Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8410

Bill Overview

Title: Coast Guard Intelligence Operations Improvement Act of 2022

Description: This bill authorizes the Coast Guard, with limitations, to expend funds appropriated for intelligence and counterintelligence activities without regard to other expenditure-related law or regulation, if it is spent on emergency, confidential, or extraordinary activities and the Coast Guard notifies the congressional intelligence committees. This authorization applies for three years after enactment.

Sponsors: Rep. Maloney, Sean Patrick [D-NY-18]

Target Audience

Population: People potentially impacted by improvements in U.S. Coast Guard intelligence activities

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Coast Guard Officer (Miami, FL)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy boosts our operational capabilities significantly, allowing us to respond faster to threats.
  • I am hopeful that this will lead to better maritime security, which has been our priority.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Maritime Lawyer (New York, NY)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I expect the policy to indirectly benefit my clients by reducing maritime security incidents.
  • The improved intelligence operations might also bring more transparency to maritime law cases.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Port Authority Manager (Houston, TX)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Strengthened intelligence operations will likely enhance port security.
  • This will help in the long term to reduce smuggling and illegal trafficking activities at the port.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Marine Biologist (San Diego, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While the policy isn’t directly aimed at environmental issues, improved maritime operations could help reduce illegal activities harming marine life.
  • It's not a direct benefit for my work, but the indirect benefits are appreciated.

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 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Business Owner in Seafood Industry (Seattle, WA)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improved security could mean less downtime due to incidents in supply lines.
  • I am optimistic that the policy will create a safer working environment for my shipping partners.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 6

Retired Navy Officer (Norfolk, VA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like these are crucial for maintaining our national security standards.
  • It's reassuring to see investment in intelligence which will protect our shores.

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 7
Year 20 7 7

Student, International Relations (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 24 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like these enhance my career prospects by increasing opportunities within intelligence fields.
  • It’s important to see such measures being taken to secure our coasts.

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 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Professor of Maritime Law (Boston, MA)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Greater intelligence capabilities can refine maritime regulations and enforcements.
  • This act aligns with many strategic recommendations I have supported in my publications.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 6 6

Commercial Fisherman (Portland, OR)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improved Coast Guard operations can significantly reduce risks in my line of work.
  • I support efforts that make the seas safer for legal operations.

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 4

Homeland Security Analyst (Tampa, FL)

Age: 46 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased funding allows for better data integration and threat assessment.
  • This will translate into real-world safety improvements.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)

Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)

Year 3: $80000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations