Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4097

Bill Overview

Title: Too Narrow to Succeed Act

Description: This bill requires federal institutional investors to report on their use of diverse-owned asset management firms. Additionally, the Department of Labor must conduct a survey of public- and private-sector pension plans regarding best practices for increasing the utilization and capacity of diverse-owned asset management firms.

Sponsors: Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals employed or invested with diverse-owned asset management firms and pension plan beneficiaries

Estimated Size: 500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Pension Fund Manager (New York, NY)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see this policy as an opportunity to broaden our engagement with diverse firms.
  • Initially, it may require more effort to identify and report on these firms, but long-term insights could be beneficial.

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 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Employee at a diverse-owned asset management firm (Chicago, IL)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could be a push towards greater recognition of firms like ours.
  • I'm hopeful it will improve our firm's visibility and open new doors.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Graduate Student studying Finance (Dallas, TX)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could enhance career prospects for someone like me who's looking to enter the industry.
  • I might actually get a chance to work with firms that prioritize diversity.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired Police Officer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm not directly involved, but if it leads to better fund management, I'm for it.
  • Pension stability is crucial, and if diversity helps, then it's beneficial.

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 6 5

Financial Consultant (Seattle, WA)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Compliance with the new regulations could mean more work initially, but it might drive positive market changes.
  • Uncertain how immediate the benefits will be.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Owner of a small asset management firm (Miami, FL)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like this could genuinely support firms like mine, providing more opportunities.
  • Implementation and follow-through remain to be seen.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Pension Plan Beneficiary (Denver, CO)

Age: 40 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I wish to see any effects materialize directly, but it's hard to say now.
  • If the policy results in a more stable pension fund, I'm supportive.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Data Analyst with a bank (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy analysis might offer deeper insights into diversity impacts.
  • Potential for enlightening findings is exciting, though challenging during implementation.

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 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 7

Tech Entrepreneur and Investor (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This aligns with my values and might foster an investment climate that supports diverse voices.
  • I hope to see a ripple effect within the tech investment space.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Policy Maker in Financial Regulation (Washington, DC)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a step in the right direction, though success requires thorough follow-up and evaluation.
  • I'm optimistic about fostering positive market changes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $4000000)

Year 2: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $3500000)

Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations