Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6914

Bill Overview

Title: SMALL GOVT Act of 2022

Description: This bill prohibits discrimination against individuals on the basis of their COVID-19 vaccination status or natural immunity to the virus. It also sets out informed consent requirements for COVID-19 vaccines. Specifically, the bill prohibits the use of federal funds to discriminate against (or induce discrimination against) an individual on the basis of COVID-19 vaccination status or natural immunity to the virus by, for example, restricting access to employment or health care. The bill prohibits the use of federal funds to administer COVID-19 vaccines without a patient's informed consent. The informed consent must comply with applicable requirements for the state in which the vaccine is administered, and patients must confirm their consent in writing.

Sponsors: Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

Target Audience

Population: People subject to policies or mandates regarding their COVID-19 vaccination status or natural immunity

Estimated Size: 150000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

nurse (Texas)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I felt restricted by vaccination mandates at work.
  • The policy would make me feel more secure in my job choice without fear of mandates.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

tech worker (California)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe vaccinations were necessary to curb the pandemic; this policy won't change much for me.
  • While I understand some people's hesitance, I trust the science.

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

teacher (Florida)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried this policy might make it less safe for my family.
  • I hope precautions at the school remain strict for now.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 4 5
Year 20 4 5

small business owner (New York)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy might ease some operational constraints I've faced.
  • Less mandate pressure is appreciated, but I still value public safety.

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 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

retired (Ohio)

Age: 65 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I feel more protected with this policy in place regarding healthcare access.
  • The focus on informed consent is a positive.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

college student (Illinois)

Age: 21 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy respects my decision to avoid additional shots if I choose.
  • College mandates were a bit much at times.

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 6 7
Year 20 6 7

factory worker (Georgia)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I feel like this policy could protect my job and make employers rethink mandates.
  • I don't think mandates help productivity.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

freelance writer (Washington)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Travel regulation changes could affect my work; I prefer consistency instead.
  • This policy may create confusion across states.

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 6 7
Year 20 6 7

healthcare worker (Michigan)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm pleased with the informed consent focus, regardless of vaccination status.
  • Healthcare trust is critical.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

retired (Indiana)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I want to travel freely without worrying about mandates.
  • The policy is a comforting sign of returning normalcy.

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 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 2: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 3: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)

Key Considerations