Bill Overview
Title: Build America, Buy America Act
Description: This bill requires federal infrastructure programs to provide for the use of materials produced in the United States. Each federal agency must submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and to Congress a report that identifies each federal financial assistance program for infrastructure administered by the agency and (1) identify domestic content procurement preferences applicable to the assistance, (2) assess the applicability of such requirements, (3) provide details on any applicable domestic content procurement preference requirement, and (4) include a description of the type of infrastructure projects that receive funding under the program. Each agency shall ensure that none of the funds made available for such a program may be used for a project unless all of the iron, steel, and manufactured products used in the project are produced in the United States, subject to waivers under specified circumstances. The Department of Transportation must enter into a technical assistance partnership with the National Institute of Standards and Technology to ensure the development of a domestic supply base to support intermodal transportation in the United States. The Office for Federal Procurement Policy shall promulgate final regulations or other policy or management guidance to standardize and simplify how federal agencies comply with, report on, and enforce the Buy American Act. The OMB must establish a Made in America Office to undertake specified activities, including to maximize and enforce compliance with domestic preference statutes.
Sponsors: Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by domestic content requirements in US federal infrastructure projects
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill focuses on infrastructure programs which are extensive and cover various sectors such as transportation, water, energy, and broadband.
- This act will impact all individuals involved in federal infrastructure projects including workers, contractors, and supply chain entities that provide materials for these projects.
- The direct impact is on industries related to iron and steel production and manufacturing in the U.S., expected to see increased demand due to domestic content requirements.
- The legislation also impacts government agencies which have to adapt their procurement processes and compliance measures.
- This act may indirectly impact consumers and citizens who utilize infrastructure services, potentially seeing improved quality due to the focus on domestic materials.
Reasoning
- To develop a range of interviews, I considered individuals with diverse roles in infrastructure sectors such as construction workers, manufacturers, and government employees.
- The impact on individuals will vary: some will see increased job stability or opportunities, while others might experience little to no direct impact.
- The budget and scope of the bill mean that only a portion of the population involved in infrastructure will be significantly impacted, with most seeing indirect benefits.
- The expected increase in demand for U.S. materials will likely improve job opportunities in manufacturing sectors, notably iron, steel, and other materials.
- Infrastructure improvements can have wide-reaching effects, enhancing overall citizens' experiences, but individual impacts are mostly limited to those directly involved in these sectors.
Simulated Interviews
Steel Fabrication Worker (Pittsburgh, PA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the Build America, Buy America Act is great because it supports domestic jobs like mine.
- I might see more stable work conditions and possibly higher demand for our products.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Auto Parts Manufacturer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might increase our business if more projects require US-made products.
- I am hopeful it will boost the local economy and provide new opportunities for workers like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Construction Project Manager (Austin, TX)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It'll be beneficial for infrastructure projects since better materials mean extended longevity of our projects.
- Budget constraints might be tough initially, but investing in American-made products is vital.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Federal Agency Procurement Officer (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 55 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Build America, Buy America Act will streamline many processes and reduce ambiguity in procurement.
- Enforcing these requirements might initially be challenging, but it'll enhance accountability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Civil Engineer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I expect to see better quality materials and enhanced job security in my sector.
- This act can make projects more costly initially, but the quality and longevity benefits are worth it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired, (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's important to invest in American jobs, but I'm not sure how it will affect me now as retired.
- Seeing improved infrastructure is beneficial, but I don't expect direct personal impact.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Logistics Coordinator (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased demand for U.S.-made materials can boost our logistics business.
- However, there might be challenges with supply chain adjustments at the start.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tech Start-Up Employee (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I expect indirect benefits as new technologies will be needed to comply with policy reporting standards.
- There might be opportunities for tech firms that can optimize these processes.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Environmental Consultant (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that some might overlook environmental standards for the sake of rapid development.
- However, using local materials can reduce the carbon footprint of transporting materials.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
City Planner (Boston, MA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative is positive as it focuses resources on developing more sustainable and resilient urban infrastructure.
- The focus on U.S. products can improve our economic self-reliance.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 2: $1150000000 (Low: $950000000, High: $1400000000)
Year 3: $1120000000 (Low: $920000000, High: $1350000000)
Year 5: $1100000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1300000000)
Year 10: $1050000000 (Low: $850000000, High: $1250000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy requires waivers for some domestic procurement under specified circumstances, which could introduce complexity in policy enforcement.
- Potential higher costs for domestically produced materials might face resistance from contractors and agencies.
- The requirement for comprehensive reporting and compliance increments administrative burden on federal agencies.
- Development of a robust domestic supply chain might require time and investment, impacting short-term feasibility.