Bill Overview
Title: A bill to prohibit certain former employees of the intelligence community from providing certain services to governments of countries that are state sponsors of terrorism, the People's Republic of China, and the Russian Federation, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill prohibits certain former employees of any intelligence community element from providing services related to intelligence, military, or internal security to the government of China, Russia, or a country that is a state sponsor of terrorism. Generally, this restriction shall apply to any employee, including any contractor or detailee, who had a level of access to sensitive information such that the relevant intelligence community element determines that such restrictions are necessary.
Sponsors: Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]
Target Audience
Population: Former employees of the intelligence community with specific access
Estimated Size: 30000
- The intelligence community employs a large number of individuals who may have had access to sensitive information.
- Not all former employees will have had the necessary level of access to be restricted by this bill.
- This bill will affect former employees who are considering or are currently providing services to the specified countries or entities.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy largely includes former intelligence personnel with access to sensitive information. These individuals may consider contracting or consulting work post-employment, sometimes with foreign governments or entities.
- The policy aims to restrict potential security risks without overly disrupting the career pathways of former intelligence community employees who do not seek employment with foreign entities.
- The financial budget suggests the policy cover administrative costs and monitor compliance over the years, impacting a finite group primarily considering or enacting such specific post-service employment.
- The wellbeing scores provide insight into the subjective impact of the policy, capturing both direct career impacts and the perceived value of national security enhancements.
Simulated Interviews
Former Intelligence Analyst (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't plan on working with any foreign governments, so this policy doesn't affect me directly.
- It's important to keep our sensitive information secure.
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 Intelligence Officer (Maryland)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for such a policy, but it feels like an overreach.
- I'm retired, so this won't impact me, but it might limit consulting opportunities for others.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cybersecurity Consultant (California)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy's restrictive nature could potentially limit my future consulting options, especially in emerging markets.
- It adds a layer of control that could be a hassle if I ever consider foreign work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Security Adviser (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm early in my career and wasn't planning international work, so the policy is not a concern.
- It's reassuring to see the country focus on keeping information secure.
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 |
Independent Contractor (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy affects me directly as I'm considering a potential consultancy role abroad.
- The implementation may make it more difficult to secure these types of contracts which could be a financial blow.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Retired Field Agent (Florida)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm retired, so these restrictions don't apply to me, but it's crucial for national security.
- The balance between security and individual freedom in such policies needs careful consideration.
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 |
International Consultant (Illinois)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might restrict my ability to offer services to certain clients, impacting revenue.
- I see why the policy is necessary, but it is limiting for those with international work portfolios.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Consultant (Colorado)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I work domestically, so no immediate impact on my wellbeing.
- The scope of the policy seems necessary for national security.
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 |
Data Analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might affect potential international roles that interest me.
- Maintaining security is vital, but this could limit career flexibility for many of us.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Defense Consultant (New Mexico)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could alter my ability to secure work abroad significantly.
- It might be challenging to adjust if my work was focused in one of the restricted countries.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $72000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $74000000)
Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $34000000, High: $78000000)
Year 10: $64000000 (Low: $38000000, High: $86000000)
Year 100: $80000000 (Low: $48000000, High: $108000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill's enforcement requires careful monitoring of former employees' interactions with foreign governments, posing logistical and privacy challenges.
- Impact on individual employment opportunities must be balanced against national security concerns.