Bill Overview
Title: Empowering and Enforcing Environmental Justice Act of 2022
Description: This bill provides statutory authority for the Department of Justice's Office of Environmental Justice. It also establishes grants to improve the capacity of state, local, and tribal governments to enforce environmental laws involving environmental justice matters.
Sponsors: Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44]
Target Audience
Population: people living in environmentally burdened communities worldwide
Estimated Size: 30000000
- The bill focuses on environmental justice issues, which generally target communities disproportionately affected by environmental hazards.
- Such communities often include marginalized populations, including low-income individuals and minority groups.
- Environmental justice issues often affect residents in urban and industrial areas with significant pollution and environmental degradation.
- The bill also aims to enhance state, local, and tribal government capacities, implying a broad reach to all communities these entities govern.
Reasoning
- The policy targets communities disproportionately affected by environmental hazards, implying the main beneficiaries will be low-income and minority communities.
- Considering the budget of $200 million in year 1, resources will be limited and targeted to areas with the highest need initially.
- The impact on individuals will vary based on proximity to environmental hazards and the effectiveness of local agencies in utilizing the grants.
- The policy also seems to focus on building capacity in governments, meaning impact on individual wellbeing may not immediately reflect in year one, but rather over a longer term as enforcement and conditions improve.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (Flint, Michigan)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's about time something more is done for communities like Flint.
- I worry about whether the funds will actually make it to the people who need it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Marine (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We've had enough talk, now it's time for action.
- I'm hopeful but cautious. Enforcement has been weak in the past.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Community Organizer (Navajo Nation, Arizona)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be a turning point for tribal communities.
- Grant effectiveness depends on real partnership with Native tribes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Oil Refinery Worker (Houston, Texas)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial for our health to have stricter environment controls.
- Industry jobs are important, but not at the cost of our health.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Homemaker (Appalachia, Kentucky)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These funds could address the long-ignored health impacts of mining.
- Skeptical about real changes, seen too many promises broken.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Factory Worker (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Environmental justice means a better future for my kids.
- Local enforcement has been weak; hope this changes that.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Student (Oakland, California)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy needs to empower us locally and make climate action accessible.
- This could set a precedent for the nation.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Healthcare Worker (Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More resources are essential for healthcare improvements related to environment.
- Hopeful but wary of another government program not delivering much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Truck Driver (Newark, New Jersey)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Healthier air means healthier lives, but will they follow through?
- Change is needed but who's held accountable?
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Chef (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Environmental improvement is key for future disasters we face.
- Grants must be transparent and involve the real community stakeholders.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $220000000)
Year 2: $210000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $230000000)
Year 3: $220000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $240000000)
Year 5: $240000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $260000000)
Year 10: $270000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $290000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Key Considerations
- The scale and effectiveness of the grants program will significantly influence costs and savings.
- Bureaucratic and logistical challenges in setting up the Office of Environmental Justice and distributing grants efficiently.
- Long-term benefits are dependent on the sustained success of environmental improvements in targeted communities.