Bill Overview
Title: REEShore Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the inclusion of rare earth elements and certain other critical minerals in the National Defense Stockpile and sets out other requirements related to those elements and minerals. Specifically, the bill requires defense contractors to disclose the provenance of permanent magnets that contain those elements or minerals and expands prohibitions that restrict the Department of Defense from procuring goods or services, including those elements and minerals, from companies affiliated with China. The bill also expands the President's authorities under the Defense Production Act of 1950 to support domestic sources for those elements and minerals. (The Defense Production Act of 1950 confers on the President a broad set of authorities to influence domestic industry in order to provide essential materials and goods needed for the national defense.)
Sponsors: Rep. Slotkin, Elissa [D-MI-8]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in global rare earth element-related sectors including defense, manufacturing, and mining
Estimated Size: 240000
- Rare earth elements and critical minerals are essential for various applications, especially in defense-related sectors.
- Approximately 95% of rare earth elements used by the United States are imported, with China being the largest source.
- The REEShore Act would encourage domestic production and sourcing of these elements and minerals, impacting global supply chains.
- Approximately 1,000,000 people work in industries related to rare earths globally, particularly in mining, manufacturing, and technology sectors.
- The defense sector heavily depends on these elements for manufacturing advanced technologies.
- The bill could affect around 2,000,000 workers globally involved in sectors transitioning their supply chains due to this legislation.
Reasoning
- The REEShore Act primarily targets national security and the domestic production chain, likely impacting industries such as defense, technology, and advanced manufacturing.
- Policy impacts are primarily on the workforce directly involved in the extraction, processing, and use of rare earth elements.
- We should include individuals working in high-tech industries, manufacturing, and government-related sectors alongside those in industries that are less directly affected.
- Not every U.S. citizen will feel direct impacts, especially those not involved in these specific sectors.
- The policy might indirectly affect other sectors like electronics, automotive, due to changes in supply chains and costs.
- Given the budget constraints, large investments may not instantly translate into immediate changes in wellbeing but could stabilize industries over time.
Simulated Interviews
Defense Contractor (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy creates more paperwork and bureaucracy for us, but it's necessary for national security.
- In the long run, it might stabilize domestic supply chains, making us less reliant on imports.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Electronics Manufacturing Technician (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might drive up our costs initially, as domestic sourcing typically costs more.
- It could incentivize innovation in alternative materials locally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Mineral Research Scientist (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy supports our research in sustainable materials domestically, which is fantastic.
- Funding should increase as more focus is placed on domestic capability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
Automotive Engineer (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased domestic sourcing could raise production costs; however, it's vital for industry innovation.
- We could see slower progress in adopting new tech if costs spiral.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Austin, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a strategic move to bolster national security, prioritizing long-term benefits over current costs.
- Public and private sectors need to align to maximize results.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Mining Site Manager (Denver, CO)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We expect this policy to boost operations and increase job security at mining sites.
- Environmental regulations also have to be considered to ensure sustainable practices.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Renewable Energy Consultant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Balancing domestic production with environmental sustainability concerns is crucial.
- This bill might push us to identify greener alternatives and innovation.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Automotive Manufacturer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We are worried about supply chain disruptions and costs in the short term.
- Long-term benefits might balance these initial hurdles and ensure better industry stability.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Tech Startup Co-founder (Boston, MA)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Short-term supply chain disruptions are expected; however, this could be positive in diversifying risks.
- We are already exploring sustainable alternatives and anticipating faster domestic response.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
University Professor in Materials Science (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 57 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill will enhance research opportunities and collaborations with industry.
- Expecting increased funding and interest in sustainable materials technology.
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 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 2: $1500000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1700000000)
Year 3: $1600000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 5: $1700000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $1900000000)
Year 10: $1750000000 (Low: $1550000000, High: $1950000000)
Year 100: $1800000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2000000000)
Key Considerations
- Securing rare earth elements is critical for national defense and tech industries.
- Short-term costs may be offset by long-term strategic and economic advantages.
- Concerns of increased scarcity or price volatility if global players counter U.S. efforts by hoarding rare earths.
- Technological advancements are necessary to support domestic rare earth extraction and processing.