Bill Overview
Title: REEShore Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes a strategic reserve of rare earth metals and rare earth metal products and sets out other requirements related to rare earth metals. Specifically, the bill requires defense contractors to disclose the provenance of rare earth metal permanent magnets and restricts the use of rare earth metals sourced from China in certain defense items and services. Additionally, the U.S. Trade Representative must investigate China for unfair trade practices related to the rare earth metals market, and the Department of Defense must report on efforts to reduce the dependence of U.S. allies on non-allied sources of rare earth metals.
Sponsors: Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]
Target Audience
Population: People dependent on global rare earth metals supply chain
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The rare earth metals market is global, with China being the largest producer and exporter.
- The U.S. defense industry relies on rare earth metals for many critical applications, including manufacturing defense equipment and technologies.
- The establishment of a strategic reserve implies the government's effort to make the U.S. more self-reliant and less dependent on imports from China.
- Defense contractors and related supply chain participants in the U.S. will need to adapt their sourcing strategies.
- Restriction on rare earths from China might increase demand from other countries, potentially increasing prices.
Reasoning
- The policy aims to establish a domestic supply chain for rare earth metals, reducing dependency on China—a major producer. This is strategic for national security and might aid domestic industries in becoming more self-reliant. However, shifting supply chains can incur costs for businesses, raise prices for consumers in the short term, and might affect employment within the defense sector due to disrupted supply chains.
- People directly working in industries using or dependent on rare earth metals will feel the immediate impacts. This includes defense contractors and certain manufacturers.
- Broader impacts may affect employees in the technology sector or industries tangentially related to defense (e.g., aerospace).
- The target population includes a wide cross-section of workers in the defense technology sectors, potentially influencing millions of employees through shifts in market dynamics over a decade.
- Public response might vary based on the degree of independence from foreign supply chains achieved, potential cost increases for products, and job security within affected industries.
Simulated Interviews
Engineer at a defense contractor (San Jose, California)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think reducing reliance on Chinese rare earth metals is crucial for our national security.
- There might be short-term challenges and adjustments in our supply processes but, in the long term, it could be beneficial.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Rare earth metals supplier (Houston, Texas)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about losing business due to sourcing restrictions.
- This policy could open new opportunities in U.S.-based supply chains if managed well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Automotive industry analyst (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While this policy focuses on defense, the ripple effects on other industries, like automotive, could be substantial.
- Electric vehicles and other tech-heavy industries are likely to see cost increases in the short term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Policy advisor (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an essential step towards securing supply chains critical for national defense.
- There will be challenges in restructuring these supply chains, but it's a necessary evolution.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Tech startup founder (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could result in increased prices and make our sourcing more complicated.
- However, if effectively executed, it might lead to more stable U.S.-based supply chains.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Economist (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The REEShore Act is a positive move towards safeguarding crucial supply chains.
- It might also shift geopolitical alliances, affecting trade flows.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired military officer (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring the U.S. has control over essential materials is paramount for defense.
- The policy might involve teething issues, but it's vital for long-term security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
University researcher (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could encourage research into more sustainable sources and alternatives.
- It aligns with my research goals, but transition might be slow and costly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
College student studying international trade (New York, New York)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The focus on rare earths is strategic given global reliance on them.
- It's a move that could alter U.S.-China trade relations and supply chain strategies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Senior manager at a manufacturing firm (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 58 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislation could mean short-term pain as we adapt our supply chains.
- Long-term gains could include less dependency on volatile international markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $400000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $600000000)
Year 3: $350000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $500000000)
Year 5: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $450000000)
Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $400000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Key Considerations
- Need for investment in domestic rare earth processing and manufacturing capabilities.
- Potential diplomatic tensions with China due to trade investigations and sourcing restrictions.
- Global market impact from reduced U.S. dependence on Chinese rare earths.
- Potential price volatility in the short term as supply chains adjust.