Bill Overview
Title: A bill to create a point of order against legislation making nondefense discretionary appropriations that would increase the deficit during a period of high inflation.
Description: This bill establishes a point of order that prohibits considering legislation in the Senate that provides nondefense discretionary appropriations and would increase the deficit when inflation is at least 12%. The point of order may be waived or suspended by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Senate.
Sponsors: Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Global population affected by inflation-related cost increases
Estimated Size: 335000000
- The bill targets legislation that affects nondefense discretionary appropriations, implying impacts on sectors funded through such spending such as education, health, infrastructure, etc.
- During periods of high inflation, typically, a large portion of the population experiences effects due to costs of living increases.
- Legislation that could potentially be blocked by a point of order under this bill could include anything that impacts public welfare, healthcare systems, education, and other non-defense related sectors.
- Historical data shows that inflation at high levels impacts the entire population, but especially vulnerable groups such as low-income families, fixed-income retirees, and those reliant on social services.
Reasoning
- The bill addresses how the government can manage spending during periods of high inflation, targeting the prevention of deficit increase through nondefense discretionary appropriations.
- The target population includes almost all US residents as everyone is affected by high inflation, although particularly vulnerable groups might feel the effects more intensely.
- Because the policy restricts spending during high inflation periods, impacts might include slowed government initiatives in education, healthcare, and infrastructure.
- Some individuals may see a slower improvement or even stagnation in public service provision, while others may benefit from managed inflation and a more sustainable fiscal policy.
- Given the US population of approximately 335 million, the policy has a broad indirect impact while direct visible effects might be most noticeable among those relying on government-supported services.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (Texas)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's important to control inflation, but I'm worried about cuts to healthcare funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Retired (Florida)
Age: 68 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- High inflation really hurts those of us on a fixed income.
- If this policy manages the deficit wisely, it could be beneficial in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 1 |
Teacher (New York)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Education funding cuts worry me, but stabilizing inflation is critical too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Small business owner (Illinois)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems beneficial since inflation impacts my business directly by increasing costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Graduate Student (California)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about what this could mean for student aid, but reducing inflation is also important.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Stay-at-home parent (Ohio)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Education is key for my children's future, and I worry about any limitations on school funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Automotive Worker (Michigan)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Keeping inflation under control is essential, as it directly affects our industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Nonprofit Director (Alabama)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to continue funding for essential community programs, even during tough economic times.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Grocery Store Employee (Colorado)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Controlling inflation would help with my living expenses and budgeting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Public Transit Driver (New Mexico)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy protects the services I provide without additional costs to riders.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $30600000, High: $71400000)
Year 3: $52020000 (Low: $31212000, High: $72828000)
Year 5: $54100800 (Low: $32460480, High: $75741120)
Year 10: $59496961 (Low: $35698177, High: $83395745)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $1400000000)
Key Considerations
- High inflation is assumed to be transient; thus, savings and impacts highly depend on the duration and frequency of inflation reaching 12%.
- Effects on nondefense sectors will be indirect but significant, especially if temporary spending freezes occur during high inflation phases.