Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4346

Bill Overview

Title: Complete America’s Great Trails Act

Description: This bill allows a tax credit for the fair market value of any National Scenic Trail conservation contribution. The Department of the Interior must study and report on the efficacy of the tax credit in completing, extending, and increasing the number of National Scenic Trails and the feasibility and cost of making the credit refundable and transferable.

Sponsors: Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT]

Target Audience

Population: People interested or invested in the National Scenic Trails

Estimated Size: 900000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Landowner (Boulder, Colorado)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the Complete America's Great Trails Act could incentivize more people like me to donate land for trail conservation.
  • The tax credit makes the financial side of contributing land for trails more feasible.

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 6
Year 20 9 6

Hiking Enthusiast (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I won't directly benefit financially, better maintained and expanded trails will enhance my outdoor experiences.
  • This could lead to more people appreciating and visiting trails, which is great for advocacy.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Retired (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The idea of tax credits for trail conservation is good, but I don't see it changing my life significantly.
  • Perhaps my community will become more vibrant with increased tourists, which would be nice.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Environmental Activist (San Francisco, California)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a win for conservationists like myself, as it helps safeguard our trails.
  • I'm hopeful that this will lead to more awareness and support for preserving natural landscapes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small Business Owner (Charlotte, North Carolina)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If more people visit the trails due to improvements, it could indirectly benefit my business.
  • The policy sounds great for conservation, which aligns with my store's values.

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 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Park Ranger (Salt Lake City, Utah)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy supports efforts that I’m already a part of in maintaining and expanding trails.
  • Better funding for trails could improve my work conditions and effectiveness.

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 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Freelance Writer (Austin, Texas)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Expanded trails could provide more content for my writing and photography work.
  • Although I won't see direct financial benefits, the potential cultural benefits are exciting.

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 Teacher (Shelburne Falls, Massachusetts)

Age: 65 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this means increased preservation of the trails I love to walk on.
  • I may not benefit directly, but the policy seems like a good direction for public lands.

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 6 5

Local Government Official (Seattle, Washington)

Age: 40 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The economic potential with increased tourism due to better trails could benefit the community I serve.
  • Tax credits for conservation align with sustainable development goals I've been advocating.

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 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Software Developer (Tampa, Florida)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm happy to see support for environmental conservation tools, though it doesn't affect my daily life.
  • If trails improve, I might visit more often.

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $30000000)

Year 2: $22000000 (Low: $17000000, High: $33000000)

Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $35000000)

Year 5: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $40000000)

Year 10: $35000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $45000000)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations