Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7629

Bill Overview

Title: Satellite Cybersecurity Act

Description: This bill addresses cybersecurity matters related to commercial satellite systems. Specifically, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) must maintain a publicly available clearinghouse of resources concerning the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems. CISA must also consolidate voluntary recommendations for the development, maintenance, and operation of such systems. The recommendations must include measures to protect systems against cyber-related vulnerabilities, risks, and attacks. The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study and report on federal actions to support the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems, including with respect to critical infrastructure sectors. In carrying out its study and report, the GAO must coordinate with designated federal agencies.

Sponsors: Rep. Malinowski, Tom [D-NJ-7]

Target Audience

Population: People dependent on or working with commercial satellite systems

Estimated Size: 350000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Cybersecurity Engineer (California, USA)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is a good step toward strengthening our cybersecurity landscape.
  • Initially, compliance might be challenging, but the focus on voluntary measures is reasonable given the budget.
  • This will likely increase our workload, but also bolster job security in our field.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Satellite Communications Consultant (Florida, USA)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act solidifies the importance of cybersecurity in satellite communications.
  • While the policy aims for improvement, smaller companies may struggle with the increased resource needs without government aid.

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 9 6
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Telecommunications Executive (Texas, USA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm concerned about potential cost increases and disruptions our operations might face due to new cybersecurity requirements.
  • However, improving security could prevent costly breaches.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Media Company Employee (New York, USA)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Security is vital, but I'm worried about how updates might affect broadcasting and service stability temporarily.
  • Long term, it's reassuring knowing cybersecurity is taken seriously.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (Virginia, USA)

Age: 64 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I retired before cybersecurity became this critical, but I understand its importance.
  • Improving satellite security is crucial, yet I wonder if this will lead to higher service costs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 4
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 5 4

Government Analyst (Washington, USA)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This aligns with national priorities on cybersecurity and could guide similar international efforts.
  • Balancing voluntary compliance with effective enforcement will be a challenge.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small Business Owner (Colorado, USA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope the policy offers support for small businesses to adopt recommended practices.
  • Cybersecurity is important, but I worry it might eat into our already tight budgets.

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 4
Year 20 6 4

Graduate Student (Georgia, USA)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could open more research and job opportunities in satellite cybersecurity.
  • It highlights growing awareness and support for protecting critical tech infrastructure.

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 7 7

Satellite Technician (New Mexico, USA)

Age: 32 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More regulations could mean more training and standards to meet, but there's some job security in that.
  • Keeping systems secure is essential, but I hope it doesn't complicate our operations too much.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Telecom Company Executive (Illinois, USA)

Age: 56 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Satellite security is pivotal for us, but initial costs can be a concern.
  • Ultimately, the policy's emphasis on security is aligned with our corporate goals.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 4

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)

Year 2: $122000000 (Low: $102000000, High: $153000000)

Year 3: $125000000 (Low: $105000000, High: $156000000)

Year 5: $130000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $162000000)

Year 10: $135000000 (Low: $115000000, High: $168000000)

Year 100: $135000000 (Low: $115000000, High: $168000000)

Key Considerations