competition and reducing foreign dependence.