Bill Overview
Title: They Had Our Back We Have Theirs Act of 2022
Description: This bill provides specified levels of educational assistance and federal student loan forgiveness to children and spouses of eligible public safety officers. An eligible public safety officer is a public safety officer who died or was permanently and totally disabled from an injury sustained in the line of duty.
Sponsors: Rep. Herrell, Yvette [R-NM-2]
Target Audience
Population: Children and spouses of eligible public safety officers globally
Estimated Size: 3000
- The bill targets educational assistance and loan forgiveness for children and spouses of eligible public safety officers.
- Eligible public safety officers include those who have died or been permanently and totally disabled in the line of duty.
- Public safety officers include law enforcement, firefighters, emergency medical services personnel, and similar roles.
- The number of public safety officers who die or are totally disabled annually forms the basis for the target population estimate.
- The target population includes children and spouses, which may vary significantly based on the size of the officer's family.
- Global statistics on public safety officers who die or are totally disabled can provide an estimate of the global target population.
Reasoning
- The policy is aimed at a very specific segment of the population: the families of public safety officers who have died or been severely disabled in the line of duty.
- Given the number of public safety officers who die or are disabled annually, the target population size in the US is estimated to be around 3000.
- The policy budget over 10 years is significant, ensuring substantial support, but it's still important to consider how the funds are divided among beneficiaries.
- The impact of the policy will vary, from high impact on those directly eligible and in difficult financial situations, to low or no impact on those not eligible or already resilient financially.
- One key aspect is educational assistance, which will profoundly affect younger family members seeking higher education or training.
Simulated Interviews
High school student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could change my life. I've been worried about how I would afford college.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Paramedic (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My student loans have been a heavy burden. It would be a big relief if they were forgiven.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Teacher (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing my kids could get help with their education would ease some ongoing stress.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Software developer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might help my wife more with her plans for career training.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Nurse (Seattle, WA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would have made things easier for my family had it existed earlier.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Law student (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could mean I don't have to worry as much about taking on debt for law school.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
College student (Miami, FL)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm grateful for this policy, though I feel secure even without it.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support this policy, although my immediate family might not benefit directly 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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software engineer (Boston, MA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy sounds great, but I don't think it applies to siblings in my situation.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
None (Denver, CO)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could be a lifeline in helping us rebuild and keep my children's education on track.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $187500000 (Low: $125000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $187500000 (Low: $125000000, High: $250000000)
Year 3: $187500000 (Low: $125000000, High: $250000000)
Year 5: $187500000 (Low: $125000000, High: $250000000)
Year 10: $187500000 (Low: $125000000, High: $250000000)
Year 100: $187500000 (Low: $125000000, High: $250000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill targets a well-defined but relatively small population.
- Costs and benefits might vary significantly based on the exact number of beneficiaries and the specific levels of assistance provided.
- There is an inherent unpredictability in the number of public safety officers affected each year.
- Educational attainment and its potential to raise lifetime earnings create long-term effects that are hard to quantify accurately.