Bill Overview
Title: Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Inspector General Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes a Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Inspector General.
Sponsors: Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: People participating in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP)
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill affects the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, which is related to the Thrift Savings Plan.
- The Thrift Savings Plan is a retirement savings and investment plan for federal employees and members of the uniformed services.
- There are over 5 million participants in the Thrift Savings Plan, including federal employees and members of the military.
Reasoning
- The policy is specifically aimed at participants of the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP), which includes over 5 million federal employees and military personnel.
- The participants span across various professions and locations, encompassing a diverse demographic. Hence, the policy impacts on wellbeing can vary significantly from person to person.
- Considering the budget constraints, the board's inspector general role may focus more on oversight rather than direct financial benefits, leading to indirect wellbeing impacts predominantly through increased trust and accountability.
- Not all federal employees rely heavily on the TSP for retirement, as some may have other sources of financial security, hence the policy impact can be negligible for them.
- Those closer to retirement or solely relying on the TSP may perceive the policy as more impactful due to a greater emphasis on safeguarding their retirement interests.
Simulated Interviews
Federal Employee (Administrative Staff) (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The added oversight could mean my retirement funds are more secure, which is reassuring.
- Budget constraints make me wonder how effective this role will be.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired Military Officer (San Antonio, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased oversight brings peace of mind about my savings.
- These funds are crucial to me as I don't have much else to lean on.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
IT Specialist (Federal Employee) (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As long as it doesn't mean reduced contributions or increased fees, I'm indifferent for now.
- I mainly focus on growing my savings with other investments.
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 |
Customs Agent (Federal Employee) (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy should ensure better management of the funds which is definitely good.
- I'm on track with my retirement plans, but good management always helps.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Research Scientist (Federal Employee) (Denver, CO)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The stability and transparency introduced by the Inspector General are important.
- The policy aligns with my preference for secure investment management.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Military Personnel (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Security of funds for the future when I'm planning is preferable.
- As long as it doesn't change current benefits, I'm okay with this.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Project Manager (Federal Employee) (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This increased oversight might protect against mismanagement.
- I'm curious to see real impacts and changes.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired Federal Worker (New York, NY)
Age: 64 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy gives me more confidence in the management of my funds.
- Retirement fund security is my top concern, and this helps.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Public Affairs Specialist (Federal Employee) (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this impacts me directly, as I have other investment priorities too.
- Good governance is never bad, but it won't change my plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Engineer (Federal Employee) (Seattle, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Can help maintain trust in where my money is managed.
- Hoping this reduces potential future risks of fund mismanagement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 2: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 3: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 5: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 100: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Key Considerations
- The establishment of Inspector General offices in other agencies serves as a basis to estimate costs.
- Initial costs could be higher due to setup expenses.
- Long-term benefits may include more efficient operation of the Thrift Savings Plan through enhanced oversight.