Bill Overview
Title: Cost of War Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Department of Defense (DOD) to post on its public website information relating to the cost to U.S. taxpayers of any overseas contingency operation conducted by the U.S. Armed Forces on or after September 18, 2001. DOD must update such information not later than 90 days after the end of each fiscal year.
Sponsors: Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Target Audience
Population: People interested in military expenditures
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill requires the Department of Defense to provide information about the cost to U.S. taxpayers for overseas military operations.
- All U.S. taxpayers contribute to defense budget allocations, thus they are directly impacted by the dissemination of this information.
- Awareness of military spending could impact voter decisions and public opinion, indirectly impacting policy-making based on taxpayer sentiment.
Reasoning
- The policy affects all U.S. taxpayers, which represent a significant portion of the 330 million population.
- The impact on wellbeing is more psychological or ideological rather than immediate physical impact, given that the policy increases awareness rather than changing direct economic conditions.
- The policy could have varying significance for those actively involved or particularly interested in governmental fiscal policies, military families, activists, and voters.
- Some individuals might feel empowered by gaining access to this information, potentially increasing their perceived control over government decisions.
- Others might feel overwhelmed or anxious about military expenditures beyond their control, potentially affecting wellbeing negatively.
- Cost constraints focus primarily on infrastructure to support public dissemination rather than direct economic benefits to individuals.
Simulated Interviews
School Teacher (Boston, MA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's important for the public to know where their tax dollars are going, especially with something as significant as military spending.
- This policy could make more people think critically about what we prioritize as a nation.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Software Engineer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's fascinating to see this level of transparency being mandated.
- I might look into it occasionally but doubt it will affect my day-to-day life.
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 |
Veteran Affairs Coordinator (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could serve as a wake-up call to many about the real costs of war.
- Transparency is the first step toward accountability.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Nurse (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing these costs is important, but it calls into question our priorities.
- I support this change, but it's heartbreaking to see how resources are allocated.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Lawrence, KS)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This kind of transparency is crucial for informed discussions and debates.
- Having clear data is empowering.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Federal Employee (Tallahassee, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will likely stir public opinion, affecting legislative discussions.
- It's a step towards greater public involvement in fiscal decisions.
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 |
Journalist (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides necessary data for the pieces I write.
- It's a resource we've needed for a long time.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Nonprofit Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It shines a light on issues we very much care about.
- Could help us develop better-targeted campaigns.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
College Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having the costs consistently available offers real-world data for my studies.
- Might inform my generation's policy preferences in the long run.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Small Business Owner (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to more informed decision-making at multiple levels.
- Promotes accountability but may cause concern among the public.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill enhances fiscal transparency without direct economic or budgetary repercussions.
- Costs are primarily associated with creating and maintaining the information database for public access.
- Long-term tax revenue and spending impact are speculative and beyond the direct scope of the bill.