Bill Overview
Title: To reauthorize the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Trust Fund, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill reauthorizes the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund and the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Trust Fund through FY2029. The trust fund is administered by the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation, which is an independent executive branch agency with a mission to provide programs to promote leadership, education, collaboration, and conflict resolution in the areas of environment, public lands, and natural resources. The bill also requires an audit of the foundation within four years of the bill's enactment.
Sponsors: Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-3]
Target Audience
Population: People engaged or interested in environmental leadership, education, and conflict resolution
Estimated Size: 1000000
- Reauthorizing the trust fund will continue financial support for programs that focus on leadership, education, collaboration, and conflict resolution in environment-related areas.
- Individuals participating in educational and leadership programs supported by the trust fund will be directly affected by its reauthorization.
- The Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund supports efforts to resolve environmental disputes, thus impacting communities and organizations involved in such disputes.
- The Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation's work primarily impacts those engaged in environmental and natural resource issues, which is broadly significant as these impact global public lands and natural resources.
Reasoning
- The policy affects individuals who are involved in environmental disputes and those participating in programs focused on environmental education and leadership.
- Considering the budget limitations, only a fraction of the whole population engaged in environmental issues is directly impacted.
- I included a distribution of individuals from different parts of the country and occupations to better understand how diverse populations might experience changes due to the policy.
- Only some individuals will be impacted directly, while others may see peripheral benefits thanks to improved environmental functions supporting broader community welfare.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Lawyer (Colorado)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm pleased the foundation is going to continue its work.
- The fund is crucial for fair resolutions and leadership development in environmental law.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Graduate Student in Environmental Science (Arizona)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The program is a lifeline for students like me wanting to make a difference.
- It's a rare support system to hone skills and learn from experienced individuals in the field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Farmer (Montana)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Environmental conflicts end up impacting farming critically.
- Programs facilitating dispute resolutions effectively help prevent long-term harms to agriculture.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Government Environmental Planner (Nevada)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These continued funds mean we can maintain effective collaborations on land use planning.
- Having leadership improves public and policymaker engagement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (New York)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a step forward for ensuring responsible environmental handling.
- Public awareness and education are stores of knowledge future generations can tap into.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
College Student (California)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This provides amazing opportunities for students to expand their practical knowledge.
- Looking forward to future internships funded by these grants.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Public School Teacher (Texas)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Educational programs supported by these funds make a big difference in how I teach and inspire students on environmental issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Nonprofit Environmental Worker (Washington)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Seeing continued funding means persistent efforts towards comprehensive environmental justice policies.
- Gives hope to our community and sustains our efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Tourism Operator (Florida)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The kind of work this fund supports indirectly benefits eco-tourism by sustaining ecosystems tourists value.
- More stable environments lead to a better market.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 1 |
Retired Park Ranger (Michigan)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's vital to continue this work to ensure future access and protection of natural resources.
- Encouraging leadership in younger generations is a key outcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Key Considerations
- The reauthorization must contend with federal budget constraints and potential shifts in environmental policy priorities.
- Although the expenditure might seem modest, its cumulative impact over several years requires balancing against funding for other federal programs.
- Long-term benefits could be underestimated if only captured by direct monetary metrics, ignoring qualitative advancements in education and leadership.