Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/6981

Bill Overview

Title: American Ammo in Defense of Ukraine Act

Description: This bill authorizes the President to waive certain payments and requirements for deliveries of ammunition to Ukraine until the armed conflict in Ukraine ends. Specifically, for certain types of ammunition or ordnance to be delivered to a qualified entity providing such items to Ukraine, the President may transport the items without charging the transportation costs to Ukraine. The President may also, to expedite delivery of such items, waive any applicable Department of State or Department of Commerce export criteria.

Sponsors: Rep. Hudson, Richard [R-NC-8]

Target Audience

Population: People in Ukraine

Estimated Size: 10000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Defense contractor (Virginia)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could potentially boost business opportunities for defense contractors by simplifying export procedures, which helps us get our products overseas faster. It's a positive step for aiding allies in need.
  • I think it's crucial in maintaining global security and showing support for countries defending their sovereignty.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 7 6

Peace activist (California)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried about increased military spending and how it affects domestic priorities. This policy seems like it could divert funds from important areas like education or healthcare.
  • I understand the humanitarian argument, but we should find peaceful solutions that don't involve more ammunition.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Government analyst (New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is strategically sound in terms of aiding Ukraine quickly, which is essential for their ongoing struggle.
  • It reflects our commitment to support allies, though it also necessitates careful budget monitoring and diplomatic balancing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small arms manufacturer (Texas)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could ease export-related logistics, helping smaller businesses like mine compete more effectively on the global stage.
  • While it's not a rapid improvement, any reduction in bureaucracy helps us adhere better to international demand.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Department of Commerce official (Washington D.C.)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy requires diligent execution on our part to ensure expedited processes do not compromise regulatory standards.
  • It's a new layer of challenge but provides support to a critical geopolitical ally, which aligns with our strategic goals.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Taxpayer advocate (New Mexico)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Waiving transport costs sounds like additional spending which needs transparent justification.
  • While support for Ukraine is important, we need to weigh it carefully against domestic fiscal responsibilities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Military veteran (Illinois)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a positive move in aiding our allies without immediate cost, enhancing our strategic influence.
  • Experience shows me that streamlined aid delivery can be pivotal in conflict outcomes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Arms export consultant (Florida)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy simplifies the export process potentially leading to increased business for my clients.
  • Any reduction in bureaucracy is welcome, although it must be balanced with compliance priorities.

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 6 6

Defense industry researcher (Florida)

Age: 25 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could reshape the industry's reach, potentially altering global arms market dynamics.
  • It will be interesting to see how this affects overall global security strategies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Non-profit director (Maryland)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We generally oppose increased military aid; such policies often escalate conflicts rather than resolve them.
  • Our priority is more on diplomatic and humanitarian solutions, and this approach is somewhat concerning to our community.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations