Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8955

Bill Overview

Title: Ukrainian Territorial Integrity Act

Description: This bill prohibits the expenditure of federal funds to provide assistance to any foreign government that has recognized the independence of Russian-occupied Ukraine or supported the Russian annexation of Crimea. The bill authorizes the Department of State to waive such a prohibition upon determining and reporting that a waiver is in the national interest of the United States.

Sponsors: Rep. Connolly, Gerald E. [D-VA-11]

Target Audience

Population: People living in foreign countries affected by the bill's prohibitions

Estimated Size: 5000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Foreign Policy Analyst (New York City, NY)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe this policy is crucial for showcasing U.S. support for Ukraine's sovereignty.
  • This move could influence other countries' diplomatic stance against Russia's actions.

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 8 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 4

Small Business Owner (Miami, FL)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm skeptical that this policy will have immediate effects but worry about potential escalation.
  • My European partners are cautiously observing U.S. actions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Engineer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I feel relieved that the U.S. is standing firm against Russian aggression.
  • I am worried about the growing tension but hopeful for more international support.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Graduate Student (Seattle, WA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is a valuable stance from the U.S. considering global diplomacy.
  • Our educational discussions are heavily focused on the implications of such policies.

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

Retired Teacher (Boston, MA)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm proud that our government is firm with this policy, I think it's the right stance.
  • I hope it sends the correct message internationally.

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 6 5
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 5 4

Oil Industry Executive (Houston, TX)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like this make me wary of further sanctions that could impact my business.
  • It's a delicate balance but necessary for political pressure.

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 6 4
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 5 3

NGO Worker (Denver, CO)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns with our organization's values and goals for regional support.
  • It may inspire more dedicated efforts to aid impacted communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

News Reporter (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Important for the U.S. to take this stance, but results are slow to manifest.
  • Ongoing impact of policies like this on my reporting work will be notable.

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 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 4

Community Organizer (Minneapolis, MN)

Age: 25 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is a positive move by the U.S., albeit more symbolic than material.
  • It resonates within community discussions and awareness efforts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Government Employee (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 48 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act is a strategic maneuver that aligns with existing diplomatic efforts.
  • It's essential to our foreign policy engagement and might energize diplomatic approaches.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)

Year 2: $2100000 (Low: $1050000, High: $3150000)

Year 3: $2205000 (Low: $1150000, High: $3250000)

Year 5: $2350000 (Low: $1200000, High: $3350000)

Year 10: $2500000 (Low: $1300000, High: $3500000)

Year 100: $5000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $7500000)

Key Considerations