Bill Overview
Title: PROTECT Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill alters federal sentencing for individuals who commit certain child pornography offenses. It generally requires judges to impose a sentence that is not less than the minimum period specified in the sentencing guideline range. The bill also increases certain criminal penalties for possession of child pornography.
Sponsors: Rep. Buck, Ken [R-CO-4]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved in child pornography offenses
Estimated Size: 100000
- The bill targets individuals involved in child pornography offenses, focusing on adjusting mandatory minimum sentences and penalties.
- Offenders of child pornography would be directly affected as they may receive longer sentences due to the stricter guidelines.
- Legal professionals, such as judges and lawyers, would need to adapt to new sentencing guidelines and procedures brought about by this bill.
- Families of offenders could experience extended emotional and financial strain due to longer incarceration periods.
- Victims of child pornography may be indirectly affected by stronger deterrents potentially reducing offenses.
Reasoning
- The policy directly affects individuals involved in child pornography offenses, who may face longer sentences and higher penalties. This presents a direct impact on their immediate well-being.
- Judges and legal professionals will likely require orientation and adaptation to the updated sentencing guidelines brought forth by the policy. While these individuals are not directly targeted by the policy, the adjustment period may affect their work life.
- Families of offenders are impacted due to the potential of experiencing greater emotional and financial burdens, as a result of longer prison sentences of their family members.
- Victims of child pornography may experience an indirect psychological benefit from the policy, as harsher sentences may deter potential offenses and reduce instances of exploitation.
- This policy mostly impacts a small segment of the population involved in legal cases linked to child pornography, estimated to be around 100,000 within the U.S. as per the policy specifics provided.
- Considering the policy budget, the financial resources are likely aimed at legal system adaptations, awareness campaigns, and support systems for victims and families. This means the budget should sufficiently cover the needs of the specialized audience over time without needing to cover the entire population.
Simulated Interviews
retired judge (Florida)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased penalties could deter future offenses.
- Judges need to carefully ensure just sentencing within these new guidelines.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
public defender (California)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to ensure that these penalties aren't excessively punitive.
- Balancing fair trials remains paramount.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
law professor (New York)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy reflects a strong stance against child exploitation.
- Significant resources will be required to handle legal complexities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
victim advocate (Ohio)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stronger penalties validate the harm victims endure.
- This may empower more victims to come forward.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
parent of offender (Texas)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Longer sentences will further strain our family.
- We need more support for reform and rehabilitation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
news journalist (Illinois)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The focus on strengthening laws seems justified.
- Media will closely monitor prosecutorial outcomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
unemployed (Nevada)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Registrars are excessively punitive, hindering reintegration.
- Rehabilitation must be more significant than punishment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
child psychologist (Georgia)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Toughened penalties are a step toward better protection.
- Ensuring mental health support is crucial as well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Federal prosecutor (District of Columbia)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will likely increase prosecution success rates.
- Balancing law and individual rights is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
social worker (Colorado)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy changes might make reintegration challenging.
- Support systems are vital during and post-incarceration.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $35000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $40000000)
Year 2: $37000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $42000000)
Year 3: $38000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $43000000)
Year 5: $40000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $45000000)
Year 10: $42000000 (Low: $36000000, High: $46000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $58000000)
Key Considerations
- The immediate fiscal impact primarily involves costs within the criminal justice and prison systems due to longer sentences and increased prosecution needs.
- Potential deterrent effects may reduce future criminal cases, resulting in long-term fiscal and social benefits.
- There is a requirement for upskilling among legal professionals to align with new guidelines, influencing judicial training resources.