Bill Overview
Title: Cargo Preference Reporting Act
Description: This bill requires the U.S. Maritime Administration to make public and submit to Congress a report regarding cargo preference data on an annual basis.
Sponsors: Sen. Fischer, Deb [R-NE]
Target Audience
Population: People in global shipping and logistics industries
Estimated Size: 6500000
- The bill focuses on the transparency and reporting of cargo preference data.
- Cargo preference policies generally impact shipping industries and workers involved in shipping goods, including mariners and logistics companies.
- The U.S. Maritime Administration would be directly involved in the data collection and reporting processes.
Reasoning
- Since this policy specifically targets the U.S. Maritime Administration's reporting on cargo preference data, it mainly affects individuals and companies in the shipping industry, including logistics professionals, mariners, shipping companies, and related governmental bodies.
- The U.S. maritime and shipping industry is considerable, but direct impact on general U.S. population wellbeing might be limited to professionals within this sector.
- We expect a low to medium impact on directly involved parties as this act focuses on transparency rather than operational changes, potentially improving conditions over time through better-informed policy adjustments.
Simulated Interviews
Ship Captain (New Jersey, USA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to greater transparency within the industry, which is a good thing.
- Regular reporting may highlight inefficiencies we face and could result in improvements.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Logistics Manager (Texas, USA)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased reporting could complicate compliance but also lead to more systematic improvements.
- As a manager, I welcome data that can refine our operations.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Government Employee (Florida, USA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will increase workload initially, but the long-term benefits of transparent reporting justify the effort.
- It could set the stage for more effective maritime policies.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Shipping Company Employee (California, USA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy directly impacts my job, increasing transparency demands.
- I hope this leads to better operational standards industry-wide.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Shipping Company Manager (Virginia, USA)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any transparency helps long-term policy goals, even if it's challenging initially.
- Hopeful for streamlined procedures in the future changing ambiguity into precision.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Maritime Lawyer (Seattle, USA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could drive policy reforms which are overdue in many respects.
- Increased clarity in shipping data can resolve disputes more efficiently.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Retired Maritime Worker (New York, USA)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency has always been lacking, more transparency can only be helpful.
- I'm skeptical of how swiftly changes will happen though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
International Trade Consultant (Georgia, USA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This adds clarity that can facilitate smoother trade operations.
- Informed policies are the best policies, this step could lead to such.
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 |
Mariner (California, USA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that helps increase operational transparency is desirable.
- It might not change my day-to-day work immediately but can affect future guidelines.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Logistics Coordinator (Louisiana, USA)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This data should help refine where we dispatch goods most efficiently.
- If shared properly, this information could guide strategic planning and resource allocation.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 2: $2550000 (Low: $2050000, High: $3050000)
Year 3: $2600000 (Low: $2100000, High: $3100000)
Year 5: $2700000 (Low: $2200000, High: $3200000)
Year 10: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $5500000)
Key Considerations
- The bill enhances transparency but does not change cargo preference laws themselves.
- Changing reporting practices may require upfront investment in data management systems.
- Any benefits from improved shipping practices due to increased transparency are difficult to quantify.