Bill Overview
Title: Ostracize China Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires certain actions if the President informs Congress about actions by China that result in (1) threats to Taiwan's security or social or economic system, and (2) any danger to U.S. interests. Specifically, after the President informs Congress, various federal agencies must take all necessary steps to exclude China's representatives from the activities of specified international organizations, including the Group of 20, the Financial Stability Board, and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The President may waive these requirements if doing so is in the national interest of the United States.
Sponsors: Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3]
Target Audience
Population: People in China
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill directly aims to ostracize China from international organizations like the G20, which could impact the Chinese government's participation in global decision-making processes.
- As these international organizations influence global economic policies, this bill could have broad economic implications for China and its global trade partnerships.
- Impacts could further affect Chinese industries reliant on global collaboration and networks facilitated by these institutions.
- China has a population of over 1.4 billion people, encompassing a wide range of economic, social, and regional sectors potentially impacted by shifts in international engagement.
- Moreover, any large-scale economic disruption or shift could affect global markets and supply chains, impacting populations worldwide who are involved in trade with China.
Reasoning
- Considering the budget constraints and the scale of potentially impacted populations, only a subset of Americans might be directly and indirectly affected by this policy.
- The key sectors likely to experience impacts include technology, manufacturing, agriculture, and finance due to their significant interactions with the Chinese economy.
- Small businesses relying on Chinese imports might face increased costs, and this would ripple out to consumer prices; however, disruption levels can vary significantly.
- It's important to factor in individuals working in diplomatic, military, or international business roles, as they may experience more pronounced effects.
- Long-term impacts are uncertain, dependent on the extent to which diplomatic relations either stabilize or deteriorate.
- Given the complexity and indirect nature of effects, many individuals might not perceive noticeable changes in their daily lives, especially if other global economic factors offset the potential disruptions.
Simulated Interviews
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about how this policy might impact my ability to source cost-effective tech talent.
- If China is ostracized, it could result in increased costs or delays for my business.
- In the short term, I am uncertain if this will prompt a reinvestment in domestic talent which could be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Logistics Manager (Dallas, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any disruption in trade with China could increase shipping costs and affect inventories.
- I worry that these geopolitical tensions might increase operational challenges.
- On the positive side, there could be a shift to other markets, which might offer new opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to a more volatile international financial market.
- Increased market fluctuations might pose both risks and opportunities.
- I expect my job to become more challenging as we navigate these geopolitical changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
College Student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in how this policy will affect international diplomacy.
- It may provide real-world case studies for my coursework, but I worry about the long-term stability impacts.
- I hope for more educational opportunities in understanding global political strategies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Machinery Manufacturer (Milwaukee, WI)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excluding China might reduce our market access, potentially decreasing sales.
- This could pressure us to find new markets or increase prices for other regions.
- I hope this leads to better domestic manufacturing incentives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Government Employee (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy clearly reflects significant shifts in our diplomatic stance.
- There might be increased workload and bureaucratic changes in response.
- Long term, it could redefine trade and economic policies.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Small Business Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that import restrictions might increase my costs.
- This policy could significantly impact my supply chain and pricing strategy.
- In the long run, I might need to source materials locally or from other countries.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Research Scientist (Boston, MA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Collaborative efforts might be affected if diplomatic restrictions ensue.
- This could deter joint scientific progress in my field.
- It may necessitate restructuring of current and future projects involving Chinese partners.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Investor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any exclusion of China from international entities could destabilize many markets I'm invested in.
- This might require reassessment of risk and diversification strategies.
- I hope for a strategic balance that mitigates abrupt economic shifts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might increase market volatility, affecting my retirement funds.
- I believe geopolitical events will continue to shape global exchanges.
- I will monitor closely to adapt my investment strategies accordingly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $26000000, High: $102000000)
Year 3: $52000000 (Low: $27000000, High: $104000000)
Year 5: $54000000 (Low: $29000000, High: $108000000)
Year 10: $58000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $116000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- The geopolitical implications of excluding China could affect diplomatic relations and global collaboration in areas beyond the specified organizations.
- The potential economic impact is highly uncertain and dependent on China's and other nations' reactions to these exclusions.
- US companies with significant exposure to China might require support to adjust to changes in the international trade environment.