Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6762

Bill Overview

Title: Special Inspector General for Law Enforcement Act

Description: This bill establishes the Office of the Special Inspector General for Law Enforcement. The bill sets forth the duties of the office, including investigating racial profiling, officer misconduct, use of force, use of deadly force, or pattern or practice of unconstitutional misconduct involving federal law enforcement agencies or officers; and use-of-deadly-force cases referred by state and local law enforcement agencies. The bill requires a state or local government that receives funding under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program or the Community Oriented Policing Services grant program to have in effect a law establishing a process by which use-of-deadly-force cases can be referred to the office for investigation.

Sponsors: Rep. Connolly, Gerald E. [D-VA-11]

Target Audience

Population: People subject to law enforcement activities

Estimated Size: 3000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Civil Rights Lawyer (New York, NY)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think this policy is crucial in holding law enforcement accountable.
  • It will likely improve transparency and trust between law enforcement and communities.

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 4

Police Officer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The increased oversight might create more paperwork and pressure on officers.
  • It might also improve the image and trustworthiness of the police over time.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Community Organizer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The Special Inspector General could shine a light on abuses that have gone unchecked.
  • Communities will feel heard and more secure.

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 9 3
Year 20 8 3

Business Owner (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Police reform is necessary, but I don't feel directly affected.
  • It's good for society if it improves fairness and justice.

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

University Student (Miami, FL)

Age: 23 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a positive move towards law enforcement accountability.
  • As someone who studies these issues, the data collected could be very useful.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 8 4

Federal Agent (Denver, CO)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could increase accountability within federal agencies, which is a positive.
  • There may be concerns about morale if oversight isn't handled sensitively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Freelance Journalist (Seattle, WA)

Age: 37 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy will likely uncover patterns of misconduct.
  • It is likely to lead to reforms that are needed.

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 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 8 3

Tech Worker (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 25 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Doesn't impact me directly, but could change things if more cases are exposed.
  • I'm glad there will be more scrutiny on policing practices.

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 Teacher (Houston, TX)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Feels like there's a need for transparency and accountability.
  • Even if it doesn't affect me directly, it's important for society.

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

Community Volunteer (Baltimore, MD)

Age: 46 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This office can be a significant aid in shedding light on problem areas.
  • Communities will feel supported and perhaps less fearful.

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 8 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $35000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $40000000)

Year 2: $36000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $41000000)

Year 3: $37000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $42000000)

Year 5: $38000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $43000000)

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

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

Key Considerations