Bill Overview
Title: Extension of the Department of Defense’s Authority for Certain Payments to Redress Injury and Loss Act
Description: This bill extends through December 31, 2033, the authority of the Department of Defense to provide payments for damage, personal injury, or death that is incident to the use of force by the U.S. Armed Forces.
Sponsors: Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]
Target Audience
Population: People in regions with U.S. military operations
Estimated Size: 0
- The bill extends the authority of the DoD to make payments to individuals who suffer damages from the use of force by U.S. military operations.
- Individuals impacted are likely to be those in regions where the U.S. Armed Forces operate, potentially involving both direct military engagements and other operations.
- Historically, countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, where the U.S. military has had significant presence, might be principal areas where such incidents could occur.
- Other regions with U.S. military operations could also be affected, extending the potential for civilian impact to other countries where U.S. forces are active.
- The bill focuses on extending time rather than modifying the scope, so the implication is a continuation rather than an expansion of current practices.
Reasoning
- The primary impact of this policy will be felt by foreign nationals in countries where the U.S. has military operations. Hence, most U.S. citizens will not experience direct effects from compensation claims related to military actions overseas.
- Some U.S. citizens might perceive this policy as either a necessary gesture of accountability or as an unwarranted expenditure, which could affect their theoretical wellbeing scores slightly due to moral or fiscal concerns.
- To simulate a range of responses, including individuals with connections to the military or who are politically engaged might offer insights into diverse U.S. perspectives on this extension.
- Since the policy extends over a decade and involves large sums, U.S. taxpayers might be concerned about budget allocations, affecting their long-term wellbeing perceptions.
- In regions with strong military communities or veterans, perceptions may differ from those without such connections, so regional diversity is considered.
- However, the impact on U.S. citizens’ own Cantril wellbeing should be assumed to be low to none directly, with variances reflecting perceived ethical, fiscal, or geopolitical implications.
Simulated Interviews
Policy Analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This extension is crucial for maintaining accountability by the U.S. military.
- While directly affected individuals are abroad, upholding this policy ensures ethical integrity.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Navy Officer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think compensating for damages is important for maintaining trust overseas.
- This has indirect impact on service members' morale knowing we make amends.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Veteran Affairs Counselor (Dallas, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This helps my clients feel that their actions overseas are accountable.
- Politically, it’s hard to justify if fiscal accountability lacks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
International Relations Professor (New York, NY)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step towards international accountability.
- However, it’s essential we audit such expenditures wisely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Too much spending without clear national benefit is concerning.
- Understanding long-term financial impact is critical.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Social Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Respectfully addressing harm to foreign populations is essential.
- I wish more transparency in how these decisions are made.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Veteran (Miami, FL)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support accountability for actions abroad, it upholds our ideals.
- We have to think about the cost impact as well.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Graduate Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This continues a necessary dialogue on reparations and military ethics.
- It’s important to stay vigilant on legal accountability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Military Officer (Fort Bragg, NC)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Understanding and compensating for unintentional harm is crucial.
- We should always budget wisely. Balancing ethics and costs is paramount.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Healthcare Administrator (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Financial resources should address domestic healthcare priorities.
- Wherever possible, a balance with international obligations is good.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- The program's continuation hinges on U.S. military operations remaining constant or expanding in certain regions.
- Monitoring geopolitical trends to anticipate shifts in conflict zones which could alter the volume or necessity of payments.
- Evaluating the administrative overheads associated with executing these payments to maintain efficiency and accountability.