Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4720

Bill Overview

Title: Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2023

Description: This bill provides FY2023 appropriations for the legislative branch, including the Senate and joint items such as the Joint Economic Committee, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Office of the Attending Physician, and the Office of Congressional Accessibility Services. In addition, the bill provides FY2023 appropriations for the Capitol Police; the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights; the Congressional Budget Office; the Architect of the Capitol; the Library of Congress, including the Congressional Research Service and the Copyright Office; the Government Publishing Office; the Government Accountability Office; Congressional Office for International Leadership Fund; and the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service Training and Development. (Pursuant to the longstanding practice of each chamber of Congress determining its own requirements, funds for the House of Representatives are not included in the Senate bill.) The bill also sets forth requirements and restrictions for using funds provided by this bill.

Sponsors: Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI]

Target Audience

Population: American citizens

Estimated Size: 329500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Librarian at the Library of Congress (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the funding is essential for maintaining our resources and programming.
  • The Library of Congress is a critical source of information for policy makers and the public.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Capitol Police Officer (Maryland)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The appropriations are critical to ensuring we have the resources needed to perform our job effectively.
  • It influences our training, equipment, and even personnel wellbeing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Financial Analyst at Government Accountability Office (New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Funding ensures we can conduct thorough audits and oversight, which ultimately influences national budget efficiency.
  • Our work impacts public trust and government efficiency.

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 6
Year 20 9 6

Small Business Owner (California)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I don't see immediate benefits, I understand that well-funded Congress operations can indirectly impact small businesses like mine.
  • Improved government efficiency often translates to better economic conditions for us.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Researcher (Illinois)

Age: 39 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The appropriations ensure continued access to high-quality resources, which is vital for my work.
  • It solidifies the support system for researchers nationwide.

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 9 6

Retired (Florida)

Age: 58 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope these appropriations lead to better legislative processes, but as a retiree, it doesn't directly impact my day-to-day life.
  • Ensuring well-functioning legislative branches are fundamental, but I remain skeptical.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Teacher (Texas)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Funding the legislative branch strengthens democracy, providing my students with more accurate materials for learning.
  • I appreciate the indirect support towards education.

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 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Architect of the Capitol Staff (Ohio)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Appropriations determine how effectively we can maintain and improve the Capitol grounds.
  • Funding reflects both our resource availability and job security.

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 5
Year 20 8 5

College Student (Arizona)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This budget helps sustain institutions that provide critical information for students like me.
  • I appreciate having access to legislative documents and information.

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 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Journalist (Georgia)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reliable funding of these offices means more accurate reportage and knowledge for the public.
  • Our journalism benefits from comprehensive and prompt government data.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $329500000 (Low: $300000000, High: $350000000)

Year 2: $335000000 (Low: $305000000, High: $355000000)

Year 3: $340000000 (Low: $310000000, High: $360000000)

Year 5: $350000000 (Low: $320000000, High: $370000000)

Year 10: $380000000 (Low: $350000000, High: $400000000)

Year 100: $600000000 (Low: $550000000, High: $650000000)

Key Considerations