Bill Overview
Title: Protecting American Innovation Act
Description: This bill establishes certain limitations on modifying trade agreements, including those related to the TRIPS Agreement (i.e., the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights). The TRIPS Agreement contains obligations for World Trade Organization members to protect patents and other intellectual property rights. Specifically, the bill prohibits the President (or any U.S. official, employee, or agent) from negotiating or concluding any withdrawal, suspension, or modification to a trade agreement that adversely affects the rights of the United States or U.S. persons under a trade agreement with China or Russia. Additionally, the bill states that a TRIPS waiver to address the COVID-19 pandemic shall not take effect if (1) the President does not submit required reports from the Department of Commerce and the Department of Defense (DOD), (2) the Commerce report concludes that the TRIPS waiver will not result in an increase in global vaccine access, or (3) the DOD report concludes that the TRIPS waiver would adversely impact U.S. national security. Prior to entering into a negotiation with a trading partner concerning a suspension of or modification to a trade agreement, the bill requires (1) the U.S. Trade Representative to publish certain information in the Federal Register and allow for public comment, and (2) the President to provide written notice and consult with Congress. Further, the President shall not enter into any suspension of or modification to a trade agreement unless the President has complied with such consultation requirements and receives congressional approval.
Sponsors: Rep. Smith, Adrian [R-NE-3]
Target Audience
Population: People engaged in global trade, IP protection, and healthcare access
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill focuses on protecting American innovation through intellectual property rights, which impacts U.S. individuals or entities involved in intellectual property sectors.
- There are specific provisions concerning trade agreements with China and Russia, suggesting that U.S. businesses engaged with these countries could be affected.
- The insistence on non-waiver of TRIPS for COVID-19 without meeting certain criteria touches on global health but prioritizes U.S. security and business interests.
- Public consultation requirements suggest potential impacts on American stakeholders in affected industries who could provide input.
Reasoning
- The population of interest includes professionals involved in intellectual property sectors, trade negotiations, people in the pharmaceutical industry, and tech sectors which might have dealings with China and Russia either directly or indirectly.
- Considering potential budget allocations, it is crucial to assess how this policy might impact businesses, employees, and consumers within target industries.
- The policy's non-TRIPS waiver for COVID-19 might have indirect effects on global vaccine access inequality, impacting those working in the health sectors or those advocating for global healthcare initiatives.
- The bill's emphasis on US national security suggests a considered impact on those in defense and policy-making roles, impacting their work environment and objectives. Considering direct and indirect influences on stakeholders, assessing these varied sectors provides insights into the broader economic or personal implications.
Simulated Interviews
Intellectual Property Attorney (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill seems to be a step forward in protecting US tech innovations, especially against unfair international practices.
- I worry about potential strains on international relationships, particularly with fast-growing markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Software Developer (New York, NY)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our developments are often challenged by IP theft concerns in foreign markets; this policy might help secure our efforts.
- However, I'm concerned about the escalation in trade tensions which could affect my company.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Pharmaceutical Executive (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Restriction on TRIPS waiver might hinder global vaccine equity, which is critical during pandemics.
- This policy could complicate our international collaborative efforts which rely on flexible IP considerations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Healthcare Policy Analyst (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The non-waiver of TRIPS concerning COVID-19 might slow international health responses, posing a risk to global health.
- However, national security considerations are also valid; this balance is tricky.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
International Trade Specialist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy could protect US interests against less favorable trade alterations with major players like China and Russia.
- Small businesses might find new barriers if tension escalates, particularly if retaliatory tariffs are implemented.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Entertainment Industry Executive (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Strengthening IP protections may fortify industry standards globally.
- Yet, the intricacy of cross-border media laws might still pose challenges despite these protections.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Biotech Researcher (Boston, MA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy supports IP which is fundamental for continued research and development.
- However, limiting flexibility in international cooperation could slow shared scientific progress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Independent Inventor (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Supporting IP here protects my innovations domestically and internationally against infringements.
- There's a risk of creating rifts that could isolate small inventors from global opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Policy Lobbyist (Austin, TX)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensures clearer legislative paths for innovations under US law, fitting well with industry objectives.
- Such policies may bolster local tech markets but complicate international engagements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Economic Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy might safeguard American IP interests, impacting economic forecasting positively.
- However, certain rigidity might surface for adaptability in rapidly changing global markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54080000 (Low: $43680000, High: $64680000)
Year 5: $58580000 (Low: $47180000, High: $69880000)
Year 10: $67259000 (Low: $54259000, High: $80259000)
Year 100: $172703300 (Low: $139303300, High: $206103300)
Key Considerations
- The bill imposes constraints on modifying trade agreements, which could limit the flexibility of U.S. trade policy.
- Assessing the cost of conducting robust analyses and consultations required by the bill is complex, varying with international trade environments.
- The focus on maintaining intellectual property rights aligns with broader economic strategies of fostering innovation but may encounter resistance in global forums, especially concerning health emergencies like pandemics.