Bill Overview
Title: To authorize the President of the United States to issue letters of marque and reprisal for the purpose of seizing the assets of certain Russian citizens, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill authorizes the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to privately armed individuals and entities to seize the assets of certain Russian citizens. Specifically, the holder of such a letter shall be authorized to employ all means reasonably necessary to seize any asset, such as a yacht or plane, outside of the United States that belongs to a Russian citizen on the Office of Foreign Asset Control's List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons.
Sponsors: Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]
Target Audience
Population: Russian citizens on the OFAC List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill directly targets Russian citizens whose assets are subject to seizure.
- It focuses on individuals listed in the Office of Foreign Asset Control's List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons.
- The assets in question are specifically those outside of the United States.
- The bill involves privately armed individuals and entities who may be authorized to seize these assets.
Reasoning
- I included individuals from various occupations and demographics to reflect potential impacts on those who might be authorized to carry out seizures, as well as those indirectly affected by possible economic or diplomatic changes.
- The budgetary limitation suggests the need for prioritization in terms of feasibility and effect scale; not every individual or entity could realistically participate in these activities given the cost constraints.
- To evaluate the impact, I considered both direct involvement with the policy as potential privateers and indirect effects on American citizens through international relations and economic changes.
- Wellbeing scores were adjusted based on perceived benefits for those authorized to seize assets and potential broader consequences for those indirectly affected by such governmental actions.
- I diversified the commonness of roles likely to be affected. Some such as military veterans or maritime experts might have more opportunities due to their skills, while others are indirectly affected by potential changes in political or economic environments.
Simulated Interviews
Maritime Security Consultant (Houston, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm intrigued by the potential for extra work within my expertise.
- There's a chance to earn well if I'm hired to seize assets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Economic instability might arise, affecting my work.
- Could pose risks to financial markets I'm involved in.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Business Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about unintended consequences like increased scrutiny.
- It could benefit my business but with associated risks.
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Retired Diplomat (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might escalate tensions further and affect international relations.
- Diplomatic repercussions could affect the US economic landscape.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Veteran (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy provides an opportunity to leverage my skills outside military.
- Might benefit financially from private sector opportunities this creates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
College Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potential job opportunities in new fields because of changing international policies.
- Worried about how this might influence international job markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Attorney (Boston, MA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potential for legal involvement could be good for business.
- Unsure about the international law implications.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Tech Executive (Seattle, WA)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear retaliation or increased sanctions could hurt international tech collaborations.
- There might be strategic advantages but risky.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Engineer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Might affect the defense industry indirectly.
- Could lead to boost in our sector if tensions heighten.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could influence US security policy substantially.
- Potential for security improvements but also diplomatic tensions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 5: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 10: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $35000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- International legal norms and potential conflicts with global trade laws.
- Reputational risks and diplomatic tensions with Russia and its allies.
- Regulatory oversight needs to ensure private actors adhere to international laws.