Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9598

Bill Overview

Title: Taiwan Protection and National Resilience Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense to submit a report identifying goods and services from the United States that China relies upon and U.S. military procurement practices that are reliant on trade with China. The bill also requires the Department of the Treasury to submit a sanctions strategy that could, in response to a Chinese invasion of Taiwan (1) limit China's ability to acquire petroleum and military materiel, (2) diminish the ability of the Chinese industrial base to replenish defense articles, and (3) inhibit China's ability to evade sanctions.

Sponsors: Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4]

Target Audience

Population: People living in China

Estimated Size: 10000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Defense Analyst (Washington D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy strengthens national security by preparing for longer-term geopolitical threats.
  • I believe our military readiness and strategic positioning improve with this act.

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

Tech Company Executive (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy adds risk to our supply chain, but also pushes us to diversify sourcing.
  • In the short term, disruptions could impact production and profits.

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 7 8
Year 10 7 8
Year 20 7 8

Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • My immediate concern is increased tariffs or sanctions could raise costs significantly.
  • I support a strong stance on national security, but it's going to be financially demanding.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Automotive Factory Worker (Detroit, MI)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Job security could be affected by rapid changes in import tariffs or sanctions.
  • I hope this policy encourages local production, despite short-term disruptions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Economist (New York, NY)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Economic redistribution due to this act is likely but necessary for national security.
  • Long-term benefits help counter short-term trade disruptions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Import/Export Specialist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Logistical strategies must consider the potential for heightened tensions and restrictions.
  • We have to strategize for potential trade adjustments, which can be stressful.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

University Student (Chicago, IL)

Age: 24 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy provides real-world applications for what I'm studying.
  • I feel more secure knowing the government is considering strategic implications.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 9
Year 5 9 9
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 9 9

Human Resource Manager (Seattle, WA)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There may be workforce impacts if import regulations shift suddenly.
  • Aligns with strategic goals, but could necessitate tough workforce decisions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Policy Advisor (Boston, MA)

Age: 48 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a significant stride towards reassuring allies and deterring Chinese aggression.
  • Will need regular updates and assessments to ensure effectiveness.

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

Freelance Journalist (Miami, FL)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy provides much-needed material for analysis on U.S.-China relations.
  • I anticipate some backlash or counter-actions from China.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Key Considerations