Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8842

Bill Overview

Title: Accelerating Arms Transfers to Taiwan Act

Description: This bill adds Taiwan to the statutory list of high priority countries for transferring defense articles, directs the Department of Defense to use the Special Defense Acquisition Fund for defense articles to Taiwan, and eliminates restrictions on the stockpiling of defense articles in Taiwan.

Sponsors: Rep. Chabot, Steve [R-OH-1]

Target Audience

Population: People in Taiwan

Estimated Size: 100000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Defense Contractor (Arlington, Virginia)

Age: 54 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe this policy will be beneficial for our sector as increased demand means job stability and potential for growth.
  • However, there's also a concern that this will escalate tensions with China, potentially creating a riskier global environment.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Logistics Coordinator (San Diego, California)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill could lead to more business and job security for us, but I worry about potential geopolitical tensions.
  • We need to consider the consequences on international relations long-term.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Foreign Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy underscores the strategic importance of Taiwan to US interests.
  • The increased support may stabilize Taiwan's defense but could also heighten regional tensions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Engineer (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 27 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't think this policy will affect me directly since my work is not related to defense.
  • I'm concerned about international tension, but my day-to-day life remains the same.

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 6 6

Retired (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is likely beneficial for maintaining Taiwan's security, which I support.
  • There's a personal concern about heightened global tensions, as I've seen from my former career.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 4 5
Year 10 4 4
Year 20 3 4

School Teacher (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I understand the strategic need, this policy seems far removed from my daily concerns.
  • I only worry about prolonged geopolitical tensions trickling down to affect us economically.

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 5 6
Year 20 5 5

Military Personnel (Dallas, Texas)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased support for Taiwan is crucial from a military perspective.
  • However, increased commitments could stretch resources and strain personnel.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Marketing Specialist (New York, New York)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is not something that directly impacts my life or work.
  • I am more concerned about global stability and economic impacts than the specifics of 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 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Engineer in Aerospace Industry (Huntsville, Alabama)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There's a good chance this policy could result in increased work and opportunities for my company.
  • However, we must be careful of how this impacts international relations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Economic Researcher (Boston, Massachusetts)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • From an economic standpoint, this policy can drive growth in the US defense sector.
  • Concerns remain about wider geopolitical outcomes affecting markets.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)

Year 2: $2100000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2600000000)

Year 3: $2200000000 (Low: $1700000000, High: $2700000000)

Year 5: $2300000000 (Low: $1800000000, High: $2800000000)

Year 10: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)

Year 100: $3000000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3500000000)

Key Considerations