Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8027

Bill Overview

Title: To establish within the Executive Office of the President a Technology Competitiveness Council.

Description: This bill establishes a Technology Competitiveness Council. The President shall establish such council within the Executive Office of the President. The council's responsibilities include developing recommendations for the President on U.S. technology competitiveness and technology-related issues, advising and assisting the President in the development and implementation of national technology policy and strategy; and developing and overseeing the implementation of an annual National Technology Strategy. The strategy shall be designed to maintain U.S. leadership in critical and emerging technologies essential to U.S. national security and economic prosperity.

Sponsors: Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2]

Target Audience

Population: People involved or impacted by technology industries and policies

Estimated Size: 330000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The establishment of a council focused on tech competitiveness is crucial for maintaining our industry's leadership.
  • I believe this will result in more funding and better policy alignment, enabling us to lead innovation in AI.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Startup Founder (Austin, TX)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • National strategies can provide the framework and stability needed for startups to thrive.
  • If executed well, it can help my startup compete and collaborate internationally.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having a dedicated council should streamline government actions and cross-agency coordination on tech matters.
  • It will provide more access to critical data for policy advisories.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Graduate Student (New York, NY)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could heavily influence my career prospects and direction.
  • National strategies might open more opportunities for funding and collaboration in my field.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Tech Retail Manager (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am not sure how much this impacts retail directly, maybe indirectly through more innovative products in stores.
  • There's potential for more advanced tech reaching consumers faster.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

CEO of a Tech Company (Seattle, WA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A cohesive national strategy is critical for sustained growth and competing on the global stage.
  • It should help align federal support and incentives for tech companies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

University Professor (Boston, MA)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This council could drive more academic collaborations and increase funding for research.
  • I'm hopeful for stronger ties between academia and industry.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

IT Consultant (Silicon Valley, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 13.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With a strategic approach, the tech sector can become even more robust and innovative.
  • My role could gain more demand as firms look to adapt to new strategies and technologies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Non-Tech Industry Worker (Chicago, IL)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Although my job is not directly in tech, it's indirectly affected by tech advancements.
  • A comprehensive strategy could enhance the digital advertising tools we use.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Construction Worker (Denver, CO)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't see how this tech council affects people in my line of work directly.
  • Maybe advancements in tech could slowly trickle down to make construction safer or more efficient.

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 5
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 5 4

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)

Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)

Year 5: $57000000 (Low: $47000000, High: $67000000)

Year 10: $63000000 (Low: $53000000, High: $73000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $110000000)

Key Considerations