I read that one of the proposed responses by the FAA/NTSB in the 'wake' of the US1549 ditching in the Hudson is that they might in future require a 'Dual engine failure after Takeoff' checklist. As if Sully needed it! In fact, it would in all probability have distracted him, IMHO.
Interesting thing here is that the traditional ditching checklists are based on the days of Constellations and StratoCruisers flying across the pond where maybe you'd had to shutdown 2 engines and then had at least 30 mins to drift down before you had to ditch. Ditching were "premeditated". So you had time to do all sorts of preparation (get the pax/cabin crew briefed, put the lifejackets on, get the dinghies out, burn off fuel to minimum etc).
Vast majority of ditchings now are unpremeditated. A/c goes off end of runway at airport near sea or multiple bird strike after take off, eg.
The current ditching checklist on a/c such as the B737 (and I guess A320) is so long that Sully would have been mad to even consider it! Yes there is a case for an abbreviated memory "checklist" containing "vital actions" which is really what we are saying on this thread now.
It really grates me when I see a checklist which tells me to face into wind and/or look behind before running up - these are basic airmanship items!