Bill Overview
Title: To prohibit the obligation or expenditure of funds relating to the Office for Environmental Justice and any other program, project, or activity relating to climate change of the Department of Justice, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill prohibits the Department of Justice from using funds to operate the Office for Environmental Justice or for any other program, project, or activity related to climate change.
Sponsors: Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-10]
Target Audience
Population: People living in areas impacted by environmental injustice globally
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill affects programs related to climate change across the Department of Justice.
- These programs aim to address environmental justice issues, which often disproportionately affect low-income and marginalized communities.
- Environmental justice seeks to ensure that all communities, particularly those historically burdened by pollution and systemic inequities, have equal protection from environmental challenges.
Reasoning
- The policy targeting the removal of climate change-related programs in the Department of Justice will primarily impact marginalized and low-income populations in areas suffering from environmental injustice.
- These communities might already face challenges like pollution, lack of resources, and systemic inequities, which such programs aim to mitigate.
- While not all people in affected areas may be aware of or directly benefit from these programs, the removal could exacerbate their vulnerabilities over time.
- Those working directly with or employed by these programs may experience immediate impacts, such as job loss or funding cuts.
- Individuals not affected directly may only experience minimal changes in their wellbeing or might even be unaware of such programs' existence.
- The population most impacted typically faces barriers like access to healthcare, education, and clean resources, which environmental programs help to address.
- For others in the population, the impact may align more with broader societal changes such as increased pollution or climate-related events.
- The costs and potential redirections of this $500 million in the first year and $5 billion over ten years will dictate the scale and specific impact on these communities.
Simulated Interviews
Community Health Worker (Flint, Michigan)
Age: 43 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on programs funded to address climate and environmental justice issues, especially since my community faces ongoing water concerns.
- This policy's removal might result in increased health risks for my family and community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 9 |
Environmental Lawyer (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could severely limit our ability to advocate for communities facing environmental harm.
- Without funding, lawsuits against major polluters may not proceed, impacting these communities' futures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Waiter (Houston, Texas)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I just started learning about how pollution affects my health and this policy feels like a step back.
- Local programs had started educating us and improving conditions; now that may stop.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Retired (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The environmental programs have been key in rebuilding safer homes after Katrina.
- If these programs are cut, my community will regress due to higher vulnerability to climate events.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Teacher (Bronx, New York)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Programs funding environmental education for kids are irreplaceable, cutting them erodes their future.
- This policy seems to dismiss what's crucial for our children's sustainable education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Software Engineer (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the broader impact, but personally, I don't see the immediate effect on my life.
- It concerns me socially that vulnerable communities might suffer.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Construction Worker (Miami, Florida)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My job heavily relies on the funding from environmental programs to develop climate resilience.
- I'm worried about employment stability if these resources are retracted.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Retired Coal Miner (Appalachia, West Virginia)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel this policy ignores areas like mine where environment-related health issues are rampant.
- Environmental justice funded my access to recent healthcare adjustments.
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 |
Urban Planner (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Urban planning heavily depends on support for environmental impact assessments, this policy might curb these efforts.
- It'll slow our progress in creating eco-friendly, healthy urban areas.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
College Student (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems like a step back for future climate action opportunities.
- My career and academic focus could be affected by the reduced importance placed on environmental justice.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 3: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 5: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Key Considerations
- The cessation of environmental justice programs might disproportionally affect marginalized and low-income communities.
- Potential long-term environmental impacts, leading to indirect economic and health costs, were not quantitatively assessed.
- Current funding levels suggest significant investment in addressing climate change and environmental injustice through these programs.