Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3491

Bill Overview

Title: Commission on Reform and Modernization of the Department of State Act

Description: This bill establishes in the legislative branch a commission to examine the changing nature of diplomacy in the 21st century and ways the Department of State and its personnel can modernize to advance U.S. interests. The commission must offer recommendations related to topics such as (1) the State Department's organizational structure and infrastructure, (2) the link between diplomacy and other core U.S. interests such as defense, and (3) the core legislation that authorizes U.S. diplomacy. The commission must also periodically brief Congress on the commission's work. Within 18 months of this bill's enactment, the commission must provide to Congress and the President its final report of findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The report must also examine all substantive aspects of State Department personnel, management, and operations. The commission shall terminate 60 days after the submission of the final report.

Sponsors: Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals affected by U.S. diplomacy and international relations

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Foreign Service Officer (Washington D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the commission could bring much-needed improvements to our diplomatic procedures.
  • Modernizing our tools and strategies could enhance our global standing.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 7 7

International Trade Consultant (New York, NY)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased efficiency in diplomacy could streamline international trade processes.
  • The commission's work might reduce bureaucratic delays that impact my clients.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 6 6

Software Developer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm not directly involved in diplomacy, but better policies might ease international tech cooperation.
  • Global stability through diplomacy could indirectly benefit tech industries.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 4

Retired Veteran (Chicago, IL)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • From my experience, improved diplomatic relations could prevent unnecessary conflicts.
  • Modernizing the State Department's processes could lead to more efficient handling of international issues.

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 8 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

College Student (Boston, MA)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a future diplomat, changes in the State Department are crucial for my career path.
  • This policy appears beneficial for those aspiring to enter public service.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Tourism Industry Professional (Miami, FL)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Anything that stabilizes international relations positively impacts tourism.
  • Efficiency in diplomatic processes might enhance the flow of travelers.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Global NGO Director (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might improve collaboration efficiency between NGOs and government agencies.
  • A streamlined State Department could accelerate humanitarian efforts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Oil and Gas Executive (Houston, TX)

Age: 48 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Modernizing diplomacy could benefit international energy treaties and negotiations.
  • Better diplomatic settings might stabilize energy markets.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Retired Teacher (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 72 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Though I’m retired, I see the importance of effective diplomacy for global peace.
  • Reforms could give me greater confidence in national leadership.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Freelance Journalist (Austin, TX)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This commission's findings might provide rich content for analysis and reporting.
  • Changes might also improve the transparency and accountability of the State Department.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)

Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations