Bill Overview
Title: Make American Flags in America Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses the display and procurement of U.S. flags. Specifically, the bill prohibits the display on federal property and the procurement by a federal agency of a U.S. flag unless it has been made in the United States. Further, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) must conduct a study that (1) assesses and describes the enforcement scheme for country-of-origin labeling for U.S. flags; (2) determines how many fines or penalties, if any, have been imposed for violations of such scheme; and (3) identifies the percentage of violations that are subsequent violations committed by an entity that has previously been found to have violated such scheme. Additionally, the FTC must report to Congress the results of the study and any recommendations to improve the enforcement scheme and its deterrent effect.
Sponsors: Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in the manufacture, sale, and procurement of U.S. flags
Estimated Size: 12000
- The bill mandates that all U.S. flags used on federal property must be domestically manufactured, potentially impacting flag manufacturers globally by reducing their market if they previously supplied flags to the U.S. government.
- U.S. flag manufacturers are likely the direct beneficiaries of this bill, as it ensures demand for their products by the federal government.
- The bill may lead to an increase in manufacturing jobs within the U.S. flag-making industry, affecting workers in this sector.
- This legislation does not directly impact consumers or individuals who purchase flags for personal use, as it is specific to federal agency procurement.
- International manufacturers of U.S. flags who export to the United States may experience reduced demand from federal entities, though they might still sell flags for non-federal use in the U.S.
Reasoning
- The population targeted by the policy is small relative to the entire U.S. population, and consists primarily of workers in the U.S. flag manufacturing industry, federal procurement officers, and international flag manufacturers.
- The policy's immediate impact will be on the demand for flags made in the U.S., potentially leading to job creation in the domestic manufacturing sector.
- Federal procurement processes will need adaptation, possibly requiring training or restructuring within agencies buying flags.
- International producers might see a negative economic impact, but this will primarily concern non-domestic entities.
- Given the budget constraints, the policy's enforcement and awareness reach might be limited, particularly in terms of global impact.
Simulated Interviews
Flag Manufacturer (South Carolina)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the bill as it potentially boosts my sales and business opportunities.
- There's a need for strong domestic support of our local industries.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Federal Procurement Officer (Virginia)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill results in more work as we need to ensure compliance, but I see it as a positive step.
- It's crucial we support American manufacturing and this feels like a step in that direction.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Flag Importer (California)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill doesn't affect most of my business, but the federal part will decrease.
- It's a slight setback, but I'm optimistic about compensation through private sales.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Manufacturing Worker (Iowa)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might see more hours or job security, which is reassuring.
- Hopefully, this law provides more stability in my job.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Flag Retailer (New York)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill doesn't change much for retail, as private sales are unaffected.
- I can market 'Made in America' as a selling point to attract more customers.
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Government Policy Analyst (Texas)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Encourages local economics through legislative measures, which is beneficial.
- However, careful monitoring for impacts on global trade relations is needed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Union Leader (Ohio)
Age: 49 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a boon for the workers; secure jobs are always a priority.
- We will push for better conditions alongside secure contracts.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Environmental Advocate (Massachusetts)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopefully, 'Made in America' means environmentally friendly too.
- Legislation should also focus on sustainable production methods.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
Flag Manufacturer (Illinois)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Legislation like this provides a stable market environment for my business.
- Ensures our manufacturing legacy remains strong.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Craftsman of Artisanal Flags (North Carolina)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our customer base is largely unaffected, but I welcome any legislation that supports domestic artisans.
- Such policies reinforce the importance of local craftsmanship.
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 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 3: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 5: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The cost of procuring American-made flags could be higher, though this is not directly a government cost but a reallocation of existing resources.
- There may be legal and administrative efforts required to implement and verify compliance with the domestic manufacturing requirement.
- The FTC study is expected to have minimal ongoing costs once completed.