Bill Overview
Title: Improving Digital Identity Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes the Improving Digital Identity Task Force to establish a government-wide effort to develop secure methods for governmental agencies to protect the privacy and security of individuals and support reliable, interoperable digital identity verification in the public and private sectors. The Government Accountability Office shall submit to Congress a report on the estimated potential savings, due to the increased adoption and widespread use of digital identification, of (1) the federal government from averted fraud, and (2) the U.S. economy and consumers from averted identity theft.
Sponsors: Sen. Sinema, Kyrsten [D-AZ]
Target Audience
Population: People who rely on digital identity verification systems
Estimated Size: 250000000
- The bill impacts individuals who interact with governmental agencies requiring identity verification, which is a substantial portion of the global population.
- The bill's proposed improvements to digital identity systems would resonate in countries with digital infrastructure capabilities, primarily impacting people in developed nations.
- Many people worldwide experience identity-related fraud or inefficiencies with current identity verification processes and would benefit from a more secure and reliable system.
- The global population increasingly relies on digital means for transactions and governmental interactions.
Reasoning
- The proposed policy impacts a large portion of the U.S. population, particularly those who frequently use digital identity systems for interactions with government agencies, financial institutions, and healthcare providers.
- Given the budget constraints, we need to assess how a $100 million and $700 million budget over ten years can realistically influence awareness and adoption rates, understanding that not all parts of the population will be impacted evenly or immediately.
- A spectrum of individual experiences is likely based on factors such as age, employment status, interaction frequency with digital identity verification processes, and predisposition to identity fraud risks.
- Younger and tech-savvy individuals or those in occupations requiring frequent digital verification are likely to experience greater, more immediate benefits.
- The anticipated reduction in identity theft could broadly enhance wellbeing, particularly if individuals have previously encountered issues with identity fraud.
Simulated Interviews
Financial Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy is long overdue. Having a secure digital identity method will help me trust online platforms more, especially after what happened last year.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy can drive innovation, but I'm worried about the privacy implications. Overall, I see the need for better digital identity security.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Freelance Graphic Designer (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a freelancer, having a secure and reliable digital identity verification will ease many of my transaction concerns with clients.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Healthcare Administrator (Miami, FL)
Age: 53 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this will make healthcare data more secure. It should've been implemented years ago.
- The risk of breaches scares people away from digital systems,
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Teacher (Boise, ID)
Age: 38 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As important as it is, if my access doesn't improve fast, the benefits might not reach me easily.
- I'm hopeful for future developments, but skeptical for now.
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 | 8 | 6 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm cautious but optimistic about the potential to reduce scams targeting seniors like me. I hope it truly works.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
University Student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing that my personal data is safer will make my online learning experience much smoother.
- I hope to see safe practices implemented on every platform I use.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing fraud through better digital identities could save me several headaches.
- I hope the implementation is fast and effective.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Digital Marketing Specialist (Denver, CO)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could help alleviate some security concerns when working remotely, especially as cyber threats increase.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Social Worker (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's necessary and good, but we also need to improve digital access to help my clients benefit from these changes.
- Privacy must remain a priority.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $125000000)
Year 2: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 3: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 5: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $75000000)
Year 100: $25000000 (Low: $0, High: $50000000)
Key Considerations
- Cost effectiveness will depend heavily on the expeditious and successful implementation of digital identity systems.
- Privacy and security measures need to be rigorously developed and maintained to avoid data breaches.
- Coordination between federal, state, and local governments as well as private sector partners is crucial for the broad success of the initiative.