Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8353

Bill Overview

Title: Pay Victims Not Prisoners Act

Description: This bill prohibits payment of any amount of the 2021 recovery rebate to federal prisoners convicted of a crime or confined due to insanity or a finding that the prisoner is a sexually dangerous person or a sexual predator. The bill requires (1) the disclosure of certain prisoner tax return information to the Department of Justice for purposes of making restitution to crime victims, and (2) the payment of judgments issued against prisoners using rebate amounts.

Sponsors: Rep. Budd, Ted [R-NC-13]

Target Audience

Population: Federal prisoners ineligible for the 2021 recovery rebate due to this bill

Estimated Size: 150000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Federal prisoner (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I understand that victims need support but limiting our access to funds without alternatives makes rehabilitation more difficult.
  • It feels like we're always the target for cuts even when trying to recover and reintegrate.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Victim's Advocate (Chicago, IL)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Redirecting resources to victims is positive but the amount available is limited.
  • More holistic approaches for victim support are needed beyond financial compensation.

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 5 6
Year 20 5 5

Federal prisoner (Minneapolis, MN)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Whenever they cut back on prisoner benefits, it feels like a punishment beyond the sentence.
  • It's essential for maintaining some quality of life and planning for post-release.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired teacher (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I had lost hope of seeing any restitution ever being paid.
  • This law finally allows me to see a possibility for some financial justice.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Federal prisoner (Birmingham, AL)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Assistance from the rebate might have helped with family support, which is now less feasible.
  • It feels like yet another barrier to reintegration once released.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small business owner (Houston, TX)

Age: 48 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Redirecting funds as suggested is crucial for providing victims some support.
  • Also, it's essential to fund programs that prepare prisoners for their return to society.

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 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Law student (New York, NY)

Age: 24 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This legislation is a mixed bag — though it addresses some victim concerns, it unfairly lumps all prisoners together.
  • A more nuanced approach could better balance support with the need for justice.

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

Retired federal judge (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 61 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Victims deserve every opportunity for compensation, but these funds are a mere patch on a greater systemic issue.
  • Redirecting these rebates is a start, but broader policy changes are needed.

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

Social worker (Miami, FL)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Anything that aids victims is welcome, though we must ensure these funds truly reach them.
  • There are many complex needs potentially unmet by just financial recompense alone.

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 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Software engineer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 37 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy seems like a small step but it overshadows larger systemic issues needing addressing.
  • I believe in both victim support and constructive rehabilitation for prisoners.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)

Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 10: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)

Key Considerations