Bill Overview
Title: Political CRIMES Act
Description: This bill addresses unlawful political activity by specified federal officials and revises the penalties for unlawful political activity by executive branch employees. Specifically, the bill directs the Department of Justice (DOJ) to conduct a preliminary investigation when it receives information sufficient to constitute grounds to investigate whether the President, Vice President, or other senior officials violated laws regarding political activities between January 20, 2009, and January 21, 2021. If further investigation is warranted, DOJ must apply for the appointment of an independent counsel. The bill limits the political activity of the President and Vice President while on federal property. Additionally, the bill increases criminal penalties for Hatch Act violations. The Hatch Act prohibits civil service employees in the executive branch of the federal government from engaging in some forms of political activity (e.g., advocating for or against a partisan political party while on duty). The purpose of the act is to maintain a federal workforce free from partisan political influence or coercion. The bill establishes an Inspector General for the Office of Special Counsel. The Government Accountability Office must report to Congress on certain reimbursable political events held at the White House or on the White House grounds.
Sponsors: Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]
Target Audience
Population: Federal executive branch civil service employees
Estimated Size: 2100000
- The bill primarily targets federal officials, including the President, Vice President, and senior officials, which is a small group compared to the overall population.
- Federal government employees constitute about 2.1 million individuals in the United States.
- Hatch Act violations pertain specifically to civil service employees in the executive branch, which is part of the 2.1 million federal workers.
- The general U.S. citizenry may indirectly feel the impact through changes in governmental transparency and integrity, but they are not the direct target of restrictions or penalties outlined in the bill.
- Between January 20, 2009, and January 21, 2021, there were two presidential administrations. This historical scope impacts individuals who held senior political offices during that period.
- The penalty increase and enforcement enhancements specifically affect those involved in current and future executive branch employment.
Reasoning
- The primary target of the bill comprises federal officials, particularly those in senior and executive roles within the executive branch, which makes up a small fraction of the overall federal workforce.
- Due to the specificity of the bill towards political activities, its direct impact is limited to those currently involved in or previously holding positions where the Hatch Act applies.
- While the broader civil service workforce is around 2.1 million, the impact is narrowly concentrated, typically impacting policy and legal compliance departments more than general civil servants.
- The increased penalties and restrictions could have a dissuasive effect on political activities on federal property, promoting neutrality within the federal workflow but may stress those indirectly involved through closer scrutiny.
- The general public’s impact is mostly through improved transparency and accountability, although this is indirect and may manifest as more trust in the federal system.
Simulated Interviews
Senior Executive Assistant (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The heightened scrutiny and independent counsel investigations are reassuring, suggesting checks on power abuses.
- While policy restrictions don't impact my day-to-day, they ensure ethical compliance across the board.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Civil Service Employee (Houston, Texas)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see this policy affecting my role directly since I'm not in federal political circles.
- However, knowing that there are stricter measures on executive misconduct makes me more confident in our leadership's integrity.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Federal Executive (New York, New York)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Retrospective investigations could reignite past controversies but also bring clarity to unresolved issues.
- Increased oversight today promotes a cleaner future for current officeholders.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Federal Policy Analyst (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stronger enforcement mechanisms seem beneficial both in maintaining neutrality and punishing misconduct effectively.
- However, I worry about potential bureaucratic slowdowns as new oversight layers are added.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Labor Union Representative for Federal Workers (Springfield, Illinois)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While rooting out corruption is essential, the approach shouldn't demoralize employees.
- Would prefer broader safeguards against misuse of new powers.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Operations Manager (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't impact my work life directly, but I appreciate efforts to enhance governmental ethical standards.
- The potential for bureaucratic congestion concerns me somewhat.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Political Science Professor (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The political landscape today demands stricter adherence to ethics in politics, and this bill contributes positively.
- I'm skeptical of political motives behind investigations, yet they play a necessary part in accountability.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Senior Federal Ethics Officer (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Adds necessary checks within the federal system, ensuring actions align with ethical standards.
- Concerns about potential for misuse or politicization of the process, requiring balance.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Federal Prosecutor (Baltimore, Maryland)
Age: 57 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The political CRIMES Act strengthens our ability to curb political abuses effectively.
- Ensures that justice is impartial and free from political influences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Human Resources Manager for Federal Agency (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Happy to see efforts to improve ethics in governance, but hope it doesn't affect workforce morale negatively.
- Clarity in applications of the policy is essential to avoid confusion.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $18000000 (Low: $14000000, High: $22000000)
Year 3: $18000000 (Low: $13000000, High: $23000000)
Year 5: $17000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $22000000)
Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 100: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Key Considerations
- The capacity of the DOJ to handle potentially extensive investigations on historical political activities could stretch its current resources.
- The establishment of new oversight roles, such as the Inspector General, requires planning to ensure effectiveness and avoid duplication of efforts.
- Ensuring compliance with the enhanced penalties for political activities necessitates complementary training and awareness programs across federal agencies.