Bill Overview
Title: Upholding the Inter-American Democratic Charter Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of State to develop and implement a strategy to uphold and strengthen the Inter-American Democratic Charter, which states that the peoples of the Americas have a right to democracy and their governments have an obligation to promote and defend it. The charter was adopted in 2001 by the member states of the Organization of American States (OAS), which includes all 35 independent countries of the Western Hemisphere. The strategy must include plans to (1) strengthen the integrity of electoral processes in the Americas; (2) counter the spread and amplification of disinformation and misinformation in the Americas; and (3) address threats to democratic governance posed by corruption, criminality, and the malign activities of nondemocratic and non-OAS countries such as China and Russia.
Sponsors: Sen. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ]
Target Audience
Population: People living in OAS member states
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The Inter-American Democratic Charter was adopted by all 35 member states of the Organization of American States, indicating that it potentially impacts the entire populations of these countries.
- The charter emphasizes the right to democracy, which implies that every individual living in these member countries is a beneficiary of the democratic initiatives, protections, and improvements outlined.
- The OAS includes countries from North, Central, and South America, as well as the Caribbean, meaning this impacts populations across the entire Western Hemisphere.
- Considering the broad objectives of strengthening electoral integrity, combating disinformation, and addressing corruption, all individuals within these societies may experience changes in their democratic environment.
- This bill indirectly addresses the influence of external actors like China and Russia, implying global geopolitical considerations that impact citizens.
- Given the universal nature of the discussed rights (democracy, anti-disinformation, etc.), almost every individual in these regions can be considered part of the target population.
Reasoning
- The policy has broad objectives that aim to enhance democratic structures and public trust across the Americas. In the US, this might translate into efforts to improve electoral transparency and reduce foreign misinformation impacts.
- Given the size of the budget, many US citizens might not feel immediate, direct benefits from the policy. The focus on strengthening systems might lead to perceived improvements in electoral integrity and governance, but these changes can take time to manifest and be recognized by individuals.
- Considering the widespread scope—combatting misinformation, corruption, electoral integrity—the impacts might be subtler, like increased trust in news sources or confidence in election results, which can slightly improve wellbeing scores.
- People from various demographic backgrounds should be represented because democracy, information, and governance impacts may resonate differently across age groups, occupations, and locations.
- Since the policy is not exclusive to the US and targets 35 OAS member states, the specific influence in the US is likely less pronounced compared to smaller states where US-led initiatives might play a larger relative role.
Simulated Interviews
Journalist (New York, NY)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a journalist, I'm optimistic about reducing misinformation but am skeptical about the scale of change given the budget.
- I hope this policy will strengthen trust in media across America's diverse communities.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
IT Specialist (Houston, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- IT security is crucial, especially against foreign misinformation. I believe the policy could bolster efforts in this space.
- While I expect minimal immediate impact personally, the policy could enhance national security, indirectly benefiting us all.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems like an extension of ongoing US efforts in the Western Hemisphere, which I'm familiar with from past policies.
- Supporting democratic principles is crucial, but I doubt it will dramatically change my retirement life or feelings.
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 |
Graduate Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy's focus on democratic integrity is well-aligned with my studies.
- It's a good sign that efforts are made to improve governance, which is promising from an academic perspective.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy might have indirect effects by stabilizing local governance and business conditions.
- I have a vested interest in any policy that could improve community trust and economic conditions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Civil Rights Activist (Washington, DC)
Age: 35 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm cautiously optimistic about the policy, though large-scale impact seems challenging given budget limitations.
- Steps towards transparency are good, but significant change will require persistent effort beyond just policy frameworks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Teacher (Denver, CO)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Educational materials could see improvement with the initiative to counter misinformation.
- I'm hopeful students will become more informed citizens over time with richer educational content.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Social Media Manager (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With the rise of social media, countering misinformation is absolutely crucial.
- I see potential for this policy to streamline some of our informational campaigns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Public Health Official (Seattle, WA)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving information integrity could positively impact public health communications, aiding our efforts.
- I see indirect benefits tied to how people perceive health information and news.
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 | 7 | 6 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 37 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- An interesting policy that could lead to innovations in tech solutions for elections.
- I'm keen to see if increased funding towards safeguarding democracy can spur technological advances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $73000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $76000000)
Year 5: $59000000 (Low: $48000000, High: $82000000)
Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $57000000, High: $95000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $140000000)
Key Considerations
- The broad scope of the strategy requires engaging diverse regions with varying political climates, affecting both cost and implementation complexity.
- Leveraging international partnerships within the OAS might allow for sharing resources and insights, potentially lowering costs.
- The policy's success depends heavily on other member states' cooperation and their respective domestic political scenarios.
- Geopolitical aspects, particularly concerning China and Russia, suggest potential needs for continuous adjustments and resource allocation to counterbalance non-allied interests.