Bill Overview
Title: Stop Human Trafficking in School Zones Act
Description: This bill establishes an enhanced penalty—an additional prison term of up to five years—for certain human trafficking offenses that occur in a school zone or on or within 1,000 feet of a premises on which a school-sponsored activity is taking place.
Sponsors: Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18]
Target Audience
Population: Human trafficking victims and school communities globally
Estimated Size: 50000000
- Human trafficking victims often include women, children, and marginalized individuals who are most vulnerable to exploitation.
- The bill targets trafficking activities near school zones which are areas frequented by children and adolescents, thus indicating these demographics are directly at risk.
- Enhancing penalties in school zones creates a deterrent effect, protecting students, their families, and school staff.
- Human traffickers – individuals or organizations engaged in this illegal activity – will be directly impacted through increased legal penalties for their actions.
- The community surrounding school zones will be affected as increased safety measures and awareness can alter community vigilance and behaviors.
Reasoning
- The Stop Human Trafficking in School Zones Act targets sensitive areas, fundamentally affecting school zones, which are prevalent across the U.S., impacting many communities.
- Given the expansive reach, a broad spectrum of the population—including students, parents, school staff, and traffickers—will experience varied impacts of the policy.
- The policy allocates a relatively substantial budget, enough to implement significant changes in terms of monitoring and enforcement around school zones, which can enhance community safety but may not directly translate to wellbeing improvements for everyone.
- The policy predominantly affects individuals connected to school zones and potential trafficking victims, with a focus on increasing their safety, thus potentially improving their wellbeing scores.
- Though the law is quite specific, community awareness and behavioral change might be slow, so its most significant benefits may manifest over a longer duration.
Simulated Interviews
Student (New York City, NY)
Age: 17 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm relieved to know there will be more penalties for trafficking near schools. It feels safer going to school without as much fear about these dangerous activities happening nearby.
- My parents are also more at ease knowing there is some action being taken for our safety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
School Principal (Austin, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Strengthening laws around school zones is a good move. It gives us additional leverage when working with law enforcement to ensure the safety of our students.
- The funding will hopefully translate to more resources like security personnel and awareness programs in schools.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Parent (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the effort to enhance safety around schools, but I'm concerned about how this policy will be enforced and if it will truly make a difference.
- I hope the policy comes with community education and more support for parents to understand warning signs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Social Worker (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could be a game-changer for prevention in specific zones, but we need to ensure victims still get the support they need without increasing their fear of coming forward due to stricter penalties.
- The success of such laws hinges on effective implementation and awareness programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Police Officer (Rural Iowa)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhanced penalties are necessary, however, we need more manpower and training to make this policy effective, especially in rural areas.
- The budget needs to allocate for on-the-ground training and equipment.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Retired Teacher (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful the measures will improve safety around schools but remember that effective communication with the community is key.
- We must ensure that we are proactive in engaging all stakeholders, especially in such big cities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
District Attorney (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stricter penalties are good news; it gives us more tools to work with in convictions.
- Federal support helps convince local governance to take these issues seriously.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Human Trafficking Survivor (Miami, FL)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While harsher penalties are a step forward, empowering survivors through accessible services is essential.
- There's a risk of traffickers becoming more covert, so community vigilance is crucial too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Non-profit Organizer focusing on Child Welfare (Boston, MA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The intention is positive, but success hinges on collaboration between schools, law enforcement, and communities.
- Increased penalties could potentially deter offenses near schools.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
School Counselor (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is definitely a move in the right direction, but there's still work needed to integrate such laws into our everyday school practices.
- Our students need to be educated about why these laws are being enforced.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52500000 (Low: $31500000, High: $73500000)
Year 3: $55000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $77000000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $36000000, High: $84000000)
Year 10: $75000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $105000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $210000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy targets human traffickers around schools, directly increasing safety for children and community members.
- Implementing the policy may escalate costs in law enforcement and criminal justice systems due to increased actions against traffickers.
- The long-term benefits, although difficult to quantify, include potentially significant societal gains through enhanced community safety.