Bill Overview
Title: To promote United States interests at the international financial institutions, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill temporarily authorizes the Department of the Treasury to waive, on a case-by-case basis, statutory requirements that govern the U.S. Executive Directors at international financial institutions with respect to their use of the voice and vote of the United States. Treasury must periodically issue a report that (1) lists each waiver issued since the previous report, if any; (2) describes the project or policy that each waiver applied to; (3) provides a detailed explanation of the reasons for each waiver; and (4) includes a determination that each waiver allowed Treasury to more effectively advance U.S. interests at the institution involved. Treasury must review existing statutory requirements and submit any recommendations to revise or sunset the requirements with the objectives of strengthening U.S. leadership, facilitating multilateral cooperation, reflecting changing conditions, and advancing the U.S. national interest.
Sponsors: Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2]
Target Audience
Population: people potentially influenced by decisions of international financial institutions
Estimated Size: 335000000
- The bill affects the operations of the U.S. Executive Directors at international financial institutions, who represent U.S. interests in these institutions.
- Changes in how the U.S. interacts with international financial institutions could potentially influence global financial policies and projects, impacting countries and populations that are recipients of financial assistance.
- By allowing for waivers of statutory requirements, the bill may affect how quickly and effectively financial decisions are made in these institutions, potentially altering the support for development projects worldwide.
- If waivers lead to changes in U.S. influence or leadership in international financial institutions, this could have cascading effects on global economic stability and development efforts.
Reasoning
- The policy focuses primarily on U.S. interactions with international financial institutions, so its direct effects might not be immediately visible or impactful to individual U.S. citizens.
- Wellbeing impact is likely to be more pronounced among individuals or sectors directly engaged with, or dependent on, international financial decisions influenced by the U.S.
- A significant portion of the U.S. population may not experience direct effects, while policymakers, international business leaders, and those involved in international development may see more tangible impacts.
- The financial scale of the policy suggests it might influence large-scale operations or decisions rather than immediate economic changes for individual households.
Simulated Interviews
International Trade Analyst (New York City, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could streamline decision-making processes, potentially benefitting international trade practices.
- It might increase U.S. influence in global economic matters, which could be positive for businesses reliant on U.S. leadership.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Startup Founder (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could improve the agility of U.S. responses in international finance, aiding businesses like mine that work across borders.
- However, there needs to be a balance to ensure U.S. interests align with fair global practice.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Congressional Staffer (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could enhance U.S. leadership in key international financial bodies, which is crucial.
- It must be monitored carefully to ensure that waivers do not undercut transparency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Oil and Gas Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changes in international finance regulations might impact the resource sector.
- While U.S. leadership is crucial, the policy could risk over-centralizing decision processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
College Professor (Des Moines, IA)
Age: 51 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might provide valuable case studies to illustrate U.S. influence in international economics.
- As a researcher, the transparency and reporting aspects are positive.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
International Policy Advisor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potentially increases U.S. strategic options and influence.
- There must be diligence in ensuring U.S. economic perspectives are balanced with global needs.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Banker (Miami, FL)
Age: 57 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy reminds me of past efforts to improve decision-making agility in finance.
- It will be important to see how these waivers are justified.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Construction Manager (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our projects rely on smooth international funding processes, so this could be beneficial.
- Would prefer some assurances that no undue risks are introduced.
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 |
NGO Worker (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While the policy might expedite positive decisions, it could also risk overlooking equitable considerations.
- Ensuring U.S. leadership considers broad impacts is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Graduate Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Offers an opportunity to understand the dynamic between U.S. national interests and international finance.
- Could influence career prospects in a positive way by increasing U.S. engagement.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 2: $3100000 (Low: $2600000, High: $3600000)
Year 3: $3200000 (Low: $2700000, High: $3700000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Flexibility in policy execution at international financial institutions could enhance U.S. strategic positioning.
- Administrative costs are higher initially due to setting up the waiver process and reporting systems.
- Long-term implications depend on sustained U.S. influence within the international financial system.