Bill Overview
Title: Quantum in Practice Act
Description: This bill expands the National Quantum Initiative to specifically include quantum modeling and simulation.
Sponsors: Rep. Feenstra, Randy [R-IA-4]
Target Audience
Population: People working in or studying quantum technologies worldwide
Estimated Size: 200000
- Quantum technologies are an emerging field with potential applications across various industries, including computing, cybersecurity, healthcare, finance, and materials science.
- Given its specialized nature, the primary population impacted by this act would include professionals and researchers in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, particularly those working in quantum technologies.
- The expansion to quantum modeling and simulation is likely to impact academic institutions, research centers, and high-tech industries involved in science and engineering.
- Governments and policy makers concerned with technology and innovation are also an interested group, though not directly impacted in terms of wellbeing.
- Students in STEM fields who may have future career opportunities in quantum technologies represent a younger population segment that will be indirectly affected.
Reasoning
- The primary impact of the Quantum in Practice Act is expected to be on those who are currently engaged in fields related to quantum technologies, including researchers, students, and industry professionals. Since quantum technology is an emerging field, the overall population directly impacted is relatively small but growing.
- Many of the individuals directly affected will be highly educated and working within academic institutions or tech companies. They are likely to experience improvements in opportunities and resources, which can affect their professional satisfaction and wellbeing.
- Not everyone in STEM fields will be impacted. Some leverage will be experienced by those closely related to quantum chemistry or computing. Others in distinct STEM areas may see little to no change.
- Students in these fields will likely experience an increase in educational and employment opportunities, which can enhance their future wellbeing. However, tangible outcomes may take years to manifest, hence the medium-to-long term impact expectations.
- The policy's impact will be focused, given the budget constraints, with direct funding supporting specific projects and sectors related to quantum modeling and simulation.
Simulated Interviews
Quantum Computing Researcher (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The expansion to quantum modeling and simulation under the National Quantum Initiative is an excellent step to bolster resources.
- This will likely lead to more funding opportunities and collaboration possibilities within the industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Physics Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I welcome increased support for quantum modeling as it will open up new avenues for research and teaching.
- Funding will help sustain academic programs and potentially attract more students to the field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Graduate Student in Quantum Physics (Austin, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy enhances my prospects as a student, potentially bringing more funding and resources to our labs.
- I'm optimistic about future job opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Government Policy Advisor (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see the strategic importance of expanding quantum technologies for national security.
- The implications are more about policy and strategic positioning rather than personal wellbeing.
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 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this policy directly affects my field as I'm not heavily involved in quantum computing.
- Interesting to know the federal involvement with quantum tech, though.
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 |
Undergraduate Student in Computer Engineering (Ann Arbor, MI)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this would mean more opportunities to engage with leading tech companies during internships.
- Feel hopeful about a future in quantum tech with this policy support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Senior Scientist at a National Lab (Los Alamos, NM)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative is vital for sustained technological leadership and will probably secure ongoing research funding.
- The policy directly supports projects I'm working on.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Palo Alto, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potential for increased business opportunities if the initiative extends to quantum devices.
- Innovative environment positively influenced but hard to say for certain until more details are known.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
High School Physics Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might result in more educational resources for teachers like me.
- Seeing federal interest in quantum tech is encouraging for future curriculums.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Data Analyst (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Quantum cryptography is an exciting prospect and this policy could potentially aid in its advancement.
- Uncertain of immediate effects on my current role.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $240000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $290000000)
Year 3: $230000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $280000000)
Year 5: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 10: $210000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $260000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The global competition in quantum technology is intense, and delays in adopting new initiatives could result in lost market leadership.
- Partnerships with universities and private companies will be crucial for successful implementation.
- The timeline for palpable technological advancements deriving from this initiative may stretch beyond the initial years of investment.