Bill Overview
Title: Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes new requirements to expand the availability of information on domestic terrorism, as well as the relationship between domestic terrorism and hate crimes. It authorizes domestic terrorism components within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to monitor, analyze, investigate, and prosecute domestic terrorism. The domestic terrorism components of DHS, DOJ, and the FBI must jointly report on domestic terrorism, including white-supremacist-related incidents or attempted incidents. DHS, DOJ, and the FBI must review the anti-terrorism training and resource programs of their agencies that are provided to federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies. Additionally, DOJ must make training on prosecuting domestic terrorism available to its prosecutors and to assistant U.S. attorneys. It creates an interagency task force to analyze and combat white supremacist and neo-Nazi infiltration of the uniformed services and federal law enforcement agencies. Finally, it directs the FBI to assign a special agent or hate crimes liaison to each field office to investigate hate crimes incidents with a nexus to domestic terrorism.
Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: US residents
Estimated Size: 327000000
- The bill aims to expand the information and resources available to address domestic terrorism and its intersection with hate crimes, which primarily affects law enforcement agencies, individuals at risk of domestic terrorism, and potential victims of hate crimes.
- By establishing components within DHS, DOJ, and FBI, the bill is directed at these agencies and their employees who will be required to adjust their operations to meet the new mandates.
- The requirement for DHS, DOJ, and FBI to report on and analyze domestic terrorism will increase the workload on these agencies and highlight the importance of addressing domestic terrorism, particularly white supremacist-related activities.
- The training provisions mean that federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement officers will be impacted as they receive new guidance on domestic terrorism.
- Creating an interagency task force to combat infiltration of white supremacist and neo-Nazi ideologies in law enforcement and uniformed services will directly impact individuals in these roles.
- Assigning FBI special agents or hate crimes liaisons to investigate hate crimes related to domestic terrorisim will transform field office priorities and resources.
Reasoning
- The interviews simulate a cross-section of individuals, including law enforcement officers, potential victims of domestic terrorism, and average citizens not directly affected by the policy.
- We're considering both direct and indirect impacts, such as changes in law enforcement practices and community safety.
- Each person represents different demographics and geographic areas to reflect the diverse impact of federal policies across the U.S.
Simulated Interviews
NYPD Officer (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As an officer, additional training is beneficial but can strain resources.
- The policy could improve our response to hate crimes, which is a current challenge.
- My concern is balancing these new demands with existing duties.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Community Activist (Chicago, IL)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A much-needed focus on white supremacist threats, which often go under-reported.
- Concerned about how this will affect marginalized communities in terms of police interactions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Federal Prosecutor (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy requires more rigorous reporting and analysis, which is critical in handling domestic terrorism cases.
- Our field will need to adapt quickly to these changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am glad to see a policy focusing on domestic terrorism and hate crimes.
- I worry about potential missteps in execution that could affect civil liberties.
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 |
School Teacher (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support policies that make schools safer from hate-related threats.
- Increased focus on domestic terrorism is encouraging, but I worry about its real-life impact.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Member of National Guard (Seattle, WA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy targets extremist infiltration, which is reassuring but may face implementation challenges.
- Training and resources will be beneficial for the Guard.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 21 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is a step in the right direction but might not address tangential hate crime issues fully.
- Curious to see how it unfolds in practice.
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 |
Retired Police Officer (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 66 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Glad to see a focus on combating terrorism domestically, an issue we've historically overlooked.
- There is a question in the law enforcement community about resource allocation.
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 | 6 | 6 |
Freelance Journalist (Dallas, TX)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased transparency and reporting on domestic terrorism is crucial.
- Journalists play a key role in ensuring the policy is implemented fairly.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Iowa)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems relevant for urban areas more than rural.
- I am generally supportive of anything that improves national safety, though my daily life is unchanged.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $32700000 (Low: $25000000, High: $40000000)
Year 2: $37000000 (Low: $28000000, High: $45000000)
Year 3: $41000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $50000000)
Year 5: $47000000 (Low: $37000000, High: $57000000)
Year 10: $57000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $69000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- Compliance costs for agencies involved, particularly regarding staff increases and training.
- The potential effects on communities and individuals who may be disproportionately targeted by enforcement measures.
- Efficacy of proposed measures in reducing instances of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.
- Long-term commitment required for consistent policy enforcement across federal and local levels.