Bill Overview
Title: Protect Against Terrorist Threats (PATT) Act of 2022
Description: This bill expands, for immigration purposes, the definition of engaging in terrorist activity to include threatening, attempting, or conspiring to take certain acts considered to be terrorist activity under current law, such as gathering information on potential targets for terrorist activity. Currently, non-U.S. nationals ( aliens under federal law) who engage in terrorist activity are barred from admission into the United States.
Sponsors: Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3]
Target Audience
Population: Non-U.S. nationals seeking admission to the United States under immigration law.
Estimated Size: 0
- The bill affects the immigration status of individuals labeled as engaging in terrorist activity.
- It expands the definition of terrorist activity to include additional acts, thereby potentially impacting more individuals.
- Individuals globally, especially those non-U.S. nationals seeking to immigrate to the U.S., will be affected if they fall under the expanded definition.
Reasoning
- The Protect Against Terrorist Threats Act of 2022 primarily affects non-U.S. nationals who may fall under the expanded definition of engaging in terrorist activity. Consequently, U.S. citizens are not directly impacted except for potential indirect benefits such as enhanced national security. Given the budgetary constraints, targeted surveillance and legal actions will be limited, potentially affecting a small subset of the 1 million individuals globally who might be impacted by the expanded definition.
- U.S. citizens living in communities with significant immigrant populations or those who have personal ties to individuals from nations that could be impacted might perceive indirect benefits in terms of security, although these effects are more psychological in nature.
- The main impact will likely be preventative in nature, affecting future immigration claims rather than current residents, thereby containing initial costs within the specified budget.
Simulated Interviews
Immigration Lawyer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the policy could complicate legal cases due to the vagueness in defining what constitutes a threat or attempt of terrorism. It might result in more cases being challenged in court.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Graduate Student (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The expanded definition could dissuade legitimate academic exchanges and screenings of international scholars over concerns of being flagged.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While my business benefits from immigrant talent, security enhancements may bring peace of mind. However, administrative complications could slow down hiring processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Community Organizer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 36 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could create fear among immigrant communities, possibly intensifying feelings of being unwelcome or targeted.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 9 |
Corporate Executive (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- National security is paramount and this policy provides proactive measures. However, it might restrict global movement of skilled individuals that our business relies on.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 10 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 10 |
Homeland Security Analyst (San Diego, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- From a security standpoint, this policy is crucial in addressing indirect terror threats often overlooked, but enforcing it could be resource-intensive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
College Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It sets a counterproductive precedent that might infringe on personal freedoms and lawful academic travel between nations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Factory Manager (Detroit, MI)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Expanding the definition complicates matters for individuals legitimately seeking asylum or building lives here, though it arguably increases security measures.
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 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 10 |
Retired Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 57 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Security is important, but we risk alienating people in my community who contribute positively. It might create unnecessary divides.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could unnecessarily complicate the hiring of non-U.S. nationals for our projects, though I understand the security intent.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $55000000 (Low: $33000000, High: $77000000)
Year 3: $57500000 (Low: $34500000, High: $80500000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $36000000, High: $84000000)
Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $98000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $140000000)
Key Considerations
- Administrative costs and adjustments to implementing new immigration rules.
- Potential legal challenges or increased appeals under the revised terrorist activity definition.
- Indirect national security benefits contributing to potential longer-term savings.