Bill Overview
Title: To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense to consult with the congressional defense committees in the preparation of the national defense strategy.
Description: This bill authorizes the Department of Defense (DOD), in addressing specified elements of the national defense strategy (i.e., priority missions and the assumed strategic environment), to seek the advice and views of the congressional defense committees, through the chair and ranking members of the committees. Any advice and views may be submitted to DOD in writing and must be published as an annex to the national defense strategy.
Sponsors: Rep. Slotkin, Elissa [D-MI-8]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by changes in national defense strategy
Estimated Size: 15000000
- The bill pertains to the preparation of the national defense strategy, which affects military personnel, defense contractors, and related industries.
- Changes in defense strategy can impact international relations, potentially affecting global populations.
- If defense priorities shift, it could impact diplomatic or military actions globally.
Reasoning
- The policy focuses on organizing and structuring the defense strategy, which is not a direct service or benefit to individuals but rather more about strategic planning.
- Given that it targets broad defense improvements, direct impacts might be more on employees in the defense sector and government roles than on the general public.
- Military personnel, defense contractors, and DoD employees are most likely to see potential career impacts or work process changes influenced by this strategy.
- The policy doesn't involve direct financial benefits or public services, so the average American citizen will likely remain unaffected on a personal level.
- The budget constraints mean that most utilization will occur at strategic and planning levels rather than operational or field deployment.
Simulated Interviews
Defense Contractor (San Diego, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill may lead to shifts in project priorities that could affect my job security.
- I am concerned about increased workload with little immediate benefit in terms of resources.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Incorporating congressional input should lead to more comprehensive strategies.
- As an analyst, clearer strategic guidelines will help focus my research efforts effectively.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Naval Officer (Jacksonville, FL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that sharpens defense strategy is beneficial for military readiness.
- The direct effects on daily operations are limited unless it changes mission priorities.
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 | 9 | 7 |
DOD Employee (Arlington, VA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More interaction with congressional committees might mean more oversight or red tape.
- Realized outcomes depend if suggested strategic changes align with operational realities.
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 |
ROTC Cadet (Colorado Springs, CO)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy indirectly affects my future career conditions in the Air Force.
- I hope strategic improvements enhance service readiness and safety.
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 |
Software Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Integrating congressional advice should lead to a more coherent national defense policy.
- This could spur innovation in cyber defense with new strategic priorities.
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 |
Civil Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changes in defense strategies might indirectly affect my company's project prospects.
- I'm hopeful this leads to more stable contracts and long-term planning opportunities.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
International Relations Scholar (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A strategic overhaul is essential for maintaining international stability.
- This policy could lead to more holistic and aligned defense postures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Military (Boston, MA)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Greater legislative input may seem cumbersome but it enhances decision-making quality.
- I hope it doesn't lead to paralysis by analysis in strategy formulation.
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 |
Graduate Student (Columbus, OH)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm curious how this strategic shift might affect research and funding opportunities.
- Greater clarity in defense priorities can direct academic focus on emerging areas.
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 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill allows for improved collaboration between the Department of Defense and congressional defense committees.
- Administrative procedures would require some budget allocation.
- Potential impacts on defense policies are speculative and dependent on the subsequent national defense strategies developed through this consultation process.