Bill Overview
Title: Department of Homeland Security Seal Protection Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits the use of the seal of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a manner reasonably calculated to convey the impression that DHS or any organizational component or element of it has approved, endorsed, or authorized such use, except with the written permission of DHS.
Sponsors: Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals or entities using the DHS seal without permission
Estimated Size: 300000
- The bill addresses the unauthorized use of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) seal, which is primarily a concern for entities or individuals who might previously misuse or misrepresent the DHS seal.
- The primary groups affected would be individuals or organizations engaged in communication or publication activities where the DHS seal might be used without permission.
- This includes media organizations, government contractors, private companies, and non-profits that could mistakenly, or deliberately, use the seal to suggest endorsement or authorization by the DHS.
- The global population itself may not be directly impacted; impacts are more specific to those misusing the DHS seal.
- Potential legal and administrative consequences for violators are only applicable to those considering or found using the DHS seal inappropriately.
Reasoning
- The budget constraint suggests that the policy implementation will involve limited outreach and enforcement activities, focusing on key violators of unauthorized DHS seal usage rather than widespread enforcement.
- The population directly impacted by this bill is small compared to the general U.S. population, and mainly includes specific sectors such as media companies, government contractors, or entities in regulated industries.
- Majority of the population might not notice any difference or be aware of the policy unless they are in fields related to compliance law or publication where incorrect usage of seals is prevalent.
- Some of the impacted individuals may experience stress related to compliance, potentially affecting their wellbeing scores, but this will likely be minor.
- Most effects are indirect and legal or regulatory in nature, meaning the policy might not directly contribute to an individual's day-to-day wellbeing, but could affect their organization's operating procedures.
Simulated Interviews
Legal Compliance Officer (New York, NY)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is necessary to prevent misuse of essential government symbols.
- It won't affect me personally much, but it adds another layer to ensure our publications comply with federal regulations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Startup Founder (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The restriction is clear, and while it restricts some potential marketing opportunities, it's important to prevent misleading representations.
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 |
Nonprofit Director (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for the policy but I hope there are clear guidelines on how nonprofits like ours can legally use government ties in our communications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Government Contractor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is crucial to avoid any misrepresentations. Our company is already adherent to these standards, so there's minimal impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Graphic Designer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It impacts how I design for certain clients, but usually, legal teams handle these nuances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Media Director (Seattle, WA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We have to be very careful with the use of such seals; this regulation isn't surprising but does add to our administrative tasks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Freelance Web Developer (Austin, TX)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This isn't highly relevant to my work since most businesses don't use these seals; however, it's good to be informed.
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 |
Public Relations Specialist (Miami, FL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Government seals are a tricky business; this is one more thing we need to ensure doesn't slip through the cracks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Corporate Lawyer (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to stay updated with such regulations to guide clients effectively. It won't affect me personally, but it's significant for advising businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Marketing Analyst (Denver, CO)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My role requires understanding how branding aligns with legal standards, so this policy is important but doesn't affect me materially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 2: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 3: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring compliance through appropriate monitoring systems can deter misuse.
- Balancing enforcement spending against potential economic savings from reputation control.
- The administrative burden versus public education efforts to inform parties about legal usage.