Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8104

Bill Overview

Title: Defense Semiconductor Stockpile Act

Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense (DOD) to study and report on the strategic materials (e.g., semiconductors and related manufacturing equipment) it requires to execute its operational plans in a conflict with a strategic competitor (e.g., China) lasting not less than six months. The bill also requires DOD to implement a pilot program to acquire the highest priority minerals, materials, or equipment for the National Defense Stockpile.

Sponsors: Rep. Gallagher, Mike [R-WI-8]

Target Audience

Population: People involved in the semiconductor and defense industries

Estimated Size: 5000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Semiconductor manufacturing engineer (Austin, Texas)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the policy will secure funding and increase demand, which is good for job stability.
  • There's a lot of potential for growth, and this could position us better globally.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Defense contractor (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is crucial for national security, and for my job, it ensures continued contracts.
  • There might be some administrative hurdles, but overall it's a net positive.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

Software developer (San Francisco, California)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased stockpile could stabilize supplies, which is beneficial.
  • I do not foresee major immediate impacts on my personal life, hopefully just more job security.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Auto industry executive (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Concerned about potential tariffs or fees as DOD stockpiles resources.
  • In the long run, it could mean more US-based supply opportunities.

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 5
Year 20 6 5

Minerals supply chain analyst (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Likely more analysis work as resources are sourced.
  • Could drive up domestic mineral sourcing, which is positive.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Foreign policy analyst (New York, New York)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Strategically important, but I worry about international tensions.
  • Depends on how this aligns with broader U.S. geopolitical strategies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired military officer (Houston, Texas)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a smart move for national security.
  • Might not see the effects directly but good for future preparedness.

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 5
Year 20 6 5

Environmental advocate (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 26 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Worried about environmental impacts of increased resource extraction.
  • Hope it involves sustainable practices, so it doesn't degrade environments.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Supply Chain Manager (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This might smooth out supply issues, which are common in our industry.
  • Could mean more work, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

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 6 4
Year 20 5 4

University professor (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Important for national strategy, but needs careful implementation.
  • Could shape future administrative and policy studies, which is intriguing.

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 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 2: $105000000 (Low: $84000000, High: $126000000)

Year 3: $110000000 (Low: $88000000, High: $132000000)

Year 5: $120000000 (Low: $96000000, High: $144000000)

Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)

Year 100: $400000000 (Low: $320000000, High: $480000000)

Key Considerations