Bill Overview
Title: Expanding America's Pacific Diplomatic Presence Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Government Accountability Office to report to Congress an assessment of the feasibility of establishing new diplomatic posts in Pacific Island countries and territories that currently do not have a U.S. diplomatic post.
Sponsors: Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI]
Target Audience
Population: People in Pacific Island countries and territories possibly gaining new U.S. diplomatic posts
Estimated Size: 100000
- The bill aims to assess the feasibility of establishing new U.S. diplomatic posts in Pacific Island countries and territories.
- There are approximately 14 Pacific Island countries and several territories that currently have varying degrees of diplomatic presence.
- A new or enhanced diplomatic presence could directly affect diplomacy, economic ties, and development projects within these regions.
- The entire population of these countries and territories would not be directly impacted but would potentially benefit from enhanced diplomatic engagement, aid, and economic opportunities.
Reasoning
- The Expanding America's Pacific Diplomatic Presence Act of 2022 is primarily intended to benefit people living in Pacific Island countries by evaluating the feasibility of setting up new U.S. diplomatic posts. Consequently, direct benefits to the U.S. population are minimal.
- The primary American population segment impacted would be Americans living or doing business in the Pacific Islands, who might gain improved access to diplomatic services or business opportunities.
- Due to the nature of diplomatic presence expansion, the impacts on individuals in the U.S. will likely be indirect and connected to specific industries or personal circumstances, like those working in overseas diplomatic services or international business.
Simulated Interviews
International Trade Consultant (Hawaii)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support the policy as it could enhance trade opportunities between the U.S. and Pacific Islands.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Software Developer (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy's indirect benefits might increase opportunities for business contracts in the Pacific region.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Diplomat (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative could lead to career development opportunities and strengthen our international relationships.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired Military Officer (Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a good move for enhancing security and diplomatic reach in these strategic regions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Non-Profit Manager (Georgia)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could potentially bring more aid opportunities to Pacific Islands.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Political Analyst (Illinois)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's more of a geopolitical strategy; U.S. citizens might not feel direct changes, but it's positive for international diplomacy.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Student (New York)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could increase learning opportunities and material for my studies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Business Owner (New York)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It might marginally boost tourism if diplomatic ties ease travel restrictions.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Teacher (Guam)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved diplomatic presence could enrich educational materials available.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public Relations Specialist (Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While more focused on the Pacific, any policy that fosters international collaboration is good for global business.
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: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 2: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $800000)
Year 3: $250000 (Low: $100000, High: $500000)
Year 5: $250000 (Low: $100000, High: $500000)
Year 10: $250000 (Low: $100000, High: $500000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring the GAO has access to accurate data and sufficient resources for the feasibility study.
- Understanding current diplomatic needs and challenges in Pacific Island countries and territories.
- Strategizing for future diplomatic post implementations based on findings.
- Budgetary implications if new posts are recommended post-study.