Bill Overview
Title: KREMLIN Act
Description: This bill temporarily prohibits federal agencies from contracting with persons that have business operations with the government of Russia or with fossil fuel companies that operate there, with exceptions where necessary to provide humanitarian assistance or disaster relief or where vital to U.S. national security interests. The bill terminates the prohibition when the President submits to specified congressional committees a written certification determining that Russia has reached an agreement relating to the withdrawal of Russian forces and cessation of military hostilities that is accepted by the Ukrainian government, poses no immediate military threat of aggression to any North Atlantic Treaty Organization member, and recognizes the right of the people of Ukraine to independently and freely choose their own government.
Sponsors: Rep. Waltz, Michael [R-FL-6]
Target Audience
Population: People employed by or economically connected to businesses with operations in Russia's government or fossil fuel industry
Estimated Size: 100000
- The bill targets businesses that operate with the Russian government and fossil fuel companies operating in Russia.
- The prohibition affects U.S. federal agencies' ability to contract with specific businesses, impacting those businesses’ revenue and operations.
- The bill aims to exert economic pressure on Russia to achieve political and military concessions.
- People employed by affected businesses may face economic uncertainty due to potential changes in operations or revenue losses.
- Stakeholders in the U.S. and globally who are economically connected to these businesses may also be indirectly impacted.
Reasoning
- The policy targets a relatively small segment of the U.S. population, specifically those working for or closely tied to companies with Russian operations.
- A diverse range of perspectives is necessary, from those directly involved with impacted businesses to those not affected.
- The financial implications of the policy could affect companies' revenue, leading to potential job insecurity or layoffs.
- Other sectors may benefit indirectly as businesses pivot away from Russia to other markets.
- The impact intensity will vary; not all affected individuals will experience high levels of distress.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Industry Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about how this will impact our company's bottom line.
- We might need to cut jobs if we lose federal contracts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Tech Startup Employee (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Indirect impacts may hit us if our clients' revenues dip.
- It's stressful not knowing exactly how we'll be affected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Financial markets could see volatility.
- I'm keeping an eye on how investments will be affected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Government Contractor (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't directly affect me, but colleagues could see changes.
- I'm curious about long-term implications.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Supply Chain Manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could cause disruptions in our supply chains.
- Adapting quickly will be key to minimizing issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Auto Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't expect major changes to my pension or investments.
- The geopolitical landscape is concerning, but I'm not directly impacted.
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 | 8 | 8 |
Graduate Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could make for an interesting case study.
- As a student, I won't feel the economic impacts directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Small Business Owner (Denver, CO)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We're a small business, so every contract counts.
- I'll need to strategize if clients change their operation zones.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Environmental Consultant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've been advocating for reduced fossil fuel dependence.
- This policy could drive more interest in sustainable solutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Corporate Lawyer (Miami, FL)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could shift our legal landscape.
- There might be new opportunities as businesses refocus.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $85000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $90000000)
Year 2: $70000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $80000000)
Year 3: $70000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $75000000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $40000000)
Key Considerations
- Effectiveness of the prohibition in achieving its geopolitical aims.
- Potential increases in administrative and procurement costs for monitoring compliance and finding alternative contractors.
- Impact on U.S. companies with current operations in Russia, especially in the energy sector, and their supply chains.