Bill Overview
Title: No Taxpayer Dollars for Communist China COVID Tests Act
Description: This bill prohibits the use of federal funds to procure at-home COVID-19 tests that are imported from or manufactured (in whole or in part) in China.
Sponsors: Rep. Harshbarger, Diana [R-TN-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals using COVID-19 tests
Estimated Size: 50000000
- At-home COVID-19 tests are used by individuals worldwide to detect COVID-19 infection.
- COVID-19 tests manufactured or imported from China are distributed globally, having a strong presence in international markets including the United States.
- The legislation's ban on federal funding for these tests indicates a significant reduction in procurement of Chinese-made tests, affecting availability.
- Globally, many countries source medical supplies, including COVID-19 tests, from China, impacting anyone who uses these.
- Restrictions mainly impact U.S. residents due to the federal funding provision.
Reasoning
- The new policy aims to ban the procurement of COVID-19 tests sourced from China using federal funds. Given the distribution capability of Chinese manufacturers, this could reduce the availability of affordable tests in the U.S., particularly for those who heavily rely on government aid for access to healthcare, which is substantial due to the impact of COVID-19.
- The total budget is $15 million in the first year and $150 million over ten years, which limits its breadth and indicates that not all test users will be affected significantly. People who depend on federally funded programs are most likely to be the ones impacted due to reduced availability of inexpensive or free tests.
- The policy may also be designed as a strategic move to incentivize domestic production of medical supplies, potentially impacting job markets and availability of U.S.-made tests. Those with higher incomes or access to private healthcare might be less impacted as they can afford alternative supply options.
- The diversity in the population means the policy will have varied effects, from no impact on those who don't use federally funded tests to a high impact on those who do.
Simulated Interviews
nurse (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the accessibility of COVID-19 tests for the public, especially in emergencies when quick access is critical.
- We depend on reliable sources; limiting test availability, despite the origin, could mean delays and increased health risks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
factory worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to affordable at-home COVID-19 tests is crucial for my family's health and to ensure I can still go to work.
- This move could strain families who are already struggling during the pandemic.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
software engineer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need to diversify sources, but this policy doesn't change my routine as I get tested through my healthcare provider.
- Government spending should focus on local industries when possible.
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 |
retired teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about increased costs with less accessibility to tests that were once affordable.
- Policies like these should emphasize the welfare of the public and provide alternatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
business owner (Dallas, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This push for local sourcing could stimulate the economy and reduce dependency on foreign supplies.
- We need to ensure quality and affordability are maintained for consumers.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
freelance artist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Losing access to cheaper, reliable test sources would mean spending more out-of-pocket.
- I need to test regularly to safely meet clients in person.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
construction worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's already tough finding affordable tests. Not allowing Chinese tests might make it harder for people like me.
- We need more accessible healthcare solutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
public health official (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Limiting sources must be matched by increasing others to avoid disrupting public health services.
- We need clear alternatives for sustained testing availability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
biotech researcher (Boston, MA)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could drive innovation and self-reliance in healthcare.
- We should support domestic production while maintaining high standards.
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 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
college student (Rural Kentucky)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Testing access is important for maintaining a healthy campus.
- Hopefully, alternatives will ensure continued testing availability without increased costs.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill requires adjusting existing procurement strategies since a significant number of COVID-19 tests were previously sourced from China due to cost efficiencies.
- It is important to assess alternative supply chains to ensure continued availability and affordability of COVID-19 tests in the U.S.
- Potential impact on U.S. public health activities could include delays or cost increases if there are supply chain disruptions.