Bill Overview
Title: RECOVER Act of 2022
Description: of 2022 This bill provides lifetime identity protection coverage for individuals affected by previous federal agency data breaches.
Sponsors: Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals affected by federal agency data breaches
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill provides lifetime identity protection for individuals affected by federal data breaches.
- In June 2015, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) announced a data breach affecting approximately 21.5 million individuals.
- The data breach at OPM was a significant event affecting current, former, and prospective federal employees, as well as contractors.
- Lifetime coverage indicates a long-term impact on the affected individuals.
Reasoning
- The population impacted by this policy are primarily U.S. citizens, including current and former federal employees and contractors who were affected by the OPM data breach.
- The $4 billion budget in year 1 suggests that each affected individual could have substantial coverage if distributed evenly, although administrative costs could reduce the per-person impact.
- Some individuals may experience significant peace of mind and improved wellbeing due to the lifetime protection, while others may see little change if they have not been impacted by identity theft.
- There will be a range of opinions on the policy, from those who think it's a worthwhile investment for peace of mind, to those who may feel it doesn't address more pressing security concerns upfront.
- Many in the target population may already have some form of identity protection, so the additional coverage's impact varies.
Simulated Interviews
Federal employee (Virginia)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I was really worried after the breach was announced. Having lifetime protection eases my mind significantly.
- Knowing there won't be a lapse in coverage means I can focus more on my work and less on potential identity theft.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Retired federal contractor (California)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to have, but I already had some protection--it feels like a drop in the bucket.
- My financial situation doesn't change, but I feel slightly more secure about my identity information.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
IT specialist (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I never had my ID stolen, but this protection acts as a safety net.
- It's important, but not something I think about often.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Former federal employee (New York)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've worried a lot about data privacy. This gives me a bit more peace of mind.
- It's a good move, but we need more proactive security measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Federal analyst (Illinois)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a boon for newcomers in the federal workforce like me.
- Continuous protection makes me less anxious about potential data issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Federal contractor (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having been directly affected, I'm relieved about the lifetime coverage.
- This policy is reassuring, though the government should ensure no future incidents occur.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
School teacher (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though I wasn't directly affected, it's great my spouse has coverage.
- It's reassuring but more needs to be done to protect non-federal employees too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Freelancer (Oregon)
Age: 47 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This protection feels like a necessary step after my past identity issues.
- It's a relief to know something is being done, even if too late for past events.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Retired (Florida)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is reassurance, especially on a fixed income.
- Protection from identity theft allows me to focus on enjoying retirement more.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Federal agency manager (Maryland)
Age: 59 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While this policy will aid many, I'm more focused on preventing future breaches.
- It's a decent move for affected individuals, but stronger prevention is vital.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4000000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $6000000000)
Year 2: $4200000000 (Low: $2100000000, High: $6300000000)
Year 3: $4410000000 (Low: $2205000000, High: $6615000000)
Year 5: $4851000000 (Low: $2425500000, High: $7276500000)
Year 10: $6454900000 (Low: $3227450000, High: $9682350000)
Year 100: $43515786192 (Low: $21757893096, High: $65273679288)
Key Considerations
- Long-term annual costs due to lifetime nature of the coverage.
- Policy impacts over 20 million individuals, primarily in the U.S.
- Costs dependent on the subscription rates for identity protection services.