Bill Overview
Title: Baltic Reassurance Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of Defense to report to Congress an assessment of the military requirements of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members and countries in the Baltic region that would allow such countries to deter and resist Russian aggression.
Sponsors: Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11]
Target Audience
Population: People living in NATO countries and the Baltic region
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill concerns NATO members and countries in the Baltic region.
- The bill's focus is to deter and resist Russian aggression.
- The Baltic region is primarily composed of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
- These countries have populations totaling approximately 6 million.
- All NATO members are a crucial part of the bill since they contribute to collective security.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects military personnel and defense contractors due to its focus on defense strategies and spending. Americans are indirectly affected through economic implications and national security assurance.
- The general public may not experience a direct impact unless there's increased funding that redirects resources from domestic priorities.
- Those living near military bases or in defense industry hubs might feel a local economic impact due to increased funding or military activity.
- The policy could lead to increased job opportunities in the defense sector or related industries due to a heightened focus on military preparedness.
- People with personal or family connections to the military might perceive increased security as a personal benefit.
- While the policy is not directly aimed at the U.S. population, as a NATO leader, the perception of safety and defense readiness may generally elevate the feeling of national wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Defense Analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy reinforces the U.S. commitment to NATO and enhances security for all member states.
- The budget seems reasonable to address strategic assessments without heavy financial strain.
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 |
Military Officer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Strengthening NATO defenses is crucial given current geopolitical tensions.
- The act could mean more deployments but also safer operations due to better preparation.
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 | 9 | 8 |
Software Engineer (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act could boost job security in my company with new government contracts.
- I worry about the long-term fiscal impact of increased defense spending.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired School Teacher (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe in peace over militarization, but understand the need for preparedness.
- I worry about the budget allocation affecting domestic education funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear that increasing military expenditures diverts funding from education and health.
- While I understand the geopolitical necessity, the money could have a more direct impact domestically.
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 |
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act feels like a responsible step in ensuring our NATO allies are prepared.
- As a former military service member, national defense remains a top priority for me.
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 |
Journalist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reporting on increased defense strategies is important, but there's a need for balance with domestic policy coverage.
- Investing in NATO can help maintain global peace, which is crucial.
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 |
Logistics Manager (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act could lead to more efficient and timely logistics solutions in defense operations.
- It's beneficial for my company's growth and could lead to better job benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Financial Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any increase in government spending should be scrutinized for efficiency and necessity.
- I hope the policy will account for long-term economic stability without exacerbating debt.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Engineer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Maintaining a stalwart defense strategy in cooperation with NATO is sensible.
- The implications of this policy suggest stability and readiness.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The primary goal is to enhance regional security against Russian aggression, important for international relations.
- Estimated costs rely heavily on the level of detail required for assessments and potential unexpected changes in international relations.
- Long-term benefits may include increased stability in the Baltic region and strengthening NATO alliances, albeit not directly reflected in near-term costs.