Bill Overview
Title: A bill to repeal the waiver and termination provisions of the Protecting Europe's Energy Security Act of 2019.
Description: This bill repeals a provision authorizing the President to waive certain sanctions related to specified Russian natural gas pipeline projects, specifically Nord Stream 2 and TurkStream (and any successor projects). The bill also makes permanent the authority to impose such sanctions.
Sponsors: Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
Target Audience
Population: People who rely on Russian natural gas exports
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill affects the sanctions on Russian natural gas pipeline projects, which primarily involve Nord Stream 2 and TurkStream.
- The primary international stakeholders include European countries reliant on Russian gas, such as Germany and other EU nations.
- The economic impacts could affect energy companies involved in the construction and operation of these pipelines.
- Indirect effects might also influence global natural gas prices, affecting markets worldwide.
- In the U.S., the bill could affect foreign policy dynamics and companies with interests in energy sectors related to these sanctions.
Reasoning
- The policy directly impacts foreign policy and international energy dynamics, so most effects on the US population will be indirect.
- US energy companies and their employees might feel high impact, while residents and smaller businesses experience little to none.
- People's opinions are likely mixed, reflecting their occupation or understanding of international matters.
- Interviews cover different demographics, including sectors indirectly linked to policy effects.
Simulated Interviews
Manager at an energy company (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy can stabilize energy prices beneficial for our company in the long run.
- Concerns about potential trade complications impacting business operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Foreign policy analyst (California)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This furthers US strategic interests in curbing Russian influence.
- Could complicate US-European relations if gas prices spike.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retiree (Pennsylvania)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about future energy costs.
- Policies that stabilize the economy are good for us, but it feels too indirect to impact my daily life.
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 |
Gas Station Owner (New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope it will positively affect fuel prices here.
- Uncertain about how much such policies actually impact local businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Professor of International Relations (Ohio)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a tactical move in energy geopolitics.
- Concerns about unforeseen economic repercussions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Oil Rig Worker (North Dakota)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might see more local work if foreign supplies are restrained.
- However, this is heavily speculative and indirect.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Environmental Activist (Illinois)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy ignores the need for renewable energy solutions.
- Continues reliance on fossil fuels isn't sustainable.
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 | 3 |
Factory Worker (Michigan)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Minimal effect expected on my job directly.
- Wider economic impact might influence job stability.
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 | 4 | 4 |
Independent Consultant (New Mexico)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy creates opportunities and challenges in energy investments.
- Balancing political and economic interests is key.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Stay-at-home Parent (Florida)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not really concerned with such global policies unless they affect cost of living.
- Daily expenses and local changes are more relevant.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Year 3: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $150000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill's geopolitical importance may outweigh specific economic costs associated with sanctions.
- Focus on maintaining stable energy markets alongside effective sanction enforcement is crucial.
- The potential for increased diplomatic tensions and trade disruptions needs consideration.
- Long-term strategic goals should balance short-term economic impacts.