Bill Overview
Title: Think Tank Transparency Act
Description: This bill requires U.S. nonprofit think tanks to disclose to the Department of Justice any gifts, donations, or contributions from a foreign principal in amounts of $10,000 or greater. The bill also requires the think tanks to disclose contracts or agreements with foreign principals.
Sponsors: Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by the Think Tank Transparency Act
Estimated Size: 40000
- The Think Tank Transparency Act affects nonprofit think tanks in the U.S. by requiring them to disclose foreign donations.
- This legislation will likely lead to increased administrative work for think tanks to ensure compliance.
- The general public in the U.S. may also be indirectly impacted as the transparency could affect the information disseminated by these think tanks.
- Foreign principals who financially support think tanks might be impacted as their contributions and identities will be disclosed.
Reasoning
- The policy will primarily affect people working at or closely with think tanks, especially those with foreign funding.
- Administrative professionals and legal staff at think tanks will see increased workloads, directly affecting their wellbeing.
- Donors, especially foreign ones, may experience changes in how they manage or hide their affiliations, indirectly impacting their wellbeing.
- This policy aims to increase transparency and trust in think tanks' activities, which might improve society's perceptions in the longer term, indirectly impacting public wellbeing positively.
Simulated Interviews
Research Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased transparency is always good, but I'm worried about the additional workload for our team to maintain compliance.
- It might change the dynamic with our foreign partners, making collaborations more complex.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Compliance Officer (New York, NY)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It'll mean more work for compliance departments, but it's an essential part of our job.
- Hopefully, it leads to more trust in our research outputs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
University Professor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Think tanks must remain credible, and this level of transparency should help.
- Could potentially complicate partnerships depending on foreign sensitivities.
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 |
Legal Advisor (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act will generate more business for legal consulting, which is beneficial for me.
- However, it could strain smaller think tanks less prepared for compliance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Diplomat (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support transparency, but worry it might dissuade valuable insights from abroad.
- Will this mean less diverse viewpoints in the policy space?
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Senior Policy Advisor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More transparency could enhance policy recommendations by maintaining credibility.
- It might be more challenging to access some international collaborations, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Data Analyst (Boston, MA)
Age: 35 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency can improve data trustworthiness, which benefits data analysts.
- No immediate personal impact, but potentially in long term with data flows.
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 |
Chief Financial Officer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Could require reprioritizing funds to ensure compliance, affecting other operations.
- It’s important for organizational credibility to adhere to transparency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Philanthropist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency is crucial to ensure my funds are appropriately used.
- Concerned international collaborations might decrease.
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 Relations Specialist (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's key to maintain positive public perception amid new transparency regulations.
- Expect increased workload to manage communications throughout this.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 2: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 3: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 5: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring compliance and continuous monitoring will require significant resources from the Department of Justice.
- Transparency might deter some foreign contributions, potentially altering the funding landscape for think tanks.