Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4615

Bill Overview

Title: A bill to require the Secretary of Defense to seek to engage with the Ministry of Defence of the Kingdom of Jordan for the purpose of expanding cooperation of military cybersecurity activities, and for other purposes.

Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Department of State, to expand military cybersecurity cooperation with Jordan. These efforts may include (1) bilateral cybersecurity training activities; (2) establishing a regional cybersecurity center; (3) actively defending military networks, infrastructure, and systems; (4) eradicating malicious cyber activity; and (5) leveraging U.S. commercial and military cybersecurity technology and services.

Sponsors: Sen. Rounds, Mike [R-SD]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in and impacted by U.S.-Jordan cybersecurity cooperation

Estimated Size: 50000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Cybersecurity Analyst (Falls Church, VA)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy allows me to engage in more meaningful work and secure my job position.
  • It feels good to contribute towards enhanced security measures.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased contracts with the government are beneficial for my company.
  • While exciting, my day-to-day tasks remain mostly unchanged.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 4

Diplomat (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.5 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy enhances the strategic ties we have been nurturing in the region.
  • Though not directly impacted, the added layer of cooperation improves morale.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Small Business Owner (Austin, TX)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More opportunities may arise for my business to enter joint projects.
  • Policy seems beneficial but doesn't dramatically change the growth trajectory.

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 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 5

Cybersecurity Training Manager (Chicago, IL)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy provides an avenue for growth and innovation in training methods.
  • I feel a more sustained trajectory in my career path.

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 10 8
Year 10 10 7
Year 20 9 7

Defense Policy Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns with cooperative defense strategies I've advocated.
  • Little day-to-day change but pleasing to see strategic policy work realized.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Military Officer in Cyber Defense (Colorado Springs, CO)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This boosts mission success probability significantly, a key concern of mine.
  • Feelings of job stability and importance are enhanced.

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 8 6

IT Professional (Seattle, WA)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy feels somewhat distant from my job but reassuring in a broader sense.
  • Security abroad indirectly improves domestic confidence in cybersecurity.

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 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 4

Graduate Student in International Relations (Boston, MA)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.5 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Provides a valuable case study for my thesis.
  • Positively highlights U.S. role in international cybersecurity collaboration.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Civilian Contractor (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Opens up possibilities for international assignments, which I find rewarding.
  • Not certain of immediate effects, but optimistic about future engagement.

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 7 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)

Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $105000000)

Year 3: $85000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $110000000)

Year 5: $90000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $115000000)

Year 10: $95000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $120000000)

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

Key Considerations