Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9696

Bill Overview

Title: To direct the Secretary of Defense to provide certain resources to implement the Department of Defense policy on civilian harm in connection with United States military operations, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense to assign personnel to specified offices and commands to be responsible for providing guidance related to the prevention of harm to civilians.

Sponsors: Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

Target Audience

Population: Civilians in areas impacted by US military operations

Estimated Size: 10000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Military Commander (San Diego, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy brings important awareness of human rights into our operations.
  • However, it might create additional bureaucratic layers that could slow down action in critical moments.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Pentagon Policy Analyst (Washington, DC)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a step towards more humane operations, but effectiveness will depend on execution.
  • There's always resistance to change, especially in entrenched systems.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Soldier (Fort Bragg, NC)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Good to see efforts in reducing civilian casualties; it gives more meaning to our mission.
  • Concerns about how it could complicate decision-making under pressure.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Peace Activist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a positive move, but it feels like a small concession.
  • We need broader reforms on how military decisions are made.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Journalist (New York, NY)

Age: 32 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This development could shift public perception positively if well-publicized.
  • The real test will be in seeing actual policy outcomes.

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 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 5

Defense Contractor (Arlington, VA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might lead to more contracts for advisory roles, a potential business opportunity.
  • Still, skeptical about how much will change practically on the ground.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Veteran (Chicago, IL)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Good policy for those still serving; it means they carry less burden of guilt.
  • I wish similar measures existed during my service.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Developer (Austin, TX)

Age: 37 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This aligns with ethical standards in simulations; ensuring virtual training adheres to real-world ethical policies is crucial.
  • Little direct impact on daily life but could alter project specifications.

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 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Military Historian (Minneapolis, MN)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Historically, such policies mark shifts towards more ethical conduct, but often only gradually.
  • I hope to see these efforts reflected in future historical analyses of current operations.

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

Military Recruiter (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This change might make military service seem more appealing to those concerned with ethical conduct.
  • I don't see an immediate impact on recruitment numbers but potential long-term positive influence.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)

Year 2: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)

Year 3: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)

Year 5: $32000000 (Low: $27000000, High: $37000000)

Year 10: $35000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $40000000)

Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Key Considerations