Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8263

Bill Overview

Title: Protecting Life on Federal Lands Act

Description: This bill prohibits a federal agency or department from leasing federal property to an abortion providing organization.

Sponsors: Rep. Boebert, Lauren [R-CO-3]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals seeking abortions from providers potentially using federal lands

Estimated Size: 1000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Retail Associate (Rural Nevada)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I rely on health services near federal lands because they're closer to where I live.
  • Without access to these services, I would struggle to find alternative care nearby.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Non-profit Worker (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy imposes unnecessary restrictions that could limit access to essential health services, especially for marginalized groups.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

College Student (Southern California)

Age: 19 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I worry that this could make accessing healthcare more complicated or stigmatized at my university, which uses federal lands for some clinics.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Healthcare Administrator (Houston, Texas)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • For several of our clinics, this would mean significant logistical and operational headaches.
  • We might have to find alternative locations, increasing costs and complicating patient access.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Teacher (West Virginia)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy unfairly targets health providers who offer a range of reproductive health services.
  • I'm worried it might push some clinics out of areas that desperately need them.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired Park Ranger (Northern Arizona)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like this seem to drag politics into everyday life in unnecessary ways.
  • Although it may not affect me directly, I see how it complicates things for local clinics that provide diverse services.

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 5 6
Year 10 5 6
Year 20 5 6

Indigenous Rights Activist (New Mexico)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might worsen health disparities for Indigenous communities relying on federal lands for healthcare.
  • We're already facing significant challenges accessing comprehensive reproductive care.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Developer (NYC)

Age: 32 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't think this policy impacts me directly as I don't use services on federal lands.
  • However, I worry about friends who might need those services.

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

Small Business Owner (Alaska)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • For us in remote areas, federal lands are vital for healthcare services.
  • If operations shift away from there, it makes access even harder.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Postgraduate Student in Public Health (Florida)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I view this policy as detrimental to public health.
  • Limiting providers reduces necessary access for the communities they're meant to serve.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Key Considerations