Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6586

Bill Overview

Title: GENOCIDE GAMES Act

Description: This bill requires the President to impose sanctions on certain foreign individuals who materially supported a gross violation of internationally recognized human rights against a 2022 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games participant. Upon receiving credible evidence of such a human rights violation, the President must impose property- and visa-blocking sanctions on any foreign individual associated with the International Olympic Committee (IOC), including the president of the IOC, who the President determines materially supported the violation of human rights, including by providing to participants false, reckless, or negligent assurances of human rights assurances by the government of China. This bill's requirements shall terminate on March 13, 2023.

Sponsors: Rep. Gallagher, Mike [R-WI-8]

Target Audience

Population: Foreign Individuals with connections to IOC implicated in human rights violations in 2022 Winter Games

Estimated Size: 10

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Olympic Coach (Denver, CO)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a coach, I feel it's crucial for athletes to have assurances that their safety and rights are protected. This policy is a step in the right direction, though it seems mainly symbolic as it expired quickly.
  • The sanctions could pressure international bodies to take human rights more seriously, which indirectly benefits the athletes I work with.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Former Olympic Athlete (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Personally, the policy was too late to have impacted my experience, but it's necessary to hold accountable those who allowed human rights abuses to happen.
  • I hope future athletes benefit from increased scrutiny on the IOC.

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 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Diplomatic Staff (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My role didn't get directly impacted, but there's an interesting precedent set for how sports events and human rights are treated.
  • Long-term, this policy can lead to stronger international collaborations that respect human rights.

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

Human Rights Advocate (New York, NY)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I welcome this policy as it underscores the importance of human rights in sports.
  • Although short-lived, the awareness it generated can help push further long-term changes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Businessman in International Sports Market (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy has raised some tension and uncertainty in dealing with sanctioned individuals, though directly it doesn't affect my operations.
  • These sanctions need to be carefully considered as they shape perceptions and relationships in the sports business.

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

Aspiring Olympic Athlete (Salt Lake City, UT)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Knowing that there are policies in place to safeguard athletes' rights is reassuring, although the direct impact isn't visible to me.
  • I hope these kinds of initiatives lead to safer environments for Olympic participants.

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

Retired Diplomat (Chicago, IL)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy holds symbolic value in international relations, emphasizing the US's stance on human rights.
  • Long term, similar policies should be sustained to make a tangible impact on the international stage.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Sports Journalist (Boston, MA)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • From a reporting perspective, this policy adds a layer of complexity in discussing international sports.
  • It raises awareness and holds institutions accountable to some extent, encouraging transparency.

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

International Affairs Analyst (Miami, FL)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy shows the US's active role in addressing human rights issues, setting a precedent for other events.
  • However, its short-lived nature might limit real transformative impact on policy and practice.

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

NGO Worker for Athlete Protection (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like these, even if temporary, create awareness and pressure for change.
  • Long-term, more structured approaches are needed to ensure continuous protection for athletes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $8000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $10000000)

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