Bill Overview
Title: Defense Production Oversight Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes Congress to nullify the President's invocation of authorities under the Defense Production Act of 1950 by enacting a joint resolution disapproving of the invocation. It also outlines procedures for the consideration of the joint resolution. (The Defense Production Act of 1950 confers upon the President a broad set of authorities to influence domestic industry in order to provide essential materials and goods needed for the national defense.)
Sponsors: Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS]
Target Audience
Population: People involved or reliant on industries influenced by the Defense Production Act of 1950
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The Defense Production Act of 1950 affects industries that produce materials and goods crucial for national defense.
- Should the President's invocation under the Defense Production Act be nullified by Congress, industries may experience changes in production orders or requirements.
- Workers within industries producing for defense purposes may be indirectly impacted by any changes in production flows.
- Companies and corporations involved in supplying goods for national defense would experience the most direct impact.
- Consumers could be affected if the changes in production under the Defense Production Act affect the availability or pricing of certain goods.
Reasoning
- The policy enables congressional oversight over the President's use of the Defense Production Act, which could result in changes to the production of defense-related materials, potentially affecting workers and industries reliant on these production orders.
- Only a subset of the population will be directly affected, particularly those working within industries supplying to the defense sector.
- It's important to consider that while some individuals may experience personal impacts, such as changes in job security or demand for their products, others in unaffected industries may notice no changes.
- Given the broad scope but focused impact of the policy, a mix of interviews from various backgrounds related to defense industries can illustrate the range of possible outcomes.
- With a budget limitation, the scope of the policy is expected to be highly focused rather than wide-reaching, impacting primarily direct stakeholders.
Simulated Interviews
Steel Worker (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am a bit worried that any changes might reduce the demand for our products.
- I hope this doesn't mean job cuts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Electronics Manufacturer (Texas)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As long as the orders keep coming, I'm not too concerned.
- There might be some shifts in demand, but I'm confident we'll adapt.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Tech Engineer (California)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changes could slow down projects if there are more uncertainties around funding.
- Overall, I think we'll manage fine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 10 |
Defense Contractor Executive (New York)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could streamline new directives if managed well, but there is a risk of bureaucratic slow-downs.
- We'll have to keep a close eye on any legislative changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 10 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Union Representative (Ohio)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My main concern is protecting the jobs of our union members.
- We'll have to negotiate carefully if order volumes decline.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Logistics Coordinator (Illinois)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Potential changes may increase bureaucracy in scheduling.
- I trust our team can handle it, but it'll require focus.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Energy Sector Engineer (Alabama)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any disruption in the directives might delay projects.
- Staying prepared for changes is essential.
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 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Commercial Supplier (Florida)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy doesn't reduce material orders.
- We may see tougher competition.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Academic Researcher (Colorado)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an interesting development that could have significant ramifications for how quickly policies can be implemented.
- For researchers like me, it’s a positive opportunity to study the impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Pennsylvania)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm wary of what could happen if orders slow down, but we've survived ups and downs before.
- We'll likely need to diversify more.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5100000 (Low: $3060000, High: $7140000)
Year 3: $5202000 (Low: $3121200, High: $7282800)
Year 5: $5412080 (Low: $3247248, High: $7576912)
Year 10: $5965740 (Low: $3579444, High: $8352036)
Year 100: $96896484 (Low: $58137891, High: $135655077)
Key Considerations
- The implementation of the Act would require coordination across legislative and executive branches to manage procedural outcomes efficiently.
- Industries affected by the Defense Production Act may react variably based on perceived changes in administrative processes.
- Legal and judicial challenges could arise concerning the scope of Congressional oversight under this Act.