Bill Overview
Title: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023
Description: This bill authorizes intelligence activities for FY2023 and otherwise addresses matters related to the intelligence community.
Sponsors: Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-28]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved with or affected by intelligence operations
Estimated Size: 12000000
- The bill authorizes intelligence activities for FY2023 which directly impacts individuals working within the intelligence community.
- Matters related to the intelligence community can affect global intelligence relations, impacting international intelligence agencies and their cooperation with the US.
- The bill may influence operations that include surveillance, data collection, and analysis which could indirectly impact individuals worldwide due to global intelligence sharing agreements.
Reasoning
- The Intelligence Authorization Act primarily affects those directly involved in the U.S. intelligence community, including employees of agencies like the CIA, NSA, and FBI, as well as contractors.
- With a budget of $20 billion in the first year, the policy aims to enhance intelligence capabilities, which could lead to job security and technological investments within these agencies.
- Indirect effects might be perceived by the public through privacy concerns or improved national security but are mostly limited to those directly interacting with intelligence activities.
- It is important to include both positive and negative opinions as some individuals may feel an enhanced sense of security while others may have concerns about privacy and government oversight.
- The simulated interviews should reflect a range of impacts from none to high, depending on the individual's connection to the intelligence community and the policy measures.
Simulated Interviews
CIA Analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the budget increase will provide us with more resources and better tools, which is crucial for national security.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Cybersecurity Consultant (California)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding might lead to more contracts for cybersecurity defense, which could positively impact my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Technology Developer (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might boost my company's contracts with intelligence agencies, securing my job for the future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired NSA Officer (Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry that increased funding will lead to overreach and potentially infringe on personal privacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Recent College Graduate (Colorado)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that the increased budget will lead to more job openings for new graduates like myself.
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 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Independent Journalist (Florida)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that more funding will enhance surveillance capabilities, reducing transparency and accountability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Defense Contractor (Virginia)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The proposed budget can stabilize projects and secure jobs, benefiting my career in the long run.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Surveillance Equipment Supplier (Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Business might improve due to increased funding, but ethical concerns about surveillance persist.
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 | 4 |
NSA Software Engineer (Maryland)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The budget increase will enable us to implement advanced tools and ensure national security, benefiting our projects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Civil Rights Lawyer (New Jersey)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm skeptical of the increased budget, fearing it may lead to more invasive surveillance practices without proper checks and balances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $22000000000)
Year 2: $20000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $22000000000)
Year 3: $20000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $22000000000)
Year 5: $20000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $22000000000)
Year 10: $20000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $22000000000)
Year 100: $20000000000 (Low: $18000000000, High: $22000000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill supports critical intelligence operations that protect national security interests.
- Costs are relatively stable year over year but can be influenced by emerging intelligence needs and geopolitical situations.
- The act does not present new revenue implications but reallocates existing budget priorities.