Bill Overview
Title: COVID Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022
Description: This bill provides FY2022 supplemental appropriations to several federal departments and agencies for programs and activities to respond to COVID-19. Specifically, the bill provides appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of State, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the President. The bill also rescinds specified unobligated funds from several accounts.
Sponsors: Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by actions to address the COVID-19 pandemic
Estimated Size: 332000000
- COVID-19 is a global pandemic affecting virtually every country and population category.
- This bill will fund agencies and programs designed to mitigate COVID-19 impacts, likely covering aspects of health, economics, international cooperation, and vaccine distribution.
- The Department of Health and Human Services will focus on domestic health responses, affecting entire U.S. population, especially vulnerable groups such as elderly, immunocompromised, and healthcare workers.
- With appropriations to the Department of State and USAID, the bill will also impact foreign nationals through international health aid and diplomatic efforts to fight COVID-19.
- Since the pandemic affects health, economy, and societal normalcy worldwide, everyone is indirectly impacted, but directly affected populations will include those receiving aid or funding programs.
Reasoning
- The COVID-19 pandemic has widespread effects across various segments of the population, influencing health, economic stability, and daily life.
- Given the budget constraints of $8 billion in year 1 and $80 billion over 10 years, the policy aims to provide targeted support that maximizes public health benefits while addressing economic impacts.
- Essential workers, the elderly, low-income individuals, and those with health conditions are likely to experience more significant changes in wellbeing due to enhanced support.
- Wellbeing is self-reported using Cantril Ladder scores, a common approach in assessing life satisfaction and perception of wellbeing.
- We aim to include perspectives from a cross-section of the affected population, including those who may not be directly impacted.
Simulated Interviews
Retired (Rural Texas)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased funding for health initiatives due to this policy will hopefully provide more accessible healthcare services in rural areas.
- Access to vaccines and healthcare in my area has been limited, so any improvement in these facilities will benefit my situation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Healthcare Worker (New York City)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the funding will ensure that healthcare workers are prioritized for vaccines and protective gear.
- The policy should also focus on providing mental health support for those in the healthcare sector.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Small Business Owner (San Francisco)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Financial support and health measures are vital for small businesses to survive and recover.
- Policies must focus on both health and economic impacts to ensure local businesses can operate safely and effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Software Developer (Chicago)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While the policy may not directly affect me, it's important for the government to manage the public health crisis efficiently.
- Any measure that controls the pandemic benefits society as a whole, indirectly impacting everyone positively.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired (Florida)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy should prioritize healthcare infrastructure improvements to support people with chronic health conditions during the pandemic.
- Access to telemedicine and local healthcare services could greatly enhance my quality of life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
College Student (Los Angeles)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding for education and economic relief would support students like me who struggle with part-time work due to COVID-19.
- Access to vaccines and health education is crucial for students returning to campus.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Tech Consultant (Seattle)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’ve been less impacted thanks to remote work and advanced local healthcare, but I support policies that help reduce community transmission and protect the vulnerable.
- Continued testing and vaccination efforts are essential for societal stability and return to normalcy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Factory Worker (Detroit)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies should include safety protocols and support for essential workers to mitigate COVID-19 risks in workplaces.
- Increased funding for protective equipment and testing at workplaces is vital.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Freelance Artist (Austin)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Economic support and health measures are necessary to aid artists who lost income due to event cancellations and limited access to venues.
- Policies should provide relief for creative industries impacted by COVID-19.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 1 |
Research Scientist (Boston)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies that enhance vaccination and public health will facilitate international research cooperation.
- Continued support for science and research is crucial during the pandemic.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Year 2: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Year 3: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Year 5: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Year 10: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Year 100: $8000000000 (Low: $7000000000, High: $9000000000)
Key Considerations
- Rescinding unused funds helps offset new spending but carries uncertainty about the full offset potential.
- The success of funded programs depends on efficient implementation and international cooperation.