Bill Overview
Title: Wayne Ford Racial Impact Statement Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to prepare a minority impact assessment for each bill or joint resolution that establishes or modifies a crime, criminal penalties, or pretrial, sentencing, or probation procedures, or that could otherwise affect the number of people who are federally incarcerated, and that is under the jurisdiction of specified congressional subcommittees; GAO must also prepare assessments for similar proposed rules. Assessments must include information relating to the fiscal and demographic impact of proposed changes on prisons, prison populations, and the criminal justice system.
Sponsors: Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15]
Target Audience
Population: Minority populations affected by changes in criminal justice laws and policies
Estimated Size: 23000000
- The bill targets minority populations in the context of the criminal justice system.
- Minority groups in the U.S. are disproportionately represented in federal incarceration statistics.
- Any changes to criminal laws, penalties, probation, or sentencing disproportionately affect these minority groups.
- The criminal justice system involves millions of people in the U.S., including those incarcerated, on probation, and impacted families.
Reasoning
- The budget is limited, restricting the extent of the assessments and their potential impacts due to funding ensuring thorough, nationwide, real-time impacts on minorities involved in the justice system.
- The target population of minority individuals affected by criminal justice policies is large, but actual direct change might initially affect only a small fraction due to slow policy enactment processes.
- Those with active or past involvement with the criminal justice system directly linked to federal provisions are most likely to report changes in wellbeing based on changes in policy reflective of racial impact assessments.
- Some individuals from minority groups but without relevant criminal justice experiences may experience no change in wellbeing.
- Focus on individuals from known disproportionate groups such as African Americans and Hispanics, given current incarceration demographics.
- Consider impacts not just on those incarcerated but also on their families and communities, who might see long-term benefits from reduced incarceration rates.
Simulated Interviews
Parole officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can help identify and mitigate biases in the system, potentially leading to fairer outcomes for minorities.
- I hope this will reduce the number of people from minority backgrounds who end up incarcerated due to systemic biases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Public defender (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could bring some overdue transparency and fairness to how laws impact different demographics.
- I hope it will lead to less harsh sentences for my clients.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Community organizer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited about the potential for long-term change and accountability that this policy brings.
- It may help address systemic disparities that my community faces.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Police officer (New York, NY)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might uncover biases we need to address, possibly improving community-police relations.
- I'm cautious but hopeful for positive changes over time.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Student (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is necessary to create a fairer system and reduce stereotypes.
- It aligns with what I'm learning about the need for nuanced policy assessment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small business owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy leads to more equitable sentencing, it could positively affect families like mine.
- It gives me hope for a better future for my brother.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Software engineer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this policy will directly impact my life, but it seems like it could lead to societal benefits.
- Important for fairness and systemic reform, even if not affecting me.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Tech entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support any policy that aims to bring equality into the justice system.
- Eager to see the data and changes it will promote.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired teacher (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 57 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have witnessed the impacts of systemic injustice; measures like this might change futures.
- Hope it helps students no longer fall into the system.
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 |
Former factory worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I want to see my community benefit from changes like this, which feel like they've been a long time coming.
- I hope it prevents future injustices and changes stereotypes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)
Year 3: $15450000 (Low: $12360000, High: $18540000)
Year 5: $15913500 (Low: $12730800, High: $19096200)
Year 10: $17492385 (Low: $13913940, High: $20990862)
Year 100: $330497873 (Low: $264398299, High: $396597448)
Key Considerations
- The need for accurate and comprehensive data collection to produce meaningful assessments.
- Potential political implications of the assessments which might affect legislative priorities.
- The impact assessments will need to be continually revised as amended bills are considered, impacting resource allocation.
- The GAO's capacity to manage such assessments in conjunction with its current responsibilities.