Bill Overview
Title: Gas Price Gouging Prevention Act
Description: This bill prohibits any person from selling, during a proclaimed international crisis affecting the oil markets, gasoline at a price that (1) is unconscionably excessive, and (2) indicates that the seller is taking unfair advantage of the crisis to increase prices unreasonably. The President may issue a proclamation of such a crisis that specifies the geographic area covered and how long the proclamation applies. The bill provides for enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission and imposes enhanced civil penalties and criminal fines. It also authorizes state attorneys general to bring a civil action to enforce the prohibitions of this bill.
Sponsors: Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: individuals dependent on gasoline for transportation and goods
Estimated Size: 300000000
- The legislation is designed to prevent excessive gasoline pricing during international oil crises, which suggests it impacts those using gasoline, particularly drivers and public transportation.
- Gasoline consumption is ubiquitous in today's society, affecting a vast number of individuals globally who rely on it for transportation and goods suppliers.
- According to OPEC data and world population stats, there are over 2 billion automobiles worldwide, indicating a vast number of people potentially affected as vehicle owners.
- International crises affecting oil markets can impact global economies, thus affecting numerous individuals reliant on stable economic conditions.
- Many industries such as logistics, commuting, agriculture, and manufacturing rely heavily on gasoline for operations; thus, employees and operators in these industries will be affected.
Reasoning
- The target population includes a wide range of gasoline consumers, which extends beyond just vehicle owners to include industries reliant on gasoline, such as logistics and agriculture.
- The policy aims to curb profiteering during crises, which theoretically benefits all gasoline consumers through stabilized prices.
- The budgetary constraint suggests a need to focus efforts on enforcement and monitoring, as well as public awareness, to maximize the effectiveness of the policy.
- Given the substantial scale of vehicle ownership and gasoline reliance in the U.S., the policy's direct financial impact may be more pronounced on lower-income households who are more sensitive to price changes.
- A mix of individuals not directly affected (such as those using electric vehicles or living in urban areas with substantial public transit systems) and those vastly impacted (such as rural residents and long-distance commuters) will provide a broad perspective on the policy's implications.
Simulated Interviews
Delivery Driver (Denver, CO)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy sounds great because gas prices can get insane, and I really need to save as much as I can.
- I hope this means I won't have to choose between gas and other essentials during a crisis.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
School Teacher (Dallas, TX)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it will help during tough times, but I'm not sure how much impact it will really have day-to-day.
- Gas is always a big part of my budget. Anything to help would be appreciated.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software Developer (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not directly impacted, but I can see how it's important for those who drive a lot.
- This is more of a concern for friends and family back home who drive daily.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired (Seattle, WA)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- During a crisis, I appreciate any effort to keep essentials affordable.
- While I don't drive much, I count on gasoline prices being steady for my budgeting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Logistics Manager (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for our operations as fuel costs significantly impact logistics budgeting.
- It's a relief to know there's a mechanism to prevent price spikes during crises.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Farmer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Farming needs consistent fuel pricing; otherwise, it eats into my profits significantly.
- Policies like these help keep my business afloat in the unpredictable market.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Freelancer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not very affected, but I believe it's a necessary policy for many Americans.
- It seems like a sensible policy to prevent exploitation.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Public Transit Operator (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for preventing sudden shifts in operational costs, which affect my work hours.
- I hope it makes for more stable working conditions in crises.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Self-employed handyman (Rural Kentucky)
Age: 56 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any measure to prevent gas gouging is a step in the right direction, especially for rural folks like me.
- I'm cautious but hopeful this will make a difference.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Corporate Executive (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support measures to stabilize gas prices, even if they don't affect me directly with my electric vehicle.
- It's an essential policy during uncertain global economic periods.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $80000000)
Year 3: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $80000000)
Year 10: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill's enforcement relies heavily on the Federal Trade Commission, which may need additional resources.
- The ability of the FTC and state attorneys general to identify and prosecute price gouging cases effectively.
- Potential resistance or legal challenges from oil companies and gasoline distributors could arise.
- Relevance of the policy during non-crisis periods, where standard market prices apply.