Bill Overview
Title: Combating Obstructive National Security Underreporting of Legitimate Threats (CONSULT) Act of 2022
Description: This bill directs the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to develop governmentwide procurement policy and guidance to mitigate and eliminate organizational conflicts of interest relating to contracts involving national security or foreign policy. Specifically, contracts with China and Russia, and for consulting services relating to crimes against humanity, are highlighted as being of particular concern.
Sponsors: Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: People working for federal contractors dealing with national security and foreign policy.
Estimated Size: 1500000
- The bill focuses on government procurement policy with an emphasis on national security concerns, suggesting that it affects entities involved in bidding for government contracts related to national security.
- The bill specifically addresses conflicts of interest related to foreign entities, such as China and Russia, indicating impacts on firms with ties or operations connected to these countries.
- The development of procurement policy impacts U.S.-based federal contractors, especially those in the defense and consulting sectors dealing with national security and foreign policy.
- Contracts involving crimes against humanity are mentioned, suggesting a focus on firms that provide consultancy in international law, human rights, and geopolitical analysis.
- The target population considers employees of companies Government contractors potentially affected by this legislation.
Reasoning
- The CONSULT Act affects primarily those working in government contracting, especially related to national security.
- Given the budget, the impact on individual well-being may be modest but more significant in specialized sectors.
- Not all contractors will be affected equally; those with ties to China and Russia or involved in certain consulting roles are more impacted.
- Since the policy pertains to conflict of interest, it may create job opportunities or losses depending on compliance requirements.
Simulated Interviews
Defense Contractor Analyst (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I welcome any move that strengthens national security compliance.
- There might be increased workload initially to adjust to new policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Consultant in Human Rights Law (California)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might limit my business prospects if clients reduce their scopes.
- It's crucial to protect against conflicts of interest, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
IT Specialist for Federal Contractor (Texas)
Age: 39 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our work directly aligns with the national security interests discussed.
- I foresee more rigorous security checks which may increase stress initially but will strengthen our processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Foreign Policy Consultant (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It might mean losing some clients with Russian interests.
- We need to pivot towards sectors unaffected by these policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Compliance Officer (Maryland)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Strengthening compliance frameworks is overdue.
- There will be costs initially, but long-term benefits will outweigh them.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Lobbyist for Defense Companies (Washington D.C.)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could complicate my work in the short term if contractors adjust their strategies.
- Encourages accountability and transparency, which is beneficial in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Federal Contracting Officer (Florida)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There will be additional oversight responsibilities.
- The policy should help eliminate risky contracts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Legal Advisor for International Contracts (Illinois)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our clients may be wary of crossing lines defined by this policy.
- Positive that it formalizes and standardizes existing concerns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
National Security Analyst (Colorado)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This may increase demand for our insights.
- Should promote better alignment with international security trends.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
Researcher in International Relations (Ohio)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Funding may be redirected to support policy compliance.
- There might be new opportunities for research aligned with policy priorities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $5000000)
Year 2: $3500000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4500000)
Year 3: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $4000000)
Year 5: $2500000 (Low: $1500000, High: $3500000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $3000000)
Key Considerations
- The precise impact of procurement policy adjustments is challenging to forecast due to varying implementation strategies across federal agencies.
- Industry compliance and adaptation speed are crucial factors in determining the long-term success and impact of the policy measures.