Bill Overview
Title: Stamp Out Invasive Species Act
Description: This bill directs the U.S. Postal Service to issue and sell a Combating Invasive Species Semipostal Stamp. Proceeds from the sale of the stamp must be transferred in equal proportion to the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture for combating invasive species. (Invasive species are nonnative species whose introduction poses a serious threat to natural ecosystems and causes detrimental economic damage to local communities.) The stamp must be made available to the public for two years.
Sponsors: Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals and communities affected by invasive species
Estimated Size: 15000000
- Invasive species can disrupt natural ecosystems, so those communities and ecosystems such as farmers and those in the fishing industry that rely on natural services provided by local flora and fauna could see changes in wellbeing.
- Invasive species cost the global economy billions each year.
- Communities that are economically affected by invasive species will benefit from enhanced mitigation and control efforts funded by this stamp.
- Tourist destinations that are harmed by invasive species could potentially see improvement if these funds help alleviate the issues.
- Ecosystem restoration could benefit biodiversity and those who enjoy or work in natural areas.
Reasoning
- The policy would ideally be more impactful in areas heavily affected by invasive species that lead to economic damage, such as agricultural zones, coastal areas, or regions with significant tourism reliant on natural ecosystems.
- Farmers and those involved in agriculture are expected to experience tangible benefits in terms of reduced crop damage and consequently higher yields.
- Fisheries may benefit from improved water ecosystems, which would lead to better fish stocks.
- Tourists destinations that have been victim to invasive species could see increased visits if natural beauty is restored.
- The impact might be negligible for urban residents who are not directly reliant on ecosystems that invasive species disrupt.
- Resources generated by the stamp initiative are limited compared to the wide scale of invasive species issues, meaning high-impact cases are prioritized, affecting only a subset of the total population.
- Considering the budget scale, direct noticeable effects from this policy will likely develop over the long term rather than immediately.
Simulated Interviews
Farmer (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think any help with dealing with these pests is welcome. Even though it might not cover everything, it's a step in the right direction.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Tourism operator (Florida)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy helps restore the bird population. It's crucial for my business and the unique experience we offer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Software Engineer (New York)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am glad something is being done about the environment, but it doesn't affect me directly.
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 |
Agricultural Scientist (Nebraska)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might provide some necessary funding for research and field work to control invasive species.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Rancher (Texas)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any assistance in mitigating the damage feral hogs cause would be fantastic. They destroy my pastures regularly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Environmental Scientist (Oregon)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could address some of the critical funding gaps we face and accelerate ecosystem recovery efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Wisconsin)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm happy to see some action on this. Anything that helps my garden thrive is welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Fisherman (Michigan)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I really hope that the funds can help restore our lakes to previous fish levels; it's my livelihood.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
School Teacher (New Mexico)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's great that this policy might fund some educational programs or local initiatives to handle invasive plants.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Policy Analyst (Washington)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic, but real progress requires broader systemic changes, not just stamps.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 2: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Public willingness to purchase semipostal stamps is uncertain, impacting revenue generation.
- Coordination between USPS, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Agriculture is crucial in maximizing economic and environmental benefits.
- Stamp production and sales costs might exceed initial projections given the novelty of the initiative and uncertainties in marketing effectiveness.