Bill Overview
Title: Freight Rail Shipping Fair Market Act
Description: This bill reauthorizes through FY2027 the Surface Transportation Board and otherwise revises provisions related to rail transportation policies, including policies related to freight rail transportation.
Sponsors: Rep. Payne, Donald M., Jr. [D-NJ-10]
Target Audience
Population: Freight rail-dependent individuals
Estimated Size: 300000000
- The bill affects the Surface Transportation Board, which regulates rail transportation.
- Millions of people rely on freight rail to receive goods such as food, raw materials, and consumer products.
- Businesses across various sectors, such as manufacturing, agriculture, and retail, depend on freight rail for shipping goods.
- Freight rail workers and industry employees will be directly affected by changes to policies.
- Consumers might see impacts on goods prices if changes affect shipping costs.
Reasoning
- The policy's budget constraints should focus effects on those most affected by freight rail, such as industry workers and businesses relying on rail transport.
- Consumers' indirect benefits might be smaller, as changes could spread across larger populations.
- The policy is expected to renew the Surface Transportation Board's regulatory powers, maintaining stability for rail-dependent industries.
- Worker-related aspects will also be crucial, suggesting direct employment impacts during policy implementation.
Simulated Interviews
Freight Rail Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the policy will help ensure job stability, which is my main concern.
- If the policy improves transport reliability, it's good for the industry.
- I'm hopeful for better regulatory protections.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Small Business Owner (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My business depends on timely and cost-effective goods shipment.
- If the policy can ensure stable shipping costs, it will benefit me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Logistics Manager (New York, NY)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems crucial for ensuring smooth logistics operations.
- Any disruptions or improvements in freight rail impact my job directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Engineer (Omaha, NE)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this act safeguards the rail industry's future.
- Stability in the rail sector is crucial for my pension's security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Agricultural Producer (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reliable and affordable freight options are vital for my business.
- This policy could help stabilize shipping costs, ensuring profit margins.
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 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Urban Planner (Seattle, WA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might encourage more sustainable freight practices.
- Ensuring freight rail efficiency is part of broader sustainable policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Supply Chain Analyst (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Effective rail policies are vital for the accuracy of my work.
- The policy could signal a strong future for rail logistics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Freight Rail Regulator (Denver, CO)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act could strengthen regulatory frameworks, fostering enhanced operations.
- Maintaining a fair market is key to my role and industry health.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Freight Broker (Kansas City, MO)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hoping the policy improves cost efficiency in rail transport.
- A stable rail system benefits brokers by reducing uncertainties.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Transportation Economist (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could have long-term benefits for economic stability in the rail sector.
- Changes in freight rail could ripple across multiple economic levels.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 3: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 10: $270000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $320000000)
Year 100: $350000000 (Low: $280000000, High: $420000000)
Key Considerations
- Stakeholder input, including from freight rail companies and consumer groups, is crucial to accurately assess impacts.
- The economic environment and freight rail industry conditions will significantly influence the policy's cost and savings.
- Potential legal challenges could arise from various stakeholders affected by these regulations.