Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9337

Bill Overview

Title: Ensuring America’s Critical Infrastructure Act

Description: This bill expands the definition of critical infrastructure under the Critical Infrastructures Protection Act of 2001 in the USA PATRIOT Act. The term currently means systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, or national public health or safety. The bill includes certain sectors as part of the existing definition, including communications, dams, emergency services, energy, financial services, food and agriculture, healthcare, information technology, transportation systems, and water and wastewater systems.

Sponsors: Rep. Jackson, Ronny [R-TX-13]

Target Audience

Population: People who rely on critical infrastructure sectors for daily functions and security

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Healthcare IT specialist (New York, NY)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think improving critical infrastructure is overdue, especially in healthcare.
  • This will help prevent massive disruptions like what we saw during the pandemic.

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 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 5

Water System Manager (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With the current network vulnerabilities, this policy is a step in the right direction.
  • It's critical to the resilience of our water systems.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

Energy Sector Analyst (Houston, TX)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act could drive investments in more resilient energy infrastructure.
  • I'm curious about the long-term impact on renewable energy options.

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 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 10 5

Financial Services Consultant (Denver, CO)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Strengthening financial systems is crucial, especially against cyber attacks.
  • The scope of this bill seems necessary for modern threats.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

Retired (Rural Iowa)

Age: 65 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this means better services reach rural areas like mine.
  • These kinds of investments are often too focused on cities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 4
Year 20 7 4

Transportation Planner (Chicago, IL)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Integrating smarter, more resilient transit systems will be key.
  • Funding will need to balance between updating old systems and innovating.

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 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 9 5

Software Developer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm excited to see how this influences tech advancements in the security sector.
  • Balancing security with user access is always challenging.

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 7
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 5

Farmer (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Agriculture depends heavily on reliable water and energy infrastructure.
  • Hopeful that this policy will address some of the rural infrastructure issues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 8 4

Emergency Services Coordinator (Miami, FL)

Age: 33 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Improving emergency readiness is always positive.
  • Collaboration between sectors is essential for real change.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 4

High School Teacher (Portland, OR)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Infrastructure investments should lead to more stable communities.
  • I'm curious about the educational implications as a side effect of such policies.

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 5
Year 20 8 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)

Year 2: $1550000000 (Low: $1250000000, High: $1850000000)

Year 3: $1600000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1900000000)

Year 5: $1700000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $2000000000)

Year 10: $1900000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2200000000)

Year 100: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)

Key Considerations