Bill Overview
Title: Fentanyl Trafficker Elimination Act
Description: This bill increases the term of imprisonment for drug trafficking offenses involving large quantities of fentanyl or fentanyl analogues. Specifically, the bill requires life imprisonment for illegally importing or exporting, or illegally manufacturing, distributing, dispensing, or possessing with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, 400 grams or more of fentanyl or 100 grams or more of a fentanyl analogue, regardless of prior offenses or if death or serious bodily injury occurs. (Currently, such offenses carry a minimum sentence of 10 years imprisonment and a maximum sentence of life imprisonment for a first offense; penalties increase with subsequent offenses or if death or serious bodily injury occurs.)
Sponsors: Rep. Burchett, Tim [R-TN-2]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in large-scale fentanyl trafficking
Estimated Size: 20000
- The primary individuals affected by this legislation are those involved in the trafficking of large quantities of fentanyl or its analogues, specifically 400 grams or more of fentanyl or 100 grams of a fentanyl analogue.
- This population includes drug traffickers operating at a high enough level to deal in such large quantities.
- The tightening of penalties will likely impact criminal organizations involved in drug trafficking at this scale.
- It may also indirectly impact communities with significant opioid issues by changing the dynamics of fentanyl supply.
- Law enforcement and judicial system professionals will be impacted by changes in legal standards and potential increases in case load.
Reasoning
- The policy directly targets individuals involved in large-scale fentanyl trafficking, estimated at about 20,000 within the U.S., according to DEA operations and other data. These individuals are often part of larger criminal networks, implying a specific impact group within the justice system.
- Indirectly, communities affected by opioid-related harm might experience benefits from reduced fentanyl availability, affecting general wellbeing.
- The enforcement of this legislation involves judicial and correctional systems, which are budget-limited. The cost and scope of enforcement imply a focus on major trafficking operations rather than smaller or individual cases.
Simulated Interviews
Drug trafficker (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law is going to make it impossible for me to continue. The risk is too high now with a mandatory life sentence.
- It may reduce my personal activities, but others in the network might be willing to take the risk.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 1 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 2 |
Community activist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any law that might reduce the availability of fentanyl on the streets is welcome.
- I'm cautious about how much this policy will shift organized crime to other drugs and how effectively it's implemented.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Law enforcement officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy adds strong deterrents for high-level traffickers, which could help us in enforcement.
- It might lead to a higher workload initially but pays off if successful long-term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Defense attorney (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law could lead to injustices if applied too broadly, impacting low-level offenders harshly.
- I'm concerned about the strain on the court system and need for procedural fairness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Pharmaceutical company executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could indirectly support the market for anti-opioid interventions.
- It's crucial to combine enforcement with public health strategies to fully address the crisis.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Healthcare worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing fentanyl on the streets is critical to reducing emergency cases.
- This law seems like the right step, but enforcement must be robust.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Addiction counselor (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Deterring suppliers could create breathing room for recovery programs.
- The community needs consistent policy support to tackle addiction.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
University researcher (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could have significant effects if it reduces availability, but must be studied closely.
- Collateral social impacts need monitoring to ensure overall wellbeing improvement.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Judge (Newark, NJ)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Mandatory life sentences could burden the system with lengthy trials and appeals.
- Balancing punitive measures with rehabilitation is key.
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 |
Social worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might help children indirectly by reducing parental drug involvement, but it's not a catch-all solution.
- Legislative focus should include recovery and support interventions equally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $210000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $310000000)
Year 3: $220000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $320000000)
Year 5: $240000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $340000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $400000000)
Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Key Considerations
- Capacity and cost of federal prisons to hold an increased number of long-term inmates.
- Potential legal challenges or changes in the judiciary process due to mandatory sentencing.
- Law enforcement resource allocation to handle increased investigations and prosecutions.