Bill Overview
Title: Russia is a State Sponsor of Terrorism Act
Description: This bill designates Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. (A country with this designation is subject to certain restrictions, including a ban on receiving U.S. defense exports and limits on receiving U.S. foreign assistance.)
Sponsors: Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33]
Target Audience
Population: People worldwide impacted by US designation of Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism
Estimated Size: 15000000
- The designation of Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism will primarily impact people and entities engaged in trade and diplomacy with Russia.
- Russian citizens may face increased economic hardship due to potential economic sanctions and restrictions.
- Global companies with business ties to Russia will have to reassess their operations due to new restrictions.
- International markets may experience fluctuations due to the perceived instability such a designation could cause.
- Countries reliant on Russian trade may need to seek alternative partnerships.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects individuals engaged in trade, diplomacy, and economic activities related to Russia. The US population is a mix of those heavily involved in these sectors and those with little to no direct involvement.
- Under budget constraints, it's important to simulate situations where the policy might cause market volatility and economic changes affecting indirect beneficiaries, like investors.
- For those working directly with Russian entities, the impact could lead to either loss of business opportunities or forced adaptation to new markets, affecting wellbeing both in positive (opportunities) or negative (losses) ways.
- The policy might not directly impact the majority of US citizens, but macroeconomic ripple effects could indirectly influence a larger percentage of the population.
- Differentiating levels of impact (none, low, medium, high) helps identify who will require assistance or policy adjustment responses.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think designating Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism will create short-term market volatility, so I'll need to adjust my portfolio.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might force us to halt some operations, but it could push us to explore new collaborations elsewhere.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Diplomat (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the increased tension. It makes international negotiations more challenging.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Oil Industry Professional (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our company will face immediate challenges. This policy forces us to rethink supply chains.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retiree (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might have to reconsider some parts of my investments. Overall, it's a wait-and-see situation for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy reflects a step towards escalating tensions which worries me as a future professional in diplomacy.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Import/Export Business Owner (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We will definitely feel the pinch. Reassessing our market strategy is an immediate task.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see any direct impact on my work or life from this policy.
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 |
University Professor (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be a major subject of study, impacting how international politics is shaped.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Construction Business Owner (Dallas, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this will affect my business directly, but may have indirect higher-level economic effects.
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: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 2: $1400000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1900000000)
Year 3: $1300000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 5: $1100000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $1600000000)
Year 10: $900000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $1400000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $1000000000)
Key Considerations
- The geopolitical reactions and retaliatory measures from Russia and its allies.
- The impact on international diplomacy and US relationships with countries engaged in trade with Russia.
- Potential disruptions to the global supply chain that could have downstream economic effects.
- The balance between increased security measures and economic costs.