Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4331

Bill Overview

Title: Strengthen Taiwan's Security Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop, with close consultation with Taiwan's Ministry of Defense, a plan for the United States to use existing authorities to expedite military assistance to Taiwan as necessary for Taiwan to defend itself against certain military actions, such as an amphibious assault, a missile attack, or a blockade. The bill also requires DOD to report annually on the ability of the United States to support Taiwan's defense capabilities.

Sponsors: Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL]

Target Audience

Population: People living in Taiwan

Estimated Size: 50000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Software Engineer (San Diego, California)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think strengthening Taiwan's defense is crucial given the geopolitical tensions.
  • I work on software that supports defense systems; this policy could mean more projects and job security for me.

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 8 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 6

Military Strategist (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill will significantly impact my workload, given my involvement in East Asian defense strategies.
  • I believe it will strengthen U.S. allies and promote stability in the region.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Financial Analyst (New York, New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like these tend to increase geopolitical stability, which can be positive for markets, but there's also the risk of escalation.
  • It's a mixed bag—good for some sectors, risky for others.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Retired Military Officer (Honolulu, Hawaii)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm concerned about the ongoing tensions in East Asia and the potential for conflict.
  • I support any efforts to strengthen alliances in the region—like this policy.

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 6 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Graduate Student (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 26 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a student, I find it fascinating to see real-world applications of strategies I've studied.
  • This policy demonstrates proactive defense cooperation, which aligns with some of our theoretical discussions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Tech Entrepreneur (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any policy that strengthens security could mean more business and clients for tech solutions.
  • Interested in how this might change the dynamics and demand for cybersecurity tools.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Officer in the Reserves (Austin, Texas)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Personally, this policy means training commitments and funding could increase.
  • I think it’s necessary but wonder about the long-term implications.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

High School Teacher (New Orleans, Louisiana)

Age: 46 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This gives me more material to discuss in class, especially regarding recent geopolitical shifts.
  • It's a good case study for how policies abroad can affect us.

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 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 6

Political Analyst (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is consistent with ongoing U.S. efforts to stabilize East Asia—a region of strategic importance.
  • It raises questions about future diplomatic relations with China.

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 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Retired (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I worry about increased military spending and its impact on domestic programs.
  • However, supporting allies is important for maintaining global balance.

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 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $600000000)

Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $470000000, High: $620000000)

Year 3: $540000000 (Low: $490000000, High: $640000000)

Year 5: $580000000 (Low: $520000000, High: $680000000)

Year 10: $650000000 (Low: $580000000, High: $750000000)

Year 100: $900000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1100000000)

Key Considerations