Bill Overview
Title: Made in America Manufacturing Communities Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes the Manufacturing Communities Support Program to provide financial and technical assistance to support investments in U.S. manufacturing.
Sponsors: Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals associated with the manufacturing sector indirectly or directly
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill is set to impact individuals involved in U.S. manufacturing sectors by providing financial and technical assistance that could lead to job creation, skill development, and enhanced manufacturing capabilities.
- Both current workers in the manufacturing industry and those in adjacent sectors like supply chain and technology could be positively affected due to increased demand and innovation.
- Individuals seeking jobs in manufacturing might find improved opportunities and incentives as a result of increased investments.
- The bill focuses on boosting U.S. domestic manufacturing, so the global impact could be indirect, affecting international partners and competitors with trade relations with the U.S.
Reasoning
- The policy is set to benefit a substantial number of people involved in or connected to the manufacturing sector, potentially up to 50 million in the U.S. This encompasses not just those directly in manufacturing jobs but also those connected through supply chains and related industries.
- With a budget of $750 million in the first year out of a projected $7.5 billion over ten years, the policy should aim to provide both immediate and sustainable benefits. This may involve investments in infrastructure, training, and technology enhancements.
- Our sample includes individuals directly impacted by the policy's focus on manufacturing communities, as well as those indirectly influenced due to economic and job market changes.
Simulated Interviews
Automotive Assembly Line Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen many ups and downs in the auto industry, and any support to make our jobs more secure is a positive step.
- I hope this policy helps bring back some pride and prosperity to our town.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Supply Chain Analyst (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could expand job opportunities and stability for people in my field.
- It might also bring innovation to our processes.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Small Business Owner in Manufacturing (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be a lifeline for small manufacturing businesses like mine.
- Hopefully, it helps us modernize and stay competitive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Recent College Graduate (Austin, TX)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic this policy will create more tech jobs within manufacturing.
- It aligns well with my career goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Manufacturing Engineer (Columbus, OH)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Investment and support are crucial for driving innovation in our field.
- The policy could help balance automation and employment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Retired Steelworker (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's hopeful to see potential revitalization of industries that supported our families.
- I am concerned about whether it will affect current retirees.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Environmental Scientist (Denver, CO)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Green manufacturing should be a priority within these investments.
- I hope the policy encourages eco-friendly practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
HR Manager in Manufacturing (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Workforce development needs to be a key part of this policy.
- We should aim to retrain rather than lay off employees.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Freelance Designer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might give design companies more clients in manufacturing.
- I'm excited about the potential for more creative projects.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Independent Contractor (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Financial assistance could lead to better payment practices.
- There's hope for more consistent work if manufacturing thrives.
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 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 2: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 3: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 5: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 10: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 100: $750000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Key Considerations
- The program's success depends on effective allocation and management of both financial and technical resources to communities.
- Measurement and tracking of the program's impact will be crucial to ensure objectives are being met and to optimize the ROI.
- The competitive advantage of U.S. manufacturing on a global scale might be significantly impacted by this program.
- Coordination with existing federal and state level incentives for manufacturing could amplify the program's benefits.
- The responsiveness and adaptability of the manufacturing sector to new technologies will influence the program's long-term effectiveness.