Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7765

Bill Overview

Title: American Food Supply Chain Resiliency Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the Agricultural Marketing Service to enter into cooperative agreements with entities (such as states, colleges, and nonprofit organizations) to establish at least six Supply Chain Regional Resource Centers to support small-sized and medium-sized agricultural businesses and producers of agricultural products.

Sponsors: Rep. Spanberger, Abigail Davis [D-VA-7]

Target Audience

Population: Small and medium-sized agricultural businesses and producers of agricultural products

Estimated Size: 2000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Corn farmer (Iowa)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could help us get access to better distribution networks.
  • It might improve our ability to handle unforeseen events like floods.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

Organic vegetable producer (California)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy can provide more guidance and resources for marketing my products.
  • Support with distribution channels would be a game changer.

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

Cattle rancher (Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the centers help us with drought resistant strategies, it would be very beneficial.
  • I am skeptical about any new government program's efficacy.

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 5 4
Year 20 5 4

Urban farmer (New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It may take time for such a policy to reach urban farms like mine.
  • I'm hoping for tools to improve resource efficiency.

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 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Peach grower (Georgia)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • New strategies for crop protection could stabilize my yields.
  • The real test will be in the implementation of this policy.

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 8 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 8 4

Wheat farmer (Kansas)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might not affect larger operations like ours much.
  • Focus seems to be on smaller businesses.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Agricultural business owner (Florida)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased business for us if local farmers prosper.
  • I expect some form of initial hurdles in cooperation with the new centers.

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 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Dairy farmer (Wisconsin)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Help with technology adoption would be revolutionary for us.
  • I'm cautiously optimistic about the improvements promised.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 4

Agricultural student (Colorado)

Age: 24 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns well with my long-term business plans.
  • Access to more resources would support my career transition.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Retired government worker (Ohio)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm interested to see if this policy will produce measurable results over time.
  • Supporting small farms strengthens our local economy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $110000000)

Year 3: $85000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $105000000)

Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)

Year 10: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $80000000)

Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Key Considerations