Bill Overview
Title: Hammers' Law
Description: This bill makes additional compensation recoverable for nonpecuniary damages (but not punitive damages) for deaths resulting from a passenger cruise ship voyage accident occurring on the high seas beyond 12 nautical miles from the U.S. shore.
Sponsors: Sen. Fischer, Deb [R-NE]
Target Audience
Population: victims and their families affected by cruise ship accidents
Estimated Size: 1190000
- This bill impacts individuals who experience a death in their family due to a cruise ship accident occurring on the high seas, which is defined as beyond 12 nautical miles from the U.S. shore.
- It pertains to nonpecuniary damage recoveries, which could include compensation for loss of companionship, emotional trauma, etc.
- This will affect individuals who pursue legal compensation after a maritime tragedy.
- It is applicable to passengers on cruise ships, which are popular vacation vessels, affecting millions globally.
- Cruise ships operate in international waters, attracting passengers from many countries, not only the U.S.
Reasoning
- The policy is highly specific and only affects a narrow segment of the population, primarily victims and families who have faced tragedies during cruise ship voyages out in international waters.
- The financial budget and scale of policy implementation suggest it could cover damage claims effectively for those few cases that arise but does not imply a broader economic impact.
- Individuals who are directly affected by cruise ship fatalities may see significant improvements to emotional wellbeing from receiving compensation. Others, not as directly affected, won't be impacted or may even express opinions on fiscal responsibility, but their wellbeing wouldn't change.
- As cruise ship accidents are infrequent, the number of directly affected individuals is very low compared to the larger population of cruise passengers.
- Given this context, we focus on a small number of simulated individuals from the affected category. Most people, including the general cruise-going public, would not experience any direct impact from the policy.
Simulated Interviews
Hotel Manager (Miami, Florida)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy gives hope to families like mine who are suffering without proper compensation.
- I believe it recognizes the emotional hardships we go through and offers a fair resolution.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Attorney (New York, New York)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law will streamline the process for getting families the restitution they deserve.
- It sets a precedent that emotional damages are recognized, crucial for my clients.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cruise Ship Performer (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My work could be safer with stricter regulations; however, I'm not directly affected by past anxieties.
- Compensation changes may complicate how companies operate, but it's necessary.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change is long overdue and provides justice that could help families heal.
- My own case may not benefit, but future victims will.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Healthcare Worker (Houston, Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't directly impact me, but it seems like a fair step forward.
- It's reassuring to know there are mechanisms for compensation if needed.
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 |
Ship Captain (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I support additional compensation, the focus should also be on preventing accidents.
- This law is a step in the right direction but shouldn't change everyday operations drastically.
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 |
Activist (San Francisco, California)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We're making progress, but corporations should be held to even higher accountability.
- Compensation is important, but we need comprehensive safety measures too.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Insurance Agent (Houston, Texas)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might increase premiums but only slightly affect my day-to-day.
- It's a necessary provision balancing corporate responsibility and protection for passengers.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Travel Blogger (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a cruising enthusiast, I find the policy supportive for affected families.
- I have mixed feelings, as higher liability may impact how cruise experiences are offered in the future.
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 |
Cruise Line Executive (Jacksonville, Florida)
Age: 49 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We must be cautious about increasing operational costs due to compensation claims.
- Nonetheless, this law potentially helps us self-correct and build better relations with passengers.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $8000000)
Year 2: $5100000 (Low: $3100000, High: $8200000)
Year 3: $5200000 (Low: $3200000, High: $8400000)
Year 5: $5500000 (Low: $3500000, High: $8900000)
Year 10: $6000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $9500000)
Year 100: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Key Considerations
- Cruise ship accidents involving fatalities are statistically rare, so the frequency and impact of such claim payouts are likely limited.
- The bill does not change liability laws but expands compensable damage rules, focusing on nonpecuniary rather than punitive damages.
- Investment in safety measures on cruise ships could offset some legal costs by reducing incidents.