Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8115

Bill Overview

Title: Recreation and Public Purposes Tribal Parity Act

Description: This bill authorizes the Department of the Interior to sell or lease public lands to federally recognized Indian tribes for recreational or public purposes, subject to annual acreage limitations.

Sponsors: Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1]

Target Audience

Population: Federally recognized Indian tribes

Estimated Size: 1300000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Tribal leader (New Mexico)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a long time coming. Access to more lands for our community will help preserve our culture and improve our quality of life.
  • I'm hopeful for initiatives in recreation and public spaces for the youth.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Environmental scientist (Arizona)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns with environmental goals and acknowledges tribal sovereignty.
  • It would benefit many projects focused on sustainable land use.

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 6
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Cultural advocate (South Dakota)

Age: 35 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having more control over land for public use will enrich our community programs.
  • I support how it allows tribes to manage their lands sustainably.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Federal lands administrator (California)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy increases our workload but also provides great opportunities for collaboration.
  • Monitoring its impact will be challenging but rewarding if it supports tribal development.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Rancher (Montana)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I have mixed feelings. It might affect my business, but I see the benefits for the tribes.
  • Collaboration with tribes could open new markets for us.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Student (Oklahoma)

Age: 24 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy reflects a positive shift towards acknowledging tribal rights and history.
  • It will be interesting to see practical outcomes, especially in recreational projects.

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 6
Year 20 8 6

Policy analyst (Washington)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a significant stepping stone in federal-tribal relations, especially regarding land.
  • It sets a precedent for future legislation in this area.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Teacher (North Carolina)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see this as an educational opportunity to teach students about current progress in Native American history.
  • It's important to highlight how policies can shape community wellbeing.

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 7 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Retired (Nevada)

Age: 67 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I appreciate any effort that empowers tribal communities to expand their horizons.
  • It reminds me of past initiatives but feels more inclusive.

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 6
Year 20 7 6

Nonprofit Worker (Alaska)

Age: 42 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy provides hope for expanding our programs and reaching more community members effectively.
  • We can finally address some long-standing needs for facilities.

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 10 8
Year 20 10 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 2: $5100000 (Low: $3050000, High: $7150000)

Year 3: $5200000 (Low: $3100000, High: $7300000)

Year 5: $5400000 (Low: $3200000, High: $7500000)

Year 10: $6000000 (Low: $3500000, High: $8500000)

Year 100: $8000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $10500000)

Key Considerations