Bill Overview
Title: Securing America’s Borders Against Fentanyl Act
Description: This bill requires research and reports on technology to address illicit drug trafficking. For example, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must develop a program to measure how technologies and strategies have helped federal agencies address the illicit trafficking of fentanyl and its precursors into the United States. Under the program, DHS must periodically report to Congress an analysis of technologies used in drug interdiction. The Government Accountability Office must periodically report to Congress on recommendations for improving the data collected and metrics used under the program.
Sponsors: Rep. Spanberger, Abigail Davis [D-VA-7]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals globally impacted by opioid abuse and drug trafficking networks
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill focuses on combating the illicit trafficking of fentanyl, which is a significant public health issue worldwide.
- Fentanyl and its precursors contribute to the opioid crisis, affecting millions globally as it leads to addiction, overdose, and death.
- By improving drug interdiction strategies and technologies, the bill aims to reduce the availability of fentanyl, thereby potentially impacting the global population affected by opioid abuse.
- While direct benefits might target U.S. borders specifically, the reduction in fentanyl flow could have downstream global effects by impacting global drug trafficking networks.
Reasoning
- The bill primarily impacts individuals with opioid use disorder, their families, and communities, as well as workers and agencies involved in drug interdiction and border control.
- The budget constraints of $80M in the first year and $740M over ten years indicate modest funding relative to national spending, thus limiting the scale but encouraging targeted technology improvements in border areas.
- Since fentanyl and opioids impact a large and diverse group, it is important to include varied demographics in the interviews, including those unaffected directly by the policy but within impacted communities.
- The impact on wellbeing scores would primarily be seen among those at risk of opioid abuse or their families, law enforcement officers, border control agents, and healthcare workers.
- Those not directly dealing with opioid issues or working in related fields might not perceive immediate changes in wellbeing, but families and communities might see downstream effects over time.
Simulated Interviews
Border Security Officer (New Mexico)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this policy will reduce the dangerous flow of fentanyl into our community.
- It's crucial for our safety and public health—I see the effects firsthand every day.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Construction Worker (Ohio)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that reduces the supply of fentanyl is a step in the right direction for me.
- I think this policy could help make treatment more effective if less fentanyl is around.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 2 |
Healthcare Worker (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The daily overdose cases are exhausting—if the policy works, it could ease the emergency room burden significantly.
- I support technological advancements in border control—it's essential to tackle fentanyl trafficking.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Law Enforcement Officer (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need way better tools to handle fentanyl trafficking—this policy shows promise if implemented well.
- Technological support will help us track and stop drugs more effectively.
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 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Student (California)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think any effort to reduce dangerous drugs is good—it's crucial for health and safety.
- I hope this policy helps prevent more tragedies in communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Florida)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having kicked drugs myself, I see the immense value in these prevention policies.
- Improving technology to catch the flow at borders is crucial for saving more lives.
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 |
Teacher (Maine)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I lost a family member to an overdose; anything that limits access is critical.
- The success of such policies might deter future drug initiation among young people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
IT Professional (Michigan)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 19/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see immediate personal impact, but it's good to see the country addressing this crisis.
- Technology can be a great aid in dealing with such challenges, crucial for future prevention.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Social Worker (West Virginia)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this could make a massive difference in our communities.
- We're overwhelmed with the opioid epidemic; prevention is every bit as necessary as treatment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 2 |
Software Engineer (Washington)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm supportive of any measures that aim to combat drug issues.
- From a technical perspective, I'd be interested to see what technologies are developed or improved.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 3: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 5: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 10: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The scalability and adaptability of technologies used in drug interdiction are vital for success.
- Continued updates and resources for DHS and GAO are necessary for effective implementation.
- Measuring indirect savings and impacts requires comprehensive public health data analysis.