Bill Overview
Title: Honoring Civil Servants Killed in the Line of Duty Act
Description: This bill increases benefits to survivors of federal employees who die in the line of duty. Specifically, the bill increases the death benefit for federal employees from $10,000 to $100,000 and increases the funeral benefit from $800 to $8,800. Both amounts must be adjusted annually for inflation.
Sponsors: Rep. Connolly, Gerald E. [D-VA-11]
Target Audience
Population: People globally who are survivors of federal employees who die in the line of duty
Estimated Size: 63
- The bill targets survivors of federal employees who die in the line of duty.
- Currently there are approximately 2.1 million federal employees.
- While not all federal employees die in the line of duty, there are a number of roles, such as law enforcement and first responders, that are higher risk.
- The Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that federal law enforcement officers face significant risks, though deaths are rare.
- On average, each year, a handful of federal employees nationwide die in service related to their government roles, resulting in benefits being paid only occasionally.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy is fairly small, estimated at around 63 survivors of federal employees who die in the line of duty annually. With a budget of $6,174,000 USD for the first year, the policy can comfortably provide the increased benefits, given that each beneficiary would receive $100,000 along with funeral benefits — well within budget limits.
- Different roles within the federal workforce have different risk levels, and therefore, the likelihood of being affected by this policy varies. High-risk roles such as law enforcement and certain defense-related positions are more likely to experience service-related fatalities.
- The overall impact of the policy on broader social wellbeing is limited due to the small number of people affected, but for those directly impacted, the increased benefits will significantly ease financial burdens and provide more stability after losing a loved one.
- Given the population size and budget, the policy should be sustainable long-term while adjusting for inflation. Many federal employees and their families who are not directly impacted will still support this policy as it recognizes the sacrifices made by their peers.
Simulated Interviews
FBI Special Agent (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.5 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is critical for those families who have made the ultimate sacrifice. It provides peace of mind knowing that if something were to happen to me, my family would be better secured financially.
- This policy displays the value and respect our government holds for its employees, especially those in high-risk positions.
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 |
Capitol Police Officer (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy won't affect me directly unless I were to die in the line of duty, but knowing it's there in such an event is a relief.
- It reinforces the sense that the government recognizes and values the dangerous aspects of our job.
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 |
Federal Firefighter (Quantico, VA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With this policy, I know my child would be taken care of without financial stress in the worst-case scenario.
- I believe this should be expanded to include non-immediate family members who are dependents too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Postal Service Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While it's a beneficial policy for those affected, I don't think it would apply to me since postal service roles aren't typically life-threatening.
- I support the policy for my colleagues who are in more dangerous positions.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Customs and Border Protection Officer (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will have a direct positive impact on the families of our colleagues who are unfortunately killed in service.
- Knowing the family receives rightful compensation brings some peace amid the dangers of this job.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Federal Wildlife Officer (Denver, CO)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Absolutely support this policy. The nature of our job involves unexpected dangers that could happen any day.
- This helps secure my family’s future without me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Defense Contractor (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Good to know that there’s financial protection for families of those in riskier defense roles.
- Not directly applicable to me but ensures our team has peace of mind.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Transportation Security Administration Officer (New York City, NY)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased financial support is a huge benefit if the worst were to happen.
- Though only relevant in very unfortunate circumstances, it’s a safety net we appreciate.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
National Park Ranger (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's comforting to know in case of unforeseen events, my children will be financially supported.
- Recognizes the risks we take while protecting our natural heritage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Federal Air Marshal (Dallas, TX)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a lifeline for those of us constantly in danger.
- While I hope never to use it, knowing it’s there is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $6174000 (Low: $5000000, High: $7500000)
Year 2: $6297480 (Low: $5100000, High: $7650000)
Year 3: $6423429 (Low: $5202000, High: $7803000)
Year 5: $6685650 (Low: $5408000, High: $8109000)
Year 10: $7239926 (Low: $5859000, High: $8781000)
Year 100: $16046709 (Low: $12917000, High: $19365500)
Key Considerations
- The cost estimate is highly sensitive to assumptions around the number of deaths in the line of duty.
- Adjustments for inflation may drive costs higher over time, hence variability in future estimates.
- Federal agency budgets may need adjustments to accommodate increased payments.