Bill Overview
Title: A bill to extend by 19 days the authorization for the special assessment for the Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund.
Description: This act extends until September 30, 2022, the special assessment of $5,000 on nonindigent persons or entities convicted of certain offenses involving sexual abuse or human trafficking. Currently, the special assessment expires on September 11, 2022.
Sponsors: Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]
Target Audience
Population: Victims of Human Trafficking and Sexual Abuse
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill extends a special assessment related to convictions for human trafficking and sexual abuse by 19 days.
- Victims of human trafficking and sexual abuse may see indirect impacts through increased availability of resources funded by these assessments.
- Individuals or entities convicted of human trafficking or related offenses will directly be impacted financially due to this extended assessment period.
Reasoning
- The primary individuals directly affected by this policy extension are those convicted of the specified offenses, as they will continue to be required to pay the assessment for an additional 19 days. However, the funds generated by these assessments can indirectly assist victims of human trafficking and sexual abuse by potentially providing more resources for their recovery and support through funded programs.
- Given the limited additional duration for the policy (19 days extension), it is anticipated that the impact will be relatively minor in terms of the funds generated and the corresponding assistance to victims within the short span. However, it may still have symbolic importance and provide slight financial contributions to victim support programs.
- This analysis assumes a modest estimation of individuals impacted due to the relatively short policy extension. The budget constraints suggest only a small amount of additional support can be allocated to victim resources as compared to larger-scale, longer-term policy initiatives.
Simulated Interviews
Social Worker (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.58 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Every bit of funding helps enhance the resources available for rehabilitating survivors.
- A 19-day extension might not generate substantial funds, but it's a step in the right direction.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Former convict (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The extension means more financial burden on those in prison systems.
- I understand the intention but it feels like squeezing more out of offenders who often have limited ability to pay.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Advocate for survivors (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any extension that funds more resources for survivors is positive.
- Even small funding increases can make a difference.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Tech Industry Employee (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Unaware of the policy specifics, but supports efforts to aid trafficking victims.
- Curious about how funds are allocated and utilized effectively.
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 |
Police Officer (Houston, TX)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.5 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Assessments like this indicate a continual effort to address serious crimes.
- The financial burden on convicted offenders is necessary to fund victim support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Human Rights Attorney (Miami, FL)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy extension is minimal but symbolically keeps crimes in focus.
- The financial impact on these offenders contributes to restorative justice broadly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Judge (Chicago, IL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This extension serves as a message against leniency for severe crimes.
- The effect is likely more symbolic than financially impactful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Learning about such policies reinforces belief in systemic justice.
- It's a minor extension but every little helps in long-term systemic change.
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 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Financial Analyst (Boston, MA)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The financial implications are minor relative to whole system but relevant.
- Skeptical about the usage efficiency of additional funds collected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
NGO Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any extension support for funding is beneficial but perhaps too small to see a real change.
- Keeps morale up in anti-trafficking campaigns by showing ongoing legislative efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000 (Low: $150000, High: $250000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The extension is temporary and limited to 19 days, impacting the scale of financial impact.
- The policy is expected to generate revenue rather than cost, as it extends a financial penalty.
- Administrative costs may slightly reduce net revenue gains but are expected to remain minimal.