Bill Overview
Title: INFO Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development to continue efforts to secure internet freedom globally. The bill also directs the U.S. Agency for Global Media to obtain open-source tools and techniques to securely distribute digital content, as well as to facilitate audience access to websites censored by foreign governments.
Sponsors: Rep. Spanberger, Abigail Davis [D-VA-7]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals globally who use the internet
Estimated Size: 310000000
- The bill's focus is on securing internet freedom globally, meaning individuals using the internet, especially in countries with restricted internet access, will be impacted.
- The U.S. Agency for Global Media's efforts to distribute digital content securely will affect those consuming U.S.-distributed media globally.
- The bill mandates the use of open-source tools to help bypass censorship, impacting individuals living under internet censorship.
- The efforts directed by this bill have implications for all global internet users, as they aim to maintain and enhance a free internet environment.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects individuals in countries with restricted internet access but also has implications for users within the U.S. It aims to ensure a free internet globally, which indirectly benefits all internet users.
- While the primary target is global audiences, U.S. citizens who rely on uncensored alternative news sources or travel abroad might personally benefit from this act.
- Considering the budget of this policy, it is likely to mostly affect individuals indirectly through enhanced global internet freedom rather than direct, massive changes in personal digital experiences in the U.S.
- Public perceptions may vary; some might see the act as a valuable protection for digital rights, while others may not feel a direct benefit.
Simulated Interviews
Digital Marketing Specialist (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the INFO Act will help my international clients access our digital content more easily.
- A free internet globally ensures business continuity and growth. It's a positive move.
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 |
Tech Startup Founder (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 44 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy supports digital innovation and freedom, essential for startups like mine.
- A more open internet could reduce barriers to entry for our service internationally.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Freelance Journalist (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will help journalists like me reach more audiences in countries with censorship.
- Improving global internet freedom is essential for truthful reporting.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
University Professor (Miami, FL)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like the INFO Act are crucial for keeping the global conversation open.
- Even though I might not see a direct effect in my daily life, the broader impact on digital media literacy is significant.
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 |
College Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 19 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The internet is a global resource, and policies like these are important to uphold that ideal.
- It indirectly supports my studies and interest in wide-reaching data privacy.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe in accessing quality information worldwide, and this policy helps ensure it.
- As someone who likes to stay informed globally, this is a safeguarding measure.
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 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Open-source tools to bypass censorship are vital, and I'm glad to see them recognized in policy.
- Personally and professionally, encouraging internet freedom aligns with my values.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Legal Consultant (Boston, MA)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The INFO Act represents a step forward in ensuring internet laws align with evolving digital landscapes.
- It supports the kind of global cooperation I often work towards in my legal practices.
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 |
Grad Student in International Relations (Minneapolis, MN)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a protective measure towards maintaining internet freedom, which is crucial for diplomacy.
- As a future diplomat, understanding such policies will be key to my career.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Video Content Creator (Houston, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhanced internet freedom could improve accessibility to my content globally, reducing censorship barriers.
- While I am not directly working in censored regions, it's a positive for broader outreach.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $45000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $65000000)
Year 2: $47000000 (Low: $37000000, High: $67000000)
Year 3: $49000000 (Low: $39000000, High: $69000000)
Year 5: $54000000 (Low: $43000000, High: $74000000)
Year 10: $64000000 (Low: $51000000, High: $88000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1400000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy has a broad international focus involving cooperation with foreign entities.
- Its long-term success depends on geopolitical factors and foreign governments' responses.
- Technological advancements and cybersecurity challenges are crucial to the policy's implementation.
- Potential impacts on U.S. diplomatic relations need evaluation.