Bill Overview
Title: Tribal Firearm Access Act
Description: This bill expands the definition of identification document (for criminal offenses related to fraud and aggravated identity theft) to include an identification document issued by a tribal government.
Sponsors: Rep. Johnson, Dusty [R-SD-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: Members of indigenous tribes who use tribal identification documents
Estimated Size: 7000000
- The bill specifically mentions identification documents issued by tribal governments.
- This will directly affect tribal members who use tribal IDs for identification.
- It expands criminal offenses related to fraud and aggravated identity theft to include tribal identification documents, indicating a focus on legal and security impacts for tribal communities.
- There are over 570 federally recognized tribes in the United States, with a population of around 6.9 million according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
- Given the expansion of the identification document definition, tribal members using tribal IDs will be directly impacted, as they are now explicitly covered under federal laws related to fraud and identity theft.
Reasoning
- The annual budget for the policy is $1,500,000 initially, expanding to $5,250,000 over a decade, which indicates a constrained program relative to the 7 million potential people in the target group.
- Given the size of the target population, direct intervention may only reach a small segment, influenced by both geographical distribution and specific needs for identification verification.
- The impact on individuals may vary depending on their own experience with fraud, identity theft, or legal interactions where tribal ID is a factor.
Simulated Interviews
School Teacher (Arizona)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy gives more weight to my tribal ID, which is positive, but I'm worried about increased scrutiny and my data being misused.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Tribal Council Member (Oklahoma)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Protecting tribal ID against fraud is crucial, though it could lead to overregulation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Healthcare Worker (New Mexico)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about potential data breaches but glad the ID is taken more seriously.
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 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Ranch Owner (Montana)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see much change; I rarely use my tribal ID. Maybe it's a good precaution.
- Watching how it unfolds. Legal implications can be tricky and unexpected.
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 | 5 | 5 |
College Student (South Dakota)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's empowering to see our IDs recognized like state IDs, but will bigger laws make things harder for people not doing anything wrong?
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Retired (California)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this translates to better services and access without complication. But change is always slow.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Software Developer (Washington)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More recognition is great, but the tribal ID needs to be secure. I'm thinking about the risks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Social Worker (North Dakota)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a protective measure for IDs, but we have to ensure it serves rather than hinders our community.
- Hopefully this helps in preventing ID theft among tribal members, which has been a growing concern.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Fisherman (Alaska)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hope this helps against fraud; my ID has had issues before. Yet, afraid of more hassle during simple processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Lawyer (Maine)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Elevating the status of tribal IDs is excellent, but it might complicate legal processes before it improves them.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 2: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 3: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The administrative costs are focused on updating systems and protocols to recognize tribal IDs federally.
- Training programs for federal and local agencies may be necessary to ensure proper implementation.
- Potential increase in enforcement actions related to identity verification and fraud detection.