Bill Overview
Title: Taiwan Peace through Strength Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses military-related assistance to Taiwan. For example, the bill (1) requires the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of State to prioritize processing Taiwan's requests under the Foreign Military Sales program; (2) authorizes additional Foreign Military Financing grant assistance to Taiwan, subject to various requirements; and (3) requires DOD to establish a comprehensive training program with Taiwan designed to achieve interoperability and improve Taiwan's defense capabilities.
Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in Taiwan and those involved in U.S. military and defense sectors
Estimated Size: 10000
- The bill addresses military-related assistance to Taiwan, directly impacting the Taiwanese military and defense establishment.
- The training programs established by the DOD would involve U.S. military personnel, impacting those stationed or involved in these programs.
- U.S. defense contractors may experience increased business due to prioritization of Taiwan's requests under the Foreign Military Sales program.
- U.S. foreign policy makers and associated governmental departments might see shifts in focus or resource allocation towards Taiwan.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily targets military and defense sectors, which are a narrow but impactful segment of the U.S. population.
- Individuals directly involved with military sales or training with Taiwan will feel immediate effects, while the broader U.S. population may see political ripple effects.
- The allocated budget suggests a focus on effective military collaboration and technology exchange, prescribed to directly impact those working in defense and military roles.
- Given the priority of the policy, those in the defense industry such as contractors and military trainers are expected to experience the most change in job focus and responsibilities.
Simulated Interviews
Defense Contractor (San Diego, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is beneficial as it could increase our company's sales and expand job opportunities.
- I worry that focusing too much on Taiwan might lead to international tensions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Policy Analyst at the Department of Defense (Arlington, VA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns with strategic interests but may shift resources from other priorities.
- I'm concerned about the potential risk of escalating military commitments abroad.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
U.S. Navy Officer (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the increased training with Taiwan is crucial for maintaining regional stability.
- I'm hopeful that this policy will enhance our operational effectiveness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Peace Activist (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could escalate tensions unnecessarily and doesn't align with peaceful conflict resolutions.
- I'm concerned that an increased military presence could lead to negative international relations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Software Engineer at Defense Contractor (St Louis, MO)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Positive as it could result in more contracts for our team.
- Might lead to increased workload and stress, which is a concern.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
U.S. Army Translator (Honolulu, HI)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe cooperation with Taiwan is vital, but I am concerned about being deployed more frequently.
- It could enhance security measures which might be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Senate Staffer (Washington D.C.)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill is a strategic move to counterbalance regional threats.
- Could strain budgets for other initiatives if not carefully managed.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Defense Industry Consultant (Denver, CO)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Might lead to a positive trend for business in terms of new opportunities.
- Increased focus might diverge from other growing markets.
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 |
Retired Air Force General (Chicago, IL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an essential partnership for maintaining global balance.
- Concern about the sustainability and risks of increased military commitments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Economist focusing on international trade (Boston, MA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There might be economic benefits from increased defense collaborations.
- The policy could detract from investments in other economic sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)
Year 2: $525000000 (Low: $475000000, High: $575000000)
Year 3: $550000000 (Low: $490000000, High: $610000000)
Year 5: $600000000 (Low: $540000000, High: $660000000)
Year 10: $700000000 (Low: $625000000, High: $775000000)
Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1350000000, High: $1650000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy heavily focuses on defense spending without quantifiable direct economic benefits related to non-defense sectors.
- Long-term strategic consequences in terms of geopolitical stability or instability.
- Potential impacts on the U.S. national debt and related fiscal considerations.