Bill Overview
Title: Repurposing Elite Luxuries Into Emergency Funds for Ukraine Act
Description: This bill establishes the Ukrainian Relief Fund, which shall be available, subject to appropriations, to provide assistance to Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees. The Department of Justice shall deposit into the fund all proceeds resulting from the liquidation of assets seized by an interagency law enforcement task force established to enforce sanctions imposed in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Sponsors: Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]
Target Audience
Population: Ukrainian citizens affected by the Russian invasion, including refugees
Estimated Size: 0
- The bill creates a Ukrainian Relief Fund aimed at assisting Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees.
- The fund will be filled using proceeds from liquidated assets seized due to sanctions against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.
- The primary target population includes Ukrainian citizens who are affected by the invasion, including those who have become refugees.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily aims to provide aid to Ukrainian citizens affected by the invasion, including refugees through the liquidation of sanctioned assets. This impact does not directly influence the daily lives, financial circumstances, or wellbeing of the average US citizen, apart from those potentially employed in related judicial and administrative roles.
- Few US citizens may experience a direct impact except those engaged in the policy's implementation, such as Department of Justice staff and financiers handling the liquidation of assets. As such, most citizens will not report a notable change in their wellbeing related to this policy.
- The simulated interviews reflect a broad view of the US citizenry, mostly depicting no change or low impact in relation to their wellbeing due to the constructed target group of the policy consisting primarily of Ukrainian individuals.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York City, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support efforts to assist Ukraine as it aligns with our geopolitical interests and humanitarian values.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The funding from seized assets is a good initiative and could help my family indirectly.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Immigration Lawyer (Miami, FL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could provide more resources to support Ukrainian refugees legally and financially.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Dallas, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to support Ukraine, but I'm more concerned with domestic policies.
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 |
Graphic Designer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel uncertain about our government diverting funds internationally.
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 |
University Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a significant step in international aid and foreign policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Kentucky)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I prefer to see more funding for local agricultural support than international aid.
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 |
Retired Teacher (Boston, MA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like these reinforce our humanitarian commitments.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Aspiring Actor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see how this policy affects my personal career goals.
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 |
Police Officer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Seeing how enforcement supports broader issues is satisfying.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $55000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $75000000)
Year 3: $60000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $80000000)
Year 5: $65000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $85000000)
Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $90000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- The actual amount of assets liquidated annually is uncertain and dependent on enforcement success.
- International legal cooperation might affect the speed and efficiency of the asset seizure and liquidation process.
- Long-term geopolitical dynamics could influence the sustainability of this funding mechanism.