Bill Overview
Title: PRIDE Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires federal banking and finance agencies to expand the efforts of their existing Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion to include individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other related identities. These offices are responsible for all matters related to such diversity in management, employment, and business activities.
Sponsors: Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Target Audience
Population: LGBTQ+ individuals worldwide
Estimated Size: 23000000
- The bill targets minority groups in management, employment, and business activities.
- Sexual orientation and gender identity are recognized minority attributes.
- The LGBTQ+ community is a globally recognized group.
- Expanding inclusion efforts is expected to address issues such as representation, discrimination, and economic inequality.
- LGBTQ+ individuals work in various sectors such as finance and banking, which are directly targeted by the bill.
Reasoning
- The PRIDE Act aims to increase diversity and inclusion within federal banking and finance agencies, specifically expanding the focus to include LGBTQ+ individuals, which constitutes approximately 7% of the U.S. population or about 23 million people.
- Given the budget constraints, the policy's effects will initially be concentrated in more urban areas where financial institutions and agencies are located and where more LGBTQ+ individuals are likely to be employed.
- The primary impact is expected on LGBTQ+ individuals already working or aspiring to work in these sectors, improving representation, reducing discrimination, and promoting equal employment opportunities.
- The overall impact on self-reported wellbeing will vary based on individual circumstances, such as current employment status, location, and personal experiences with discrimination.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy might improve my job prospects and security.
- It could create a more welcoming environment in my workplace.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Banking Manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that this policy will encourage more diversity in middle and upper management.
- It might open up more leadership opportunities.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Software Developer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 41 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might indirectly affect me by increasing overall diversity in the industry.
- I'm cautiously optimistic about its ability to drive positive change.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Topeka, KS)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it will take years to see any direct impact from this policy in smaller regions.
- My business might benefit if more diverse contracts are offered.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
HR Specialist (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this policy as vital for promoting diversity and reducing biases in hiring.
- It might give me the support to drive further changes in our recruitment practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Compliance Officer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, there's potential for structural change towards inclusivity.
- I've seen lip service paid before, but this policy feels substantial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Marketing Coordinator (Austin, TX)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative could enhance networking and mentorship opportunities in the financial sector.
- Inclusion is overdue, especially in conservative industries.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Loan Officer (Boston, MA)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Overall, I'm particularly hopeful this will make workplaces safer and more equitable.
- I think it will take active monitoring to truly measure the impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired Banker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm encouraged that future generations may have it better than I did.
- Retirement is less impacted, but this policy feels like progress.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Bank Teller (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There's a lot of discrimination that goes unnoticed in entry-level roles.
- This policy should make employees like me feel more included.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $73500000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $77000000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $36000000, High: $85000000)
Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $100000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy fits into a broader trend towards inclusivity and can help address historical inequalities faced by the LGBTQ+ community.
- There might be cultural and structural resistance within agencies that could affect the pace and effectiveness of the policy's implementation.
- Public perception and political support can influence the successful adoption of the policy and any accompanying legislation.