Bill Overview
Title: To prohibit the use of Federal funds to negotiate or contribute to international agreements that provide for "loss and damage" funds as a result of climate change.
Description: This bill prohibits the expenditure of federal funds to negotiate or contribute to international agreements providing for loss and damage funds as a result of climate change.
Sponsors: Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1]
Target Audience
Population: People vulnerable to climate change impacts in low-income countries
Estimated Size: 10000
- Many developing countries are the most vulnerable to climate change, often lacking the resources to recover from natural disasters exacerbated by climate change.
- Loss and damage funds are integral to assisting countries manage the impacts of climate change when adaptation and mitigation strategies are not enough.
- Without U.S. contributions, some international funds may have reduced capacity, impacting developing countries.
- The United States is a significant contributor to international climate funds, and its refusal to contribute could lead to gaps in funding that are difficult for other nations to fill.
- Such funding directly supports millions of people in least developed countries who suffer from climate-induced phenomena like rising sea levels and severe weather conditions.
Reasoning
- The policy itself primarily impacts foreign nations by halting U.S. contributions toward international climate change assistance funds. However, understanding indirect impacts on the U.S. population is key.
- Federal employees focused on climate agreements may need to pivot their roles, but this is a minor and specific impact.
- Non-profits and humanitarian groups in the U.S. may experience funding shifts, possibly reducing their international project efficacy.
- Communities in the U.S. that are directly involved in international climate efforts or benefit from them might indirectly sense changes, either through decreased international cooperation or diminished project funding.
- Given the large population, the diversity of roles, and the specific nature of the impacted policy areas, varying levels of impact from none to low are expected among Americans.
Simulated Interviews
Federal climate policy analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy shifts our focus but doesn't immediately impact my job security.
- However, it does limit our ability to make meaningful contributions globally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
CEO of an environmental NGO (New York City)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The lack of U.S. contributions could slow down a lot of projects we're involved in.
- We'll have to seek alternative funding or scale back our work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 10 |
Graduate student in Environmental Science (Austin, Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might limit my research opportunities.
- It could reduce future collaboration prospects between nations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Climate Consultant (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Domestically, the impact is limited but could affect broader collaboration.
- International partnerships might weaken, affecting long-term adaptation plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 10 |
Retired (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The decision may lessen global environmental cooperation, weakening overall efforts.
- It has limited direct impact on me, but I am concerned about the global consequences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 9 |
Small Business Owner (Miami, Florida)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our business might see a small impact if international collaboration decreases.
- I think our local and national markets remain strong, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Climate Scientist (Boulder, Colorado)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Research on international climate effects may become harder to fund.
- There's a personal disappointment in the governmental shift without direct harm to my role.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Filmmaker (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My projects often cover international collaboration stories.
- Lack of U.S. involvement reduces the narrative appeal and importance of these stories.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
NGO Worker (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We rely on U.S. contributions to support current aid levels.
- An absence of funding impacts our ability to maintain current operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Software Developer (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't directly affect my job, but worries me about America's role on climate change.
- I hope we join back in global efforts sooner than later.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $0 (Low: $-5000000, High: $5000000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $-5000000, High: $5000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $-5000000, High: $5000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $-5000000, High: $5000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $-5000000, High: $5000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $-5000000, High: $5000000)
Key Considerations
- Prohibiting funds will provide budgetary savings, reducing U.S. international financial commitments relating to climate change.
- Loss and damage funds are crucial for supporting climate-impacted regions, and reduced U.S. involvement could increase vulnerabilities in developing nations.
- Political and diplomatic implications should be considered, given the U.S.'s role in global climate initiatives.