Bill Overview
Title: Madeleine K. Albright Democracy in the 21st Century Act
Description: This bill establishes programs to promote democracy abroad, authorizes Department of State and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) democracy programs from FY2023 through FY2027, and addresses related issues. The State Department must establish programs (1) to defend democracy globally, including by enhancing the ability of the State Department and USAID to respond quickly and flexibly to democratic openings and backsliding; (2) to support efforts to enhance government transparency and other activities related to reducing corruption; and (3) for democracy research and development, such as activities to drive innovation in State Department, USAID, and National Endowment for Democracy (NED) responses to complex challenges to democracy. The bill establishes the Democracy in the 21st Century Fund, to be administered by the State Department, to support the programs established by this bill and other related activities. U.S. government assistance for democracy programs shall not be subject to the prior approval of any foreign government. The bill also protects the identities of implementing partners of certain State Department, USAID, and NED assistance programs in countries that are undemocratic or have engaged in gross violations of civil and political rights, including by exempting the names of partners for democracy programs in such countries from Freedom of Information Act requests. The President must report to Congress a comprehensive strategy to promote democracy abroad.
Sponsors: Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]
Target Audience
Population: People living in countries targeted by US democracy programs
Estimated Size: 5000
- The bill focuses on promoting democracy abroad, so it targets populations outside the US.
- Programs to defend democracy globally will impact individuals living in undemocratic regimes.
- Efforts to enhance government transparency and reduce corruption will affect citizens in countries where such issues are prevalent.
- U.S. government assistance for democracy programs might impact global populations particularly in regions experiencing democratic backsliding or political instability.
Reasoning
- The primary effect of the policy is targeted at populations outside of the United States, promoting democracy in other countries, so the direct impact on U.S. residents is minimal.
- The policy affects primarily the U.S. government employees and contractors who are responsible for implementing the strategies and managing funds.
- Indirectly, the policy can influence those in academia or officials involved in foreign policy and international relations.
- Average American citizens may perceive a moral or ethical benefit but see no direct impact in their daily lives or wellbeing scores as it is too abstract for immediate tangible effects.
- Consideration of U.S. taxpayer money being used for international programs might invoke opinions about priorities and foreign policy effectiveness but not immediate changes in personal wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Foreign Service Officer (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is aligned with my work, improving our toolkit for supporting democratic initiatives abroad.
- It could improve operational flexibility and effectiveness in my role.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
NGO Director (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill could provide more resources and protection for our partners abroad, leading to more project opportunities.
- It should make our work more effective against authoritarian regimes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Professor of International Relations (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a positive step for addressing democratic backsliding globally.
- May offer valuable case studies for my research and curriculum.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm interested in following how this policy unfolds, good for research purposes.
- Might provide insights or data for my thesis.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Corporate Executive (Chicago, IL)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Indirectly, this could influence contract opportunities and market stability abroad.
- Mostly see this as relevant to corporate risk and strategy planning.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Documentary Filmmaker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This may aid in shedding light on important issues in my work.
- Unlikely to directly affect my projects or funding significantly.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could foster a more open environment for activists who rely on my tools.
- Any increase in global transparency benefits society, hence my work.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Retired (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Cynical about foreign policy efficacy, but optimistic about intentions.
- Hopeful it influences younger generations' perspectives on democracy.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
School Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Educationally, this policy showcases America’s commitment to democratic values.
- Could use as an example to emphasize global citizenship in my curriculum.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Lawyer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might set new precedents in international law approach by the U.S.
- Unlikely to affect my practice directly beyond theoretical discourse.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $260000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $310000000)
Year 3: $270000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $320000000)
Year 5: $290000000 (Low: $240000000, High: $340000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 100: $350000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $400000000)
Key Considerations
- International political dynamics and relationships could influence the success of the democracy programs.
- The bill's impact heavily depends on the geopolitical environments and democratic openings in the target countries.
- Coordination and collaboration with international bodies will be crucial.