Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3684

Bill Overview

Title: Improving Social Security’s Service to Victims of Identity Theft Act

Description: This bill requires the Social Security Administration to provide a single point of contact for any individual whose Social Security account number has been misused. The single point of contact must track the individual's case to completion and coordinate with other specialized units to resolve case issues as quickly as possible.

Sponsors: Sen. Sinema, Kyrsten [D-AZ]

Target Audience

Population: Victims of identity theft involving Social Security account numbers

Estimated Size: 9000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Software Developer (Austin, TX)

Age: 31 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The process of dealing with identity theft was incredibly stressful and time-consuming.
  • Having a single point of contact at Social Security would make a huge difference in peace of mind.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 5

Barista (New York, NY)

Age: 24 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The current system is fragmented and getting assistance is a nightmare.
  • If the process was smoother with just one person handling the case, it would greatly alleviate stress.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 3
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 6 4
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

Teacher (Chicago, IL)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Identity theft isn't something I've personally experienced, but I imagine having a dedicated contact would help those affected.

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

Freelance Artist (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 46 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've always worried about identity theft but felt little support was available for prevention or management.
  • This policy might not directly affect me unless something happens, but it's reassuring.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (Miami, FL)

Age: 63 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I've been through it, and having a single point of contact would likely have expedited my case.
  • It's great for those currently struggling with similar issues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Accountant (Seattle, WA)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy sounds very targeted. Even though my identity theft didn't involve Social Security, I know the hassle it can bring.

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

Tech Start-up Co-Founder (Denver, CO)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A single point of contact could be a valuable resource.
  • Right now, there's too much red tape and not enough guidance on next steps after a breach.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

College Student (Boston, MA)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I caught my case early, a streamlined process could benefit others immensely and provide peace of mind to all.

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 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Construction Worker (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This seems like a good measure to protect people in my sector where document security may not always be top priority.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Lobbyist (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Though I think this policy is beneficial, it addresses a very specific issue within a larger context of identity theft.
  • It could help catalyze further improvements in consumer protection.

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 2: $120000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $150000000)

Year 3: $115000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $140000000)

Year 5: $105000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $130000000)

Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $125000000)

Year 100: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $110000000)

Key Considerations