Bill Overview
Title: Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act
Description: This bill establishes a fund that the Southwestern Power Administration may use for the operation and maintenance of power transmission facilities and other related expenses. The bill also transfers amounts into the fund from specified accounts.
Sponsors: Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]
Target Audience
Population: People in the Southwestern United States receiving electricity from SWPA
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) operates within certain regions of the United States.
- The SWPA is responsible for marketing electric power generated from federal hydroelectric projects.
- SWPA impacts a region that includes parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas.
- The population impacted includes those who receive electricity from SWPA managed facilities.
- This includes further stakeholders such as local businesses, municipal utilities, and rural electric cooperatives that deal with SWPA.
Reasoning
- The population most directly impacted by the Southwestern Power Administration Fund Establishment Act will be those living in the areas serviced by SWPA, specifically parts of Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas.
- Given the scale of the budget and the regions affected, significant impacts will likely be localized to communities that rely on SWPA for power transmission, particularly where there are existing inadequacies that could be ameliorated by maintenance improvements.
- Businesses and municipalities that depend on SWPA's services may benefit due to improved infrastructure, potentially reducing outages and enhancing reliability, thus impacting their operations positively over time.
- Some portions of the population may remain unaffected or only indirectly affected, such as those who do not rely on SWPA or those in the same state but receiving electricity from other sources.
- The overall wellbeing impact is expected to be moderate, as the improvements funded by this act provide utility enhancements which are beneficial but do not address broad-scale social determinants of wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
School Teacher (Tulsa, Oklahoma)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy might bring some much-needed updates to our power lines, which would be good for schools and homes.
- It'll help in not losing power during storms; we sometimes experience outages.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Engineer (Little Rock, Arkansas)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This fund could really strengthen infrastructure, which benefits my business since we collaborate with utilities on sustainable projects.
- Reliability in power systems is crucial for any major development in the region.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Springfield, Missouri)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've dealt with losses due to spoilage in power outages. This policy seems beneficial.
- I hope this means fewer disruptions for small business owners like me.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Retired (Houston, Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's important that power remains stable, especially for those on medical devices.
- Investing in our power infrastructure seems overdue.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Municipal Worker (Monroe, Louisiana)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with our goals to enhance city infrastructure.
- I'd expect fewer budget constraints on projects that partner with SWPA facilities.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Farmer (Dallas, Texas)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We often get hit by outages; anything that could prevent this is welcome.
- Power consistency is crucial for farm operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Nurse (Wichita, Kansas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reliable power is a must, especially for healthcare facilities where I work.
- Any improvements in grid stability are essential.
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 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
College Student (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Power reliability affects campus life.
- This could be a real chance to see policies meet practical improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Factory Worker (Shreveport, Louisiana)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- At work, outages delay production, affecting our income.
- I hope this fund makes our power supply more reliable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Software Developer (Fayetteville, Arkansas)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who works from home, I'm all for anything that keeps the lights on.
- Stable power means more productive workdays.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $5500000)
Year 2: $5100000 (Low: $4600000, High: $5600000)
Year 3: $5200000 (Low: $4700000, High: $5700000)
Year 5: $5400000 (Low: $4900000, High: $5900000)
Year 10: $5800000 (Low: $5300000, High: $6300000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $11000000)
Key Considerations
- The reliance on federal appropriations or transfers from other accounts could impact federal budgets.
- Administrative efficiency will be essential in maintaining or potentially reducing costs.
- Weather events and climate change may alter maintenance and operation requirements.