Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6468

Bill Overview

Title: Domestic SUPPLY Act of 2022

Description: This bill establishes a program and sets out other requirements to promote domestic manufacturing of personal protective equipment (PPE) for infectious diseases and other public health emergencies. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must establish a program to enter into purchasing agreements for PPE produced domestically by manufacturers that are majority-owned and -operated by U.S. citizens. HHS must coordinate with the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security on this program. In addition, the federal government must only procure, subject to limited exceptions, PPE that is produced domestically to prevent the transmission of an infectious disease. If using federal funds, states or localities must also procure PPE domestically. Further, the bill requires HHS to consult with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration on a report about changes to federal requirements for PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of those changes on health care workers who cared for patients in 2020 and 2021.

Sponsors: Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9]

Target Audience

Population: People using or involved in manufacturing domestic PPE for public health emergencies

Estimated Size: 18000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Healthcare Worker (New York, NY)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I appreciate the focus on making more PPE domestically as it could mean better preparedness for future situations like COVID-19.
  • I'm concerned about whether the new gear will maintain quality and if there will be a hassle in supply transitions.

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 8 6
Year 20 7 6

PPE Manufacturer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a great opportunity for my business to secure contracts and grow.
  • I worry about the rigorous federal standards we might have to meet.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

State Procurement Officer (Austin, TX)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might increase paperwork and compliance checks, which is a concern.
  • On the upside, securing reliable PPE supplies is crucial for state preparedness.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

Logistics Manager (Chicago, IL)

Age: 27 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Domestically produced PPE means faster and possibly cheaper logistics, which is a win for us.
  • We need to adapt our processes but that's manageable.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Union Representative (Detroit, MI)

Age: 52 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • About time the government pushed local production, but it must ensure good labor practices too.
  • We need improvements in worker conditions alongside plans for domestic PPE.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 4
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 7 4

Public Health Official (Seattle, WA)

Age: 31 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Federal support for domestic PPE is a relief in terms of public health crisis management.
  • Implementation needs effective coordination across agencies to be successful.

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 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Small Business Owner (Boston, MA)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Domestic supply means more stability for my business in uncertain times.
  • However, adjusting existing contracts could get complicated.

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 8 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Healthcare Intern (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 23 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It’s good to know that the government is investing in PPE, but quality must be consistent.
  • Young professionals like me need to be protected, especially while gaining experience.

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 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Veteran Hospital Administrator (Baltimore, MD)

Age: 58 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The shift to domestic PPE should secure supply chains but may need significant initial adjustments.
  • Long-term, this could simplify logistics if implementation is smooth.

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 7 6
Year 20 6 6

PPE Designer (Dallas, TX)

Age: 36 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the focus on domestic manufacturing supports innovation and product testing which is great for designers like me.
  • Demand will steer more innovative solutions.

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 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Year 2: $450000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $500000000)

Year 3: $400000000 (Low: $350000000, High: $450000000)

Year 5: $350000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $400000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $500000000)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $100000000)

Key Considerations