Bill Overview
Title: No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act
Description: This bill establishes that any convention or agreement on pandemic-related issues reached by the World Health Assembly (WHA) pursuant to a specified negotiating body shall be deemed to be a treaty requiring the advice and consent of the Senate. Specifically, this bill applies to any international instrument negotiated by the intergovernmental negotiating body established by the WHA in December 2021 to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.
Sponsors: Sen. Johnson, Ron [R-WI]
Target Audience
Population: Global population potentially affected by international pandemic preparedness treaties
Estimated Size: 331000000
- This bill affects how the United States interacts with international agreements on pandemic preparedness negotiated by the World Health Assembly.
- The decision would directly impact US governance by requiring Senate approval for treaties, potentially affecting the implementation of international pandemic measures in the US.
- Indirectly, it impacts Americans by potentially influencing the speed and manner in which pandemic preparedness measures are adopted in the US, which could affect public health during global pandemics.
Reasoning
- The policy is primarily political and affects how international health agreements are processed in the United States, which makes its direct impact on individual well-being somewhat indirect.
- Cost considerations would typically be administrative as the bill requires Senate processes for treaty consent, which doesn't directly allocate funds for public well-being or immediate services.
- The potential impact comes from the longer-term implementation of international health measures which could be delayed or altered due to the need for Senate approval.
- Considering the budget constraints ($2 million in year 1 and $20 million over 10 years), the bill's financial impact on individuals is expected to be negligible as it's focused on procedural governance rather than direct service provision.
- The population considered here includes policy influencers, healthcare professionals, and the general populace who may be indirectly affected by how pandemic preparedness is handled.
Simulated Interviews
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill introduces additional bureaucracy, potentially delaying crucial pandemic preparedness stages.
- Senate consent could lead to increased political debates that impede quick decision-making during pandemics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Pandemic decisions should be thorough, so I see the value in additional oversight.
- However, I worry it might slow aid during the next pandemic.
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 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Public Health Official (New York, NY)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Senate approval might slow down the process but can lead to more conclusive agreements.
- The impact will depend on the Senate's willingness to act swiftly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Medical Resident (Houston, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- International collaboration is crucial, and delay might worsen healthcare response times.
- Senate approval makes the process less agile.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Environmental Scientist (Denver, CO)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Science should lead pandemic responses, not bureaucracy.
- Senate delay risks ineffective responses in real-time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Montgomery, AL)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm all for checks and balances, but this shouldn't slow help in times of need.
- Economic recovery from pandemics should be a priority.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tech solutions need quick government adaptation, not delay.
- This might slow tech response integration in healthcare.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Graduate Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Senate's involvement is important for democracy but could reduce urgency in responses.
- International treaties shouldn't be overly politicized during crises.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Retired Teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Senate approval is good for democratic processes, but timely action is sometimes necessary.
- Past delays in Senate can increase health risks during pandemics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Nurse (Seattle, WA)
Age: 49 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might delay crucial agreements, but Senate approval could legitimize action plans.
- Speed is crucial during health crises.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential for increased Senate workload dealing with international treaties, affecting legislative efficiency.
- Impact on international relations and goodwill, especially in crisis times when quick treaty adoption might be crucial.
- Legal and procedural complexities might arise, leading to unanticipated delays.