Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8894

Bill Overview

Title: To amend title 10, United States Code, to require the national security strategy for national technology and industrial base to provide for the research and development of sustainable and secure food sources.

Description: This bill requires that the Department of Defense's national security strategy for the national technology and industrial base includes objectives to provide for the research and development of sustainable and secure food sources (e.g., alternative protein development).

Sponsors: Rep. Slotkin, Elissa [D-MI-8]

Target Audience

Population: People involved in and reliant on US defense food security measures

Estimated Size: 30000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Military Officer (San Diego, CA)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think this strategy could be useful. We rely a lot on MREs when we are deployed.
  • If the research brings in better, more sustainable food options, it could be a big morale booster.

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

Food Scientist (Silicon Valley, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill aligns perfectly with what we're already doing, more funding can accelerate innovation.
  • It's great news because it could open collaboration opportunities with defense projects.

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 10 8

Farmer (Kansas, KS)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any push towards alternative proteins could impact traditional farming.
  • I'm thinking of diversifying; this might be a good opportunity to adapt.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Defense Contractor Engineer (Boston, MA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • New research in sustainable food is exciting and crucial for the future.
  • This policy means more resources and collaboration opportunities for us.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retiree (Orlando, FL)

Age: 65 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I worry about food security for my grandchildren's future.
  • If this policy leads to better food systems, it might ease those worries.

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 7
Year 20 8 7

Software Developer (Austin, TX)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think integrating more sustainable food options is a great idea and benefits everyone.
  • Although this policy isn't directly impacting me, it aligns with sustainable values I support.

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

Public School Teacher (Chicago, IL)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems targeted at large-scale problems, which is beneficial.
  • I’m not directly impacted, but I teach kids about these important developments.

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

Chef (Houston, TX)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm interested in how alternative proteins could change menus nationwide.
  • This policy could lead to exciting food innovations for restaurants.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Journalist (New York, NY)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a step towards addressing the impacts of climate change on food supplies.
  • It’s crucial to see how alternative proteins can meet future demands.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Biochemist (Seattle, WA)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More investment in sustainable solutions is always promising for my line of work.
  • This could lead to a broader market for plant-based products.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Cost Estimates

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

Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $72000000, High: $108000000)

Year 3: $90000000 (Low: $72000000, High: $108000000)

Year 5: $80000000 (Low: $64000000, High: $96000000)

Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $56000000, High: $84000000)

Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Key Considerations