Bill Overview
Title: Multinational Species Conservation Funds Semipostal Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2021
Description: This bill directs the U.S. Postal Service to sell each copy of the Multinational Species Conservation Fund Semipostal Stamp and notify Congress when all copies have been sold.
Sponsors: Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-16]
Target Audience
Population: People worldwide reliant on biodiversity and ecosystems
Estimated Size: 500000000
- The Multinational Species Conservation Funds support programs that aim to protect various endangered and threatened species globally.
- These funds focus on species such as African and Asian elephants, rhinos, tigers, marine turtles, great apes, and other vulnerable species.
- Efforts funded by this program help conserve species across multiple continents, impacting people in those regions both economically and environmentally.
Reasoning
- The policy affects a limited section of the U.S. population directly, primarily focused on conservationists, environmental advocates, and industries related to conservation tourism.
- Many Americans may not feel an immediate or noticeable impact on their wellbeing as they are removed from the direct effects of conservation efforts happening outside the United States.
- However, the long-term effects on biodiversity can have indirect benefits for global ecological stability, which could impact Americans over time.
- The policy has a substantial budget over ten years which suggests that it could make a significant difference in targeted areas, thereby slowly affecting related industries.
- Americans who are connected to wildlife tourism or those who support global biodiversity efforts may experience more pronounced effects in their wellbeing overtime compared to the general population.
Simulated Interviews
Wildlife Conservationist (California)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm thrilled that this policy will support conservation efforts. It's vital for the survival of so many species and for the work I do every day.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Environmental Lawyer (New York)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The funds will bolster international conservation laws and efforts, which is crucial. It's reassuring to see policy support in this area.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding could open new opportunities for my studies and research career paths.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Tour Operator (Florida)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative might promote more interest in eco-tourism, which is good for my business. I can offer more tours highlighting conservation efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Congressional Aide (Washington)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is a step forward in maintaining our stance on global conservation. It aligns with my work on environmental policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Zoo Curator (Colorado)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional funds can enhance our conservation programs and public education on global species.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Nevada)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While I support wildlife protection, I'm unsure how direct the impact will be on my life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software Developer (Oregon)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rarely think about conservation efforts, so this won't affect me much day-to-day.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
College Student (Illinois)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as a positive development, but it seems distant from everyday concerns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Activist (Washington D.C.)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's heartening to see more funding for conservation; it bolsters our efforts and optimism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 2: $3100000 (Low: $2600000, High: $3600000)
Year 3: $3200000 (Low: $2700000, High: $3700000)
Year 5: $3400000 (Low: $2900000, High: $3900000)
Year 10: $3600000 (Low: $3100000, High: $4100000)
Year 100: $4000000 (Low: $3500000, High: $4500000)
Key Considerations
- The success of this policy heavily relies on public awareness and participation to achieve meaningful sales and revenue.
- Administrative costs are continual as long as stamps are in circulation, but revenue surpasses these costs meaning net positive savings for conservation efforts.
- This initiative supports international conservation efforts rooted in bilateral and multilateral cooperation.