Bill Overview
Title: HARD ROCK Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes the National Defense Stockpile Manager (the Department of Defense) to take certain actions to address industrial base shortfalls.
Sponsors: Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: People dependent on industries of critical minerals and defense
Estimated Size: 25000000
- The bill's title suggests it focuses on industries related to critical mineral resources, particularly those used in defense production.
- The Department of Defense is authorized to address industrial base shortfalls, indicating an impact on industries that supply or use minerals essential for defense.
- Workers in mining, mineral processing, and associated industries may experience changes due to redirected funding or new initiatives under the bill.
- Communities reliant on mining and defense industries might see economic impacts, potentially affecting family and community wellbeing.
- If stockpile strategies change, there could be effects on global mineral supply and pricing, influencing countries and industries dependent on those resources.
Reasoning
- The HARD ROCK Act primarily impacts industries related to mining and mineral processing, especially those tied to defense. However, the general population may not feel a direct impact unless they are employed within or dependent on these industries.
- Given the U.S.'s substantial mining activities and defense manufacturing sectors, approximately 25 million Americans in related industries could be affected according to our target estimates.
- To simulate diverse impacts, we'll include workers directly involved in mining and mineral processing, auxiliary occupations that support these industries, and some community members who may be indirectly affected, despite not directly working in these sectors.
- The maximum budget constraints ensure that the policy selectively targets critical industrial base shortfalls. Therefore, not everyone in the industry will feel high impacts; effects will likely vary by regional and industrial specifics.
- By simulating a mix of interviews, we'll see variations in perceived wellbeing changes reflecting job security, community economic health, and strategic industry strength.
Simulated Interviews
Mining Engineer (Butte, Montana)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems like a good step for securing our national resources and ensuring job stability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Factory Worker in Defense Manufacturing (Birmingham, Alabama)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy will secure our materials supply and help keep my job safe until I retire.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Mineral Processing Supervisor (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act could bolster production and perhaps lead to expansions, which is great for career advancement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Geologist for a Federal Agency (Reno, Nevada)
Age: 52 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Supportive of the initiative but concerned about execution and environmental impacts.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Research Scientist in Battery Technology (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could ease supply issues, but we need to stay ahead with respectful sourcing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired Defense Contractor (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's crucial for national security, but I don't expect much personal impact.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Environmental Lawyer (Houston, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Concerned about potential disregard for environmental protections.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Data Analyst in Mining Sector (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopeful that increased investment will enhance data-driven sustainability in mining operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Maintenance Worker in Manufacturing (Scranton, Pennsylvania)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate any moves that secure jobs in our industry, but unclear on direct benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Economics Professor (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 44 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Analytically supportive, though worried about environmental and socio-economic impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $210000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $260000000)
Year 3: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $270000000)
Year 5: $240000000 (Low: $190000000, High: $290000000)
Year 10: $260000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $310000000)
Year 100: $260000000 (Low: $210000000, High: $310000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential environmental and regulatory challenges associated with mining and mineral processing expansion.
- Effectiveness of the Department of Defense's procurement strategies on market stability and pricing.
- The balance between federal spending increases and anticipated economic growth or tax revenues.