Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8666

Bill Overview

Title: Bicameral Congressional Trade Authority Act of 2022

Description: 2022 This bill requires congressional approval for a presidential import adjustment due to a national security threat from an import related to military equipment, energy resources, or critical infrastructure essential to national security. Specifically, the bill requires the President to submit a proposal to Congress, which Congress may approve by a joint resolution. Under current law, the President determines whether any adjustment of an import is necessary and must submit to Congress the reasons for any action taken or not taken. The Department of Defense (currently, the Department of Commerce) must investigate the effect of these imports on national security. The bill retroactively applies to any proposed action made four years before enactment of this bill. In general, any rate of duty modification occurring in the time period beginning six years before and ending the day before enactment of this bill must revert to the previous rate unless it receives congressional approval.

Sponsors: Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in or affected by global trade of military equipment, energy resources, or critical infrastructure

Estimated Size: 332000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Defense Contractor (Washington D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could delay necessary imports due to longer approval processes.
  • It might stabilize the import fees if Congress manages to approve lower tariffs.

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 6 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 8

Energy Industry Analyst (Houston, Texas)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Uncertainty could increase in the short-term as tariffs might be adjusted again.
  • Long-term changes might make energy resources a bit more expensive.

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 7
Year 20 8 8

Automotive Manufacturer (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Importing components might become more expensive, affecting production costs.
  • Increased costs might need to be passed on to consumers, lowering demand.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 4 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 7 8

Tech Startup Employee (San Francisco, California)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Tech industry could experience subtle changes if tariffs affect component pricing.
  • Likely incumbent tech giants are more affected than startups.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 9
Year 3 8 9
Year 5 8 9
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 9 9

Retired (New York, New York)

Age: 63 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Watching legislative changes in trade gives hope for more oversight.
  • Could slow growth of imports, balancing domestic production.

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

Environmental Policy Consultant (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy oversight could ensure imported energy resources are environmentally sound.
  • May lead to missed opportunities for faster adaptation to renewable imports.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

International Trade Lawyer (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased legislative control might lead to more complex cases.
  • Greater demand for legal expertise around trade policies.

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 9 8
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 9 9

Supply Chain Manager (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Not directly linked to critical imports, but shifts in tariffs could affect entire sectors.
  • Possible knock-on effects in logistics costs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 9
Year 20 8 9

Small Business Owner (Miami, Florida)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Uncertainty in import tariffs could affect resource planning.
  • Congressional oversight might lead to more stability long-term.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

University Professor (Albany, New York)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy allows real-world case studies for students on the legislative process.
  • Could highlight Congress’s role in adapting trade policies in security contexts.

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 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $110000000)

Year 3: $95000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $115000000)

Year 5: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Year 10: $105000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $125000000)

Year 100: $110000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $130000000)

Key Considerations