Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7460

Bill Overview

Title: ONSHORE Manufacturing Act

Description: This bill sets forth provisions to support secure supply chains of rare earth elements. A rare earth element means a natural element associated with (1) the metallic element scandium, with atomic number 21; (2) the metallic element yttrium, with atomic number 39; or (3) any of the series of 15 metallic elements between lanthanum, with atomic number 57, and lutetium, with atomic number 71, on the periodic table.

Sponsors: Rep. Gonzales, Tony [R-TX-23]

Target Audience

Population: People dependent on products using rare earth elements

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Software Engineer (San Jose, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could increase the cost of hardware development initially.
  • In the long run, it might stabilize supply chains and reduce dependency on foreign materials.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 7 8

Electric Vehicle Technician (Denver, CO)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy should help us with a more reliable supply for vehicle batteries.
  • I hope it leads to more job stability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 8 7

Retired Factory Worker (Detroit, MI)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see this as a chance to revive the local manufacturing industry.
  • It could bring new jobs if implemented well.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 5 5

Smartphone App Developer (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could mean more consistent access to the latest tech.
  • I worry about short-term costs but optimistic for long-term benefits.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 8 8

Gaming Technology Manager (Las Vegas, NV)

Age: 50 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A domestic supply chain could make advancing gaming technology smoother.
  • Initial disruptions might be a potential risk.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Local Politician (Lynchburg, VA)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns with my goals of boosting local economy.
  • Promoting onshore manufacturing is essential for growth.

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 8 7
Year 20 7 7

PhD Student in Material Science (Seattle, WA)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm excited about the potential for research funding this policy might bring.
  • I think it will stimulate innovation in material sciences.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 8 8

Defense Contractor (Houston, TX)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 12.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy should improve national security and reduce logistic headaches.
  • I'm optimistic about the stability it promises.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 8 8

Senior Citizen (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm concerned about possible price hikes in electronics I rely on.
  • A stable supply could mean fewer disruptions long-term.

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 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Financial Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could create new investment opportunities
  • I'm eager to see how this influences the tech market.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)

Year 2: $1350000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1800000000)

Year 3: $1200000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1600000000)

Year 5: $1000000000 (Low: $700000000, High: $1300000000)

Year 10: $800000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $1000000000)

Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)

Key Considerations