Bill Overview
Title: Internet Freedom Rapid Response Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes the U.S. Agency for Global Media's Open Technology Fund to make grants to eligible entities to support internet freedom technologies to counter acute escalations in censorship in closed countries (generally countries in which democratic participation, free expression, freedom of movement, or access to information is suppressed).
Sponsors: Rep. Demings, Val Butler [D-FL-10]
Target Audience
Population: Internet users in closed countries with restricted access to information
Estimated Size: 0
- The bill aims to support internet freedom technologies targeted at countries with restricted access to information and suppression of democratic participation.
- Such countries include those with authoritarian governments where censorship is prevalent.
- By seeking to counter censorship, the bill will benefit populations in these countries where internet freedom is restricted.
- Internet users in such countries are estimated in the hundreds of millions globally, considering countries like China, North Korea, Iran, and others have large populations.
Reasoning
- The primary focus of the Internet Freedom Rapid Response Act is on supporting entities working to counter censorship in closed countries. Thus, the direct impact on the U.S. population is minimal as U.S. citizens are not the primary beneficiaries of the technology or support funded by the act.
- Some indirect impacts may include increased awareness or pride among U.S. citizens in their country supporting global democratic values, potential engagement in related professions, or enhanced international understanding.
- Considering the large number of users in affected countries, the policy indirectly impacts U.S. citizens who may be engaged in or connected to international media, technology, and policy sectors.
- Given the funding availability and global target, the act is more likely to influence those in the U.S. connected to such industries rather than the general population, which has a high commonness score (16-20) with low direct impact.
Simulated Interviews
Software Developer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who works in internet security, I'm glad to see support for fighting censorship globally.
- While this policy doesn't impact me directly, I might see some professional opportunities due to the increased focus on these technologies.
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 |
Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that this policy will underscore the U.S.'s stance on international freedom of expression.
- Though I won't see a direct impact, it's refreshing to see government support initiatives aligned with the causes I report on.
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 |
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill might catalyze innovation and partnerships in the industry, indirectly benefiting tech entrepreneurs in the U.S.
- I may find networking opportunities with organizations receiving grants.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Although this policy has minimal direct effects on the American public, it serves a crucial diplomatic and ethical role.
- It might offer me more work opportunities analyzing this area.
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 |
Grad Student in Political Science (New York, NY)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy invigorates my faith in international policy as a tool for good.
- I hope it provides more research opportunities aligned with my studies.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Legal Advisor (Austin, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though my primary clients aren't directly impacted, indirectly, this policy could substantiate their advocacy efforts.
- Important for continuity in global digital rights advocacy.
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 |
Cybersecurity Analyst (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While this policy targets more acute censorship threats abroad, it aligns with strengthening cybersecurity practices globally.
- I expect more sector-related legislative discussions where my expertise will be needed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Non-Profit Worker (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The broader implications of this policy resonate with my work in ensuring freedom through access.
- I feel proud that similar principles are government-supported globally.
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 |
Retired Diplomat (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's heartening to see initiatives supporting freedoms that were central in my career.
- While no direct impact, it adds to a legacy of supporting democratic movements globally.
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 |
Digital Marketer (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy indirectly emphasizes global digital access, impacting commerce and marketing strategies.
- No direct implications, but aligns with my interest in a globally connected market.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $70000000)
Year 3: $70000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $80000000)
Year 5: $85000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $100000000)
Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $115000000)
Year 100: $110000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy leverages existing mechanisms like the Open Technology Fund to counteract global censorship, potentially amplifying U.S. influence.
- Funding will need close monitoring to ensure it effectively targets critical areas of internet freedom suppression.
- There may be geopolitical implications by targeting countries with authoritarian regimes.
- Policy success may set a precedent for similar efforts in other sectors of global freedom and democracy promotion.