Bill Overview
Title: Federal Government Advertising Equity Accountability Act
Description: This bill requires the President to include information in each budget regarding executive agency expenditures for advertising services, including expenditures for the advertising services of socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses and of women and minority-owned businesses.
Sponsors: Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Owners and employees of socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses, including women and minority-owned businesses
Estimated Size: 700000
- The bill mandates the inclusion of information about the expenditure on advertising services to socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses, including women and minority-owned businesses.
- This information could lead to more equitable distribution of advertising contracts, impacting those businesses.
- Transparency in government advertising expenditures could lead to policy changes benefiting these target groups.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses, including those owned by women and minorities. Therefore, interviews should focus on owners or employees of these businesses.
- Since the policy mandates transparency in advertising expenditures, its impact may vary based on individual business exposure to government contracts.
- Given the budget, not all such businesses will be directly affected or perceive a change in the immediate years. The impacts might be more significant over the long term as transparency breeds more equitable contracts.
Simulated Interviews
Owner of a minority-owned marketing agency (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could open up opportunities for us to compete more fairly for government contracts.
- I am hopeful it will create a level playing field.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Employee at a woman-owned digital media firm (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy might help in bringing more business to our firm, which means job security for employees like me.
- It's good to see the government addressing disparities in contract awards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Owner of a woman-owned consulting firm (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative might make it easier for smaller firms to bid on government projects.
- Greater transparency is always welcome; it could help us expand.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Owner of a family-owned retail business (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel distant from this policy as my business doesn't directly rely on government contracts.
- However, indirect benefits might arise if more local businesses thrive due to this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Owner of a minority-owned tech startup (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems beneficial, but I'm skeptical about its actual influence on startups in technology.
- Government projects are competitive; hence true impact would require significant improvements in our positioning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Employee at a minority-owned manufacturing firm (Miami, FL)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe government transparency can only help improve business offers, indirectly benefiting employees like me.
- The time frame for observing tangible benefits may be long.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Owner of a Latino-owned food startup (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a positive step, but its relevance to my industry is indirect.
- I hope this induces more government involvement in diverse industries.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Employee at a women-owned logistics company (Detroit, MI)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More equitable distribution of contracts could bring more work to us, promoting longer-term job security.
- I am optimistic but realistic about potential delays in policy impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Owner of a small minority-owned IT services company (Seattle, WA)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The visibility on government spending could indirectly improve opportunities for us over time.
- Immediate impacts on technology firms might not be demonstrative.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Owner of a woman-owned boutique (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our business operations have little interaction with government advertising, but broader economic improvements could help.
- I'm cautious about assuming the policy's effect but hopeful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 5: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 100: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Key Considerations
- The main budgetary impact of this bill is the administrative cost associated with tracking and reporting new data.
- Future policy changes or shifts in how government advertising contracts are awarded could influence both the costs and potential savings.
- The administrative costs will depend on the extent to which current systems can be used or need significant modification to report required data.