Bill Overview
Title: Safe Passage on Interstates Act
Description: This bill establishes new federal criminal offenses for conduct involving the obstruction of interstate highways.
Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals utilizing or impacted by interstate highway transport worldwide
Estimated Size: 250000000
- Interstate highways are used by a wide range of individuals including commuters, travelers, and commercial transportation vehicles.
- Nearly every aspect of daily life is connected in some way to the transportation system, including the delivery of goods and services.
- The legislation will primarily impact those who travel or transport goods across state lines by road.
- According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, there are over 3 trillion vehicle miles traveled on U.S. interstates annually.
- Assuming passenger vehicles, commercial trucks, and buses account for a large number of these miles, potentially millions of individuals would be involved.
Reasoning
- The Safe Passage on Interstates Act is expected to affect a wide range of people, from everyday commuters and travelers to commercial freight industries.
- Considering the budget, the primary focus of the policy will likely be on preventing highway blockades due to protests, accidents, or other events that disrupt the flow of traffic.
- The act is expected to have a varying degree of impact depending on the individual's reliance on interstate highways.
- People living in urban areas connected by interstates are likely to experience both direct and indirect effects due to changes in transportation efficiency.
- Commercial drivers and logistics companies might experience significant benefits from smoother traffic flow, potentially improving satisfaction and operational efficiency.
Simulated Interviews
HR Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the policy can alleviate some of the daily commute stress, that would be fantastic.
- Traffic jams are more about the volume of cars than blockades, but every bit helps.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Truck Driver (Chicago, IL)
Age: 56 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing delays means I can make more trips efficiently, improving my income potential.
- Safety on the road is also a prime concern, and anything that makes travel smoother is welcome.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
College Student (New York City, NY)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While helping with highway issues is great, it won't change much for me personally.
- I take interstates mostly when traveling to visit family during holidays.
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 |
Logistics Manager (Dallas, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A clearer path on the highways helps us deliver more promptly, impacting our operations positively.
- The ripple effect on end consumers is another positive aspect we're hoping for.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Event Planner (Seattle, WA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Part of my job involves interstate travel to coordinate events, so efficiency improvements are beneficial.
- However, it's hard to predict subtle improvements in experience.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Retirement is bliss when travel is hassle-free. Any policy improving convenience is something I welcome.
- Smooth and safe travel is key in my leisurely routines.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Smoother interstate travel means maintaining delivery schedules better, which impacts my business directly.
- Chain disruptions are lessened, improving my service reliability.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More predictable transport schedules help maintain freshness and quality of transported goods.
- Although indirect, any improvement in delivery timelines reflects on my bottom line.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rarely use interstates, so it's not a major concern in my day-to-day life.
- The impact would more likely benefit when attending occasional conferences.
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 |
Musician (Nashville, TN)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Minimizing travel time can significantly ease the strain of long tours.
- Each hour saved means better rest and performance during tours.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $105000000 (Low: $84000000, High: $126000000)
Year 3: $110250000 (Low: $88200000, High: $132300000)
Year 5: $121550000 (Low: $97240000, High: $145860000)
Year 10: $148884263 (Low: $119107410, High: $178661115)
Year 100: $349671089 (Low: $279736871, High: $419605308)
Key Considerations
- The cost of implementing and maintaining surveillance and enforcement is significant but necessary for effective policy execution.
- Future technologies may impact the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of implementing this policy.
- Inter-agency cooperation will be essential to ensure seamless policy enforcement across different states.