Bill Overview
Title: To provide for the application of certain provisions of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 for fiscal year 2021.
Description: This bill extends through FY2021 the inapplicability of the requirement for counties to elect to receive certain payments under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. That act provides compensation to counties for the presence of untaxable federal land within their borders.
Sponsors: Rep. McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [R-WA-5]
Target Audience
Population: People relying on public services funded by the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 affects counties with federal lands within their boundaries, as these lands are untaxable and the counties do not receive property tax from them.
- The compensation provided by this legislation helps these counties fund local schools, roads, and other municipal services that might be underfunded due to the lack of tax revenue from federal lands.
- Counties across the United States with significant portions of federal land rely on this compensation to support public services.
- There are approximately 2,600 counties in the United States, and not all have significant federal land. However, many western and Appalachian states have counties with substantial federal holdings.
Reasoning
- The policy exclusively targets counties with federal land, which are not evenly distributed across the United States. This means not every county is affected and, within those affected, only certain demographics may see substantial impact.
- Educational and infrastructure funding in these areas can have ripple effects on local employment and economic stability, impacting a wide range of residents.
- People with direct reliance on public services (schools, roads) funded through this act are most likely to see changes in their wellbeing scores tied to these services.
- Budget constraints mean that not all demands for funding can be met, thus prioritizing areas with the greatest reliance or need is necessary.
- It's important to include a mix of urban and rural perspectives to understand the broader societal impacts.
Simulated Interviews
school principal (Montana)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Without this funding, our schools struggle to maintain staffing and resources.
- The extension is crucial for keeping our district operational and competitive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 1 |
county infrastructure planner (California)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Losing funding would set us back on essential road projects next to federal lands.
- The continued support allows us to plan effectively and maintain safe roads.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
retired forest ranger (Appalachia)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These funds keep the community intact by supporting local needs.
- Maintaining services makes this area a viable place to live post-retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
teacher (Oregon)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Classrooms would be significantly under-resourced without this funding.
- It's a relief to know that we'll have continued support for programs that improve student performance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 1 |
local business owner (Idaho)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The infrastructure improvements help to bring in more tourists, boosting local business.
- Stable roads and services are essential for my business to thrive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
environmental engineer (Washington)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Extending funding ensures that my projects can proceed without financial uncertainty.
- This has a direct impact on employment within my community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 1 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 1 |
county official (Colorado)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's critical for us to have this continued funding for planning our county's long-term projects.
- The extended timeline allows us to forecast and prevent service disruptions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
librarian (Kentucky)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Canceling this funding would severely limit what we can offer the community.
- We rely on it to keep our doors open, particularly for educational programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
municipal services worker (Alaska)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Extended funding means we can continue to provide reliable service to our remote communities.
- We lean heavily on these resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
public school teacher (Utah)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These funds keep our school programs running, directly influencing our students’ future.
- Without them, we'd face significant cutbacks annually.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 1 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $215000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $220000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The primary cost of the policy derives from extending funding for counties under the Secure Rural Schools Act.
- This largely affects counties with substantial federal land holdings, ensuring they can continue to fund local services such as schools and infrastructure.
- The policy extension is expected to be a continuation of previous funding levels, adjusted for inflation.