Bill Overview
Title: Ensuring American Global Leadership and Engagement Act
Description: This bill addresses various foreign relations issues, with a focus on China.
Sponsors: Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals globally impacted by American foreign policy changes
Estimated Size: 200000000
- The bill addresses global foreign relations issues, suggesting it will impact people around the world engaged in or affected by American foreign policies.
- Given the focus on China, it will likely particularly impact individuals involved in US-China relations or in sectors affected by these relations, such as international trade.
- American foreign policy impacts a large global audience, including diplomats, business leaders, and citizens of countries where the US has significant engagement.
Reasoning
- The population directly impacted by the EAGLE Act will vary, but key groups include those in sectors heavily involved in international relations and trade with China, like business professionals, government employees, and academics.
- There will also be indirect impacts on the general public through changes in prices, availability of goods, economic relations, and national security.
- The budget constraints limit the scope and intensity of direct interventions, suggesting broad effects might be limited but could still be significant where strategic impacts are focused.
- By sampling different demographics and employment sectors, a range of potential effects can be inferred, showing both direct and indirect outcomes.
Simulated Interviews
government official (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the EAGLE Act is crucial for maintaining and advancing our diplomatic relations, particularly with China.
- While the work might be intense, I am optimistic about the nation's future standing globally.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
international trade consultant (New York, NY)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The EAGLE Act might create more stability in US-China business, which could be beneficial for consultants like me.
- I'm concerned about potential trade barriers if not managed well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
software engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the EAGLE Act strengthens tech collaborations with China.
- I'm concerned about it possibly creating new regulatory hurdles.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
supply chain manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might stabilize supply issues but could also complicate tariff negotiations.
- There’s a worry about unpredictability increasing in the industry.
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 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
academic researcher (Birmingham, AL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This Act may offer more research opportunities and funding in my field.
- There might be greater influence on academic freedom if political tensions rise.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
import/export business owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The EAGLE Act might help secure stable trade regulations, which is good for business.
- Concerned about overly stringent regulations or retaliations that might arise.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
graduate student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The EAGLE Act provides an exciting milieu for studying impactful policies.
- I worry about potential funding limitations affecting academic resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
tourism industry professional (Miami, FL)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy promotes tourism by improving diplomatic ties.
- There’s concern about unpredictable military or economic tensions dampening tourism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
retired diplomat (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could strengthen the foundations of diplomatic relations.
- I’m hopeful but mindful of geopolitical risks embedded in any policy move.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
small business owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Act could stabilize product imports and prices.
- There’s a risk of potential price hikes if tariffs or trade tensions arise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)
Year 2: $2050000000 (Low: $1550000000, High: $2550000000)
Year 3: $2100000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2600000000)
Year 5: $2200000000 (Low: $1700000000, High: $2700000000)
Year 10: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)
Year 100: $5000000000 (Low: $4000000000, High: $6000000000)
Key Considerations
- Ongoing geopolitical tensions require sustained investment to maintain diplomatic and strategic advantages.
- Long-term economic benefits depend on successful implementation of improved trade agreements and foreign relations.
- Potential risks include escalating disputes with nations where US engagement is perceived as opposing their interests.