Bill Overview
Title: Responsible Budget Targets Act of 2022
Description: This bill modifies the federal budget process to establish new spending caps that are adjusted annually based on factors such as the amount of revenue and the growth of the gross domestic product.
Sponsors: Rep. Emmer, Tom [R-MN-6]
Target Audience
Population: People relying on government services and programs
Estimated Size: 333000000
- The bill modifies the federal budget process, which directly involves government spending and fiscal policy affecting various sectors.
- Spending caps influence how much funding is available for federal programs and services, impacting education, defense, healthcare, and public welfare sectors.
- Adjustments based on GDP growth and revenue can have broader effects on economic conditions, potentially affecting employment rates and individual economic stability.
- Anyone who relies on federal programs, projects, or services might see their funding reduced or stabilized based on the limits set by this bill.
- Changes in federal budget allocations could affect local governments relying on federal funding support.
Reasoning
- The Responsible Budget Targets Act of 2022 affects broad federal spending, which means it can impact various sectors like education, healthcare, and defense. The policy targets spending and thus influences individuals relying on government services for key needs.
- Since the caps are adjusted annually, the policy could create uncertainty in funding levels. This uncertainty could affect state and local governments, as well as non-profit organizations depending on consistent federal support.
- The largest impacts likely fall on individuals significantly dependent on federal program funding or jobs directly tied to state-allocated federal funds.
- Given the budget constraints of $47 million over 10 years and a focus on efficient federal spending, the policy might directly or indirectly impact a variety of socio-economic groups, but can only fund limited-scale national reforms.
- Wellbeing scores are predicted to change depending on personal reliance on government-funded services. Individuals less dependent on such funding or those with private sector alternatives may experience little change.
Simulated Interviews
School Teacher (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that the budget caps might reduce funding for educational initiatives.
- Education often faces cuts first, which could affect my job and children's learning experiences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Software Developer (Austin, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The changes might not impact me directly as I work in the private sector.
- However, any deep economic impacts on the consumer base could eventually affect business.
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 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 10 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on Medicare and it's worrying to think my benefits could be affected by budget caps.
- Healthcare cost stability is crucial for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Non-Profit Administrator (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Federal grants are vital for our community programs.
- Any decrease in budget could mean scaling back services or losing jobs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry budget caps could slow down state projects my business depends on.
- Stable federal funding is crucial for my business plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Veteran (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There are concerns that caps may reduce veteran assistance programs.
- These benefits are significant for my wellness and acting life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Graduate Student (Denver, CO)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the impact of spending caps on student loans and education funding.
- If loans become less available or more expensive, I might need to reconsider my education plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Healthcare Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Caps could mean our clinic faces funding issues, decreasing healthcare access for underserved populations.
- Patient care quality is at stake.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Construction Worker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Budget constraints might result in fewer infrastructure projects.
- This directly affects my job security and community growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear reduced government spending power could decrease my contract opportunities and consumer purchase power.
- Maintaining steady government business is essential for my operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $8000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $6000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $10000000)
Year 5: $4000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $8000000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $5000000)
Year 100: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Key Considerations
- Spending caps can create fiscal constraints that prevent the government from adequately responding to economic crises.
- Potential friction between expected GDP growth and cap-securing revenue requirements could impact economic stability.