Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6527

Bill Overview

Title: Driving Veterans Success Act

Description: This bill requires that at least 10% of the funds under specified infrastructure programs are expended through veteran-owned small businesses.

Sponsors: Rep. Steel, Michelle [R-CA-48]

Target Audience

Population: Veterans globally who could benefit from enhanced business opportunities.

Estimated Size: 18000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Owner of a construction company (Houston, TX)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy gives us a significant competitive edge in bidding for local government contracts.
  • I hope it leads to more stable contracts, which in turn allows us to hire more veterans and expand operations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Consultant for veteran business development programs (Charlotte, NC)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a great start but needs more funding to make a real impact.
  • It could potentially stimulate more investments in veteran entrepreneurship.

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 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Co-owner of an IT firm servicing infrastructure needs (San Diego, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Such policies are encouraging as they break barriers in contract access.
  • However, I worry the allocation might be too concentrated on larger players.

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 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Financial advisor (Denver, CO)

Age: 48 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My clients could benefit significantly, but success will depend on how accessible the process is.
  • A positive change in veteran business fortunes could indirectly benefit my business as well.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

University Student studying Business (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see this as an encouraging first step for future business owners like myself.
  • It highlights the importance of veteran contributions but could be more inclusive of new ventures.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Works for a non-profit supporting veteran employment (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy creates trickle-down employment opportunities for homeless veterans.
  • There's a need to balance emphasis on business with immediate veteran welfare needs.

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

Heavy equipment operator for a veteran-owned firm (Miami, FL)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful this translates to job security and possibly wage increases.
  • Policies like this should maintain focus on fair distribution among firm sizes.

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 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Retired, former owner of a logistics company (Seattle, WA)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy shows the renewed focus on veteran enterprises, which I think is overdue.
  • I'm concerned about how it will evolve over time and reach newer generations.

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

Marketing manager for a start-up (Chicago, IL)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy won't affect me directly, but I support more veterans getting business opportunities.
  • These efforts, indirectly, could make sectors more competitive and robust.

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

Civil engineer working for a large infrastructure firm (New York, NY)

Age: 51 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We might see more bids going to veteran-owned competitors if this policy matures.
  • Keeping a level playing field is crucial for a fair market.

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Key Considerations