Bill Overview
Title: Baltic Defense and Deterrence Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of State to establish and implement an initiative to increase security and economic ties with the Baltic countries (i.e., Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania). The bill also requires the Department of Defense to establish and implement an initiative to deepen security cooperation with the Baltic countries.
Sponsors: Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7]
Target Audience
Population: People in the Baltic countries
Estimated Size: 5000
- The primary focus of the bill is on the Baltic countries: Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, indicating a direct impact on their populations.
- The populations of these countries are approximately: Estonia (1.3 million), Latvia (1.9 million), and Lithuania (2.7 million).
- Deepening security cooperation can affect military personnel, government officials, and potentially the broader populace in terms of national security implications.
- Economic ties can influence business sectors, job markets, and economic growth, impacting citizens' livelihoods and opportunities.
- There will be indirect impacts on surrounding regions' security and economic conditions due to strengthened Baltic alliances.
Reasoning
- The primary affected groups in the U.S. are military personnel, defense contractors, diplomats, and possibly businesses engaged in trade with the Baltic nations.
- Given the specialized focus on security and diplomacy, impacts may be more acute on defense-related sectors rather than the civilian populace.
- The policy budget constrains the breadth of impact within the U.S. but allows significant influence within the specified sectors.
- American citizens at large might experience indirect impacts through global security improvements, potentially enhancing economic stability.
Simulated Interviews
Military officer (Virginia)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could mean increased deployment opportunities and operational funding.
- It's reassuring to see more focus on Eastern European security, as Russia's influence is concerning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Foreign service officer (Washington D.C.)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative could enhance my career owing to an increased focus on Balts.
- May lead to more collaborative opportunities with European counterparts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
CEO of a tech startup (California)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might open new markets or partnerships in the Baltics.
- Security cooperation could offer our business defense contracts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Defense contractor engineer (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could lead to increased contracts and job security.
- Improves our firm's strategic positioning globally.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired military general (Florida)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Seeing further U.S. involvement in Baltic security reassures me.
- Hopeful about improved geopolitical stability.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Supply chain manager (Maryland)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potential Baltic market growth from this act could benefit our business.
- Security improvements could boost economic stability.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Academic specializing in International Relations (New York)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides excellent case studies to analyze in my work.
- Strengthens opinions on appropriate U.S. foreign policy focus.
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 |
Logistics and supply company owner (Illinois)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Could lead to more business with Baltic countries.
- Security improvements seen as beneficial for trade stability.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Tech consultant (Massachusetts)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could foster opportunities to deploy technologies in new markets.
- Improved security enhances tech integration possibilities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cybersecurity analyst (Texas)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased Baltic security can mitigate cyber threat vectors alongside this initiative.
- Policy could enrich my role with new responsibilities.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Year 2: $510000000 (Low: $460000000, High: $560000000)
Year 3: $520000000 (Low: $470000000, High: $570000000)
Year 5: $540000000 (Low: $490000000, High: $590000000)
Year 10: $580000000 (Low: $530000000, High: $630000000)
Year 100: $800000000 (Low: $750000000, High: $850000000)
Key Considerations
- Estimations involve uncertainties related to geopolitical shifts and economic changes in the Baltic region.
- The durability and effectiveness of security enhancements will affect both U.S. and Baltic states' security.
- Potential increases in administrative and operational efficiencies might reduce costs over time.