Bill Overview
Title: To require the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy for further collaborating with allies and partners of the United States regarding access to strategic and critical minerals, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill requires the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment of the Department of Defense (DOD) to brief Congress on the feasibility of expanding the cooperation between DOD and allies and partners of the United States regarding critical minerals. Additionally, DOD must submit a strategy for expanding the collaboration between DOD and allies and partners of the United States to strengthen the supply chains for critical minerals and address the risks to such supply chains.
Sponsors: Rep. Slotkin, Elissa [D-MI-8]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in industries related to critical and strategic minerals
Estimated Size: 300000
- The bill focuses on defense and strategic minerals sector workers who are directly involved in the supply chain management and extraction of critical minerals.
- Any change in collaboration with allies may impact industries and economic sectors dependent on critical minerals, such as electronics, automotive, and defense industries.
- The legislation may drive changes in trade practices or policies, indirectly affecting downstream manufacturers and related businesses that rely on the steady supply of strategic minerals.
- Moreover, international partners and allied countries that are part of the mineral supply chain will be impacted by any strategic changes the U.S. adopts, affecting their economies.
- Workers in the mining industries both within the U.S. and in partner countries will be impacted by changes in cooperative strategies.
Reasoning
- The policy directly targets individuals involved in the defense and strategic minerals sectors, impacting workers in supply chain management and mineral extraction.
- Economies dependent on critical minerals, such as those in the electronics, automotive, and defense sectors, may see changes due to new collaborative strategies.
- The policy may have indirect effects on trade practices, affecting manufacturers dependent on strategic minerals.
- International partners and allied countries in the mineral supply chain will be influenced by U.S. strategic changes, impacting their economies.
- Workers in the mining industry, both domestically and in partner countries, might experience job stability changes based on new cooperative strategies.
Simulated Interviews
Supply Chain Manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might streamline supply processes through enhanced cooperation with allies.
- It could make sourcing minerals more reliable, reducing supply chain disruptions.
- This would positively affect job stability and workload management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Automotive Engineer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved supply chain security could enhance production consistency for EVs.
- Policy could spark innovation in material sourcing and new technological development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Mining Operations Director (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 51 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could stabilize exports by improving international cooperation.
- Might result in increased operational efficiency and investment in the mining sector.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy changes might indirectly secure the supply of components for tech companies.
- Could lead to cost reductions, ultimately benefiting consumers and companies alike.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could reduce market volatility, enhancing investment opportunities.
- Might increase transparency and security in the minerals market.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Military Officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving strategic mineral supply chains would enhance national security.
- Long-term allies could strengthen ties, enhancing collaboration beyond minerals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Geologist (Houston, TX)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might increase demand for geologists and environmental assessments.
- Could pressure regulation alterations, impacting environmental standards.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Policy Advisor (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could streamline coordination efforts, improving professional efficiency.
- The strategy might lead to policy shifts that require adaptation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
International Trade Specialist (Miami, FL)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Closer coordination could lead to smoother trade operations.
- Potential to influence U.S. international trade policies positively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmentalist (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy needs sustainable commitments to be persuasive.
- Environmental consequences must be weighed against strategic mineral benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $10500000 (Low: $8400000, High: $12600000)
Year 3: $11025000 (Low: $8820000, High: $13230000)
Year 5: $12155000 (Low: $9724000, High: $14586000)
Year 10: $14884806 (Low: $11907845, High: $17861767)
Year 100: $252736664 (Low: $202189331, High: $303283997)
Key Considerations
- The initial outlay for developing strategies and increasing international collaboration and cooperation will be a significant upfront cost.
- Potential savings through risk mitigation aren't guaranteed and may develop over time with successful implementation.
- Long-term benefits may outweigh initial costs if the strategy effectively secures supply chains and stabilizes critical mineral markets.