Bill Overview
Title: Imported Seafood Safety Standards Act
Description: This bill prohibits the importation of any seafood from a foreign country unless the country complies with U.S. standards for seafood manufacturing, processing, and holding. Among other requirements, the bill requires an annual inspection of each foreign facility that exports seafood to the United States to ensure compliance with U.S. standards.
Sponsors: Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3]
Target Audience
Population: people involved in or consuming imported seafood production
Estimated Size: 15000000
- The bill affects countries exporting seafood to the United States as they must comply with U.S. standards.
- Changes in regulatory standards might lead to increased costs for foreign producers.
- Consumers in the U.S. may see changes in the availability or price of imported seafood.
- The seafood industry is a global market with significant production in Asia, Europe, and other regions.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily impacts Americans involved in importing, distributing, retailing, and consuming imported seafood.
- People with occupations linked to domestic seafood or non-seafood industries might be less affected or not at all.
- Due to the policy's strict requirements, there might be changes in the market affecting availability and prices of seafood, with costs potentially rising due to compliance expenses passed to consumers.
- Impact may vary significantly among consumers based on their dependency on imported seafood and their price sensitivity.
- U.S. seafood industry employees (processing domestic seafood) might see indirect benefits if domestic products become more competitively priced relative to imported options.
- While seafood is consumed widely, not all consumers are equally affected, as some eat seafood more regularly or prefer imported options.
- For a significant portion of the population, the impact might be low, as other dietary options are available.
- This policy aims to improve safety, which could lead to long-term health benefits, although these might not be immediately apparent.
Simulated Interviews
Seafood Restaurant Owner (New York City, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the potential delay in getting specialty seafood from our top suppliers.
- While I appreciate improved safety standards, I worry about added costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Seafood Distributor (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could disrupt supply chains, leading to short-term losses.
- Over time, it may encourage more local sales, which could be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Marine Biologist (Boston, MA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased standards may support sustainable practices, which I view positively.
- Long-term, these changes could improve ocean health significantly.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that my favorite seafood dishes will become pricier.
- On the other hand, safety improvements are welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
College Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with my views on environmental and health safety.
- I'm glad to see more regulations, even though I am not directly impacted.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Grocery Store Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might face challenges in stocking certain popular imported seafood.
- Hopefully this will drive more interest in local seafood offerings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Chef (Chicago, IL)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about cost increases, but improved quality control is beneficial.
- Will adapt our menu if necessary, focusing more on local sources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Food Blogger (Portland, OR)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety is essential for my blogging topics, so I support improved standards.
- Changes in availability will impact what restaurants I can review.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Seafood Supply Chain Analyst (Tampa, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Expect disruptions initially, but markets will adjust over time.
- Policy might lead to increased interest in my analyses, deepening my expertise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Environmental Activist (Austin, TX)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A step in the right direction for sustainable seafood sourcing.
- Supports the mission to improve public health outcomes in the long run.
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 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $85000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $105000000)
Year 3: $95000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $110000000)
Year 5: $105000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $120000000)
Year 10: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $140000000)
Year 100: $130000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $150000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill seeks to ensure imported seafood meets U.S. safety standards, potentially increasing costs for foreign exporters.
- Increased oversight could lead to higher seafood prices but may improve consumer confidence in the safety of imported seafood.
- Fostering better seafood quality might enhance U.S. suppliers' market share if imports decrease.