Bill Overview
Title: National Guard Promotion Improvement Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses the promotion process for members of the National Guard.
Sponsors: Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the National Guard
Estimated Size: 440000
- The National Guard is a reserve component of the United States Armed Forces, with units in each state, three territories, and the District of Columbia.
- Promotion processes would primarily affect active and aspiring National Guard members who are part of this military reserve force.
- There are about 440,000 National Guard members across the different components as of recent data.
- Promotion adjustments can impact career trajectories, salaries, and job satisfaction of these service members.
Reasoning
- The National Guard Promotion Improvement Act impacts around 440,000 potential National Guard members, focusing on improvements in their promotion process.
- A key challenge is ensuring the improvements adhere to budget constraints—limited to $70 million in the first year and $265 million over ten years.
- The policy directly affects job satisfaction, career progression, and financial compensation for members, but may not drastically affect others outside this group.
- To provide a balance, I will simulate interviews with a mix of National Guard members and civilians, highlighting the direct and indirect impacts.
- I must limit the impact ratings for civilians as the policy primarily targets National Guard personnel.
- To cover a range of perspectives, I'll simulate interviews from different geographical areas and demographics.
Simulated Interviews
National Guard Soldier (Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this new policy makes promotions more transparent and merit-based.
- Better promotion processes means more motivation for us servicemembers.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
National Guard Lieutenant (California)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Advancement in the National Guard has been slow; any steps to expedite and improve the process are welcome.
- This policy might help retain talent.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
National Guard Colonel (Florida)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Consistency and clarity in promotions are always positives.
- This act reflects a clear acknowledgment of the intricacies in guard promotions.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Civilian (New York)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I couldn’t get promoted and left; this policy would have been helpful when I was serving.
- I'm curious if it will affect re-engagement with veterans like me.
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 |
National Guard Major (Alabama)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- For someone nearing retirement, it might have limited impact, but it could improve morale.
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 |
National Guard Recruit (Illinois)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Good promotion policies mean better early career motivation.
- I’m keen to see how this policy can shape my future outlook.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Civilian (Washington)
Age: 51 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Promotions are key to a healthy defense force, but this doesn't directly impact me.
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 |
University Student (Virginia)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m currently undecided, but a fair promotion process is something I'd consider strongly.
- Policies like this could encourage more to enlist.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Civil Engineer (Nevada)
Age: 37 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved promotion processes help those whom my work supports but isn’t directly related to my job.
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 |
National Guard Specialist (Georgia)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Specialists often feel sidelined in promotions, so a clearer path is beneficial.
- I’m looking forward to seeing what changes this brings.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 5: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring the new promotion system aligns with both state and federal military regulations and practices.
- Potential short-term disruption during transition to new promotion systems and processes.
- Need for training and communication strategies to ensure smooth implementation.