Bill Overview
Title: To prohibit certain aircraft associated with the Russian Federation from operating in the national airspace system.
Description: This bill prohibits aircrafts affiliated with Russia from operating in U.S. national airspace. The prohibition applies to (1) any aircraft or foreign air carriers that are owned, organized, or operated by an entity organized under Russian laws; and (2) private aircraft owned by Russian oligarchs and registered in a country other than Russia.
Sponsors: Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-26]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals associated with Russian-affiliated aircraft operations and passengers using these services
Estimated Size: 1000
- The bill impacts all aircraft operations that are linked to Russian entities or individuals within the U.S. national airspace, thus any flights planned by these aircraft will have to be canceled or rerouted around U.S. airspace.
- Aircraft operations usually involve crew, passengers, and logistical staff; it is likely that these operational roles will be disrupted for a significant portion of Russian-affiliated flights.
- Airline companies that either partner with or are owned by Russian entities may face operational challenges and financial setbacks.
- Passengers who intended to travel to or from the United States on Russian-affiliated flights will be affected, possibly needing to seek alternative travel arrangements.
- Private jets owned by Russian oligarchs and registered in countries other than Russia would also be banned, affecting the personal travel plans of these individuals.
- Other countries allowing registration of Russian-owned aircraft might face secondary political pressure or regulatory checks as they could circumvent bans.
Reasoning
- We need to consider that the direct impact of this policy will mainly hit those in aviation sectors that deal with Russian-affiliated flights, such as airline staff and logistical support workers. These individuals are relatively few in the broader American population, hence their impact on the overall budget and target population is minimal.
- The secondary impacts include passengers who might use these services, including those with Russian-related business or personal ties that necessitate travel. These are concentrated in cities with business ties to Russia or hubs for international travel such as New York, Los Angeles, or Washington D.C.
- The broader American workforce involved in managing airspace adjustments and ground services will experience only minor operational changes, as most operations will remain unaffected. However, they still contribute to indirect effects.
- Financially, the policy itself does not distribute funds like a public welfare program, meaning the budget considerations are primarily on administrative rather than reparative or compensatory terms.
Simulated Interviews
Aircraft ground services manager (New York, NY)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have heard about the ban, and it seems like it might decrease the number of flights I manage, but I'm not sure it will affect me long-term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Aviation regulatory officer (Miami, FL)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This regulation adds a layer of paperwork for us but doesn't really change the day-to-day operation of my job.
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 | 9 | 9 |
International travel consultant (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might cause inconvenience for some of my clients, but there are usually alternatives we can arrange.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Government aviation policy analyst (Washington, DC)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a critical regulatory stance that reflects our political strategy and national security. My role is more about understanding long-term impacts.
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 |
Air traffic controller (Houston, TX)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A ban will change our flight routing management slightly but shouldn't affect operations significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small business owner (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might lose some business, but I can find other clients to fill the gap. Overall, I'm not extremely worried.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Private jet pilot (Newark, NJ)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't affect many of my clients directly, but it does limit possible business coming from that direction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Corporate international liaison (Chicago, IL)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This won't have much direct impact on my day-to-day responsibilities, but I'll need to make some adjustments to flight plans.
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 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Tech executive (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a minor inconvenience to have to adjust my travel plans, but my wellbeing is not impacted.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Retired pilot (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 64 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As I'm retired, I don't expect this to affect me, except maybe seeing shifts in airline industry moves.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Key Considerations
- The political backdrop could influence the actual enforcement and associated monitoring needs.
- Secondary effects might arise from reciprocal measures by Russia affecting U.S. airlines, though such impacts are speculative.
- Coordination with allies might lead to wider bans, which could alter the initial estimates.