Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8607

Bill Overview

Title: To direct the Secretary of Transportation to give priority consideration for certain Department of Transportation grant programs to eligible projects that improve or build resiliency in the supply chain, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill directs the Department of Transportation to prioritize providing grants under certain programs for projects that improve or build resiliency in the supply chain, including multimodal projects.

Sponsors: Rep. Crawford, Eric A. "Rick" [R-AR-1]

Target Audience

Population: People whose wellbeing is affected by supply chain efficiency and stability

Estimated Size: 330000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Truck Driver (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the policy might improve road conditions which would be great for my job.
  • Having more reliable routes could ease some of the stress I experience daily.

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 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 4

Logistics Manager (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • By enhancing infrastructure, our operations might become more efficient and cost-effective.
  • I'm optimistic that with fewer disruptions, my work stress will decrease.

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 8 6
Year 20 8 5

Retail Store Owner (Houston, Texas)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If supply chain efficiency improves, I could receive products more reliably and at lower costs.
  • Not sure how quickly these changes will trickle down to my level, but hopeful they will.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Port Operator (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Enhancements to intermodal transport systems could reduce congestion and stress at the port.
  • This policy feels like a proactive step to address pressing infrastructure needs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 6

Warehouse Coordinator (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improvements may lead to more stable work hours and enhanced safety standards.
  • I hope the policy boosts job security in the long run.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Consumer (New York, New York)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a consumer, resilient supply chains are key for reliable access to products.
  • I'm curious to see if product costs might decrease as a result.

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 6
Year 20 6 5

Manufacturing Plant Manager (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 44 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If delivery schedules are more reliable, we can maintain production levels more consistently.
  • Hopefully, these projects come to fruition soon.

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 7 5
Year 20 7 4

Public Policy Analyst (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill has potential, but real success depends on execution and follow-up.
  • Critical to ensure funding efficiently addresses actual bottlenecks.

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

Bicycle Courier (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 26 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Better road conditions through this policy could make my deliveries smoother.
  • I'm slightly skeptical but hopeful for positive changes.

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 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 4

Import/Export Specialist (Miami, Florida)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might streamline the customs process through better infrastructure.
  • Ultimately, a resilient supply chain benefits everyone involved.

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 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)

Year 2: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)

Year 3: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)

Year 5: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)

Year 10: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations