Bill Overview
Title: Defund the Ministry of Truth Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits the expenditure of federal funds for the establishment or operation of the Disinformation Governance Board in the Department of Homeland Security.
Sponsors: Sen. Paul, Rand [R-KY]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by disinformation governance
Estimated Size: 330000000
- The bill affects the Disinformation Governance Board, which was proposed under the Department of Homeland Security, aimed at addressing disinformation threats.
- The Ministry of Truth concept is a reference to a governmental organization focusing on monitoring, and potentially censoring, information. Its defunding may alter how disinformation is addressed at a federal level.
- Citizens concerned with issues of privacy, freedom of speech, and misinformation could be impacted by the existence or the defunding of such an entity.
- Actors including media platforms, journalists, watchdog organizations, advocacy groups for freedom of speech, and legal consultancies may be directly or indirectly impacted.
- Globally, misinformation is a concern affecting multiple sectors including public health, politics, and economics.
Reasoning
- The population likely to be affected by the policy includes those working in media and information industries, digital content consumers, and advocacy groups focused on freedom of speech and privacy.
- Due to the controversial nature of the Disinformation Governance Board and its perceived role in censorship, individuals valuing privacy and free speech are expected to react positively to the defunding.
- The policy has no direct budget allocation, meaning its impact is more ideological and operational within existing structures.
- Impact varies significantly since this involves perceived government overreach versus governmental responsibility to combat misinformation, leaving numerous stakeholders with differing views.
- Most of the population will remain unaffected directly but may have secondary influences in how media and information are regulated.
Simulated Interviews
Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy will safeguard press freedom from government overreach.
- The Disinformation Governance Board always sounded too much like the thought police.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Software Developer (Austin, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm neutral about the board, but the elimination might remove unnecessary federal oversight.
- Social media should handle misinformation more independently.
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 |
Legal Consultant (New York, NY)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Defunding is a reasonable step to prevent an overpowered regulatory body.
- We should focus more on digital literacy to combat misinformation.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public Policy Advisor (Washington, DC)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial for oversight on disinformation, so defunding seems a step backward.
- A balanced system could address disinformation without heavy-handed tactics.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Content Creator (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Defunding the board is a victory for free speech on digital platforms.
- Censorship through governance boards is a slippery slope to avoid.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (Seattle, WA)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Without governance, misinformation may increase, affecting education and public understanding.
- However, government should not have too much power over information.
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 | 4 |
Social Media Manager (Chicago, IL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Defunding could lead to more unchecked misinformation spreading.
- I feel conflicted; regulation is needed but not at the cost of censorship.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Digital Artist (Denver, CO)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This board always seemed like a pathway to restrict creative expression.
- I'm relieved it's defunded, allowing art to express freely.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't believe the board affected my life much, as we're mostly self-reliant here.
- The community handles its own misinformation through discussion.
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 |
Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 44 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While defunding might allow disinformation to spread, having an unbiased education system is critical.
- Teaching students critical thinking is part of the solution, not more government control.
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: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- This estimate assumes that initial funding for the board was already planned but not yet fully spent.
- Public opinion and political support may affect the perceived necessity and cost implications of defunding the board.
- The effect of disinformation on national issues, such as public health and electoral processes, remains a concern.