Bill Overview
Title: North Korea Policy Oversight Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires additional reports and briefings related to North Korea. The Department of State shall periodically report to Congress on diplomatic engagement with and by North Korea. The bill contains various additional reporting requirements, such as for the President to report a detailed strategy for implementing certain policies related to achieving North Korea's denuclearization. The State Department shall brief Congress after each high-level U.S.-North Korea diplomatic talk. The President shall notify Congress no later than five days after entering into any agreement with North Korea related to North Korea's nuclear and missile program. The notice shall include the agreement and an assessment of the extent to which the State Department can verify North Korea's compliance with the agreement. The President shall also periodically report on North Korea's compliance with the agreement and other related matters.
Sponsors: Sen. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved or affected by US-North Korea diplomatic relations
Estimated Size: 200000
- The bill focuses on diplomatic engagement and denuclearization strategies related to North Korea.
- It mainly involves US government bodies, specifically the Department of State and Congress, in increased reporting and oversight activities.
- The emphasis on reporting and verifying compliance impacts individuals involved in US national security and foreign policy sectors.
- Direct impact on citizens is minimal as it is a foreign policy oversight and reporting bill.
Reasoning
- The policy is largely administrative and primarily impacts government officials and employees who work in foreign policy, national security, and military sectors.
- Given the small budget and focus on high-level diplomatic and military matters, direct impact on ordinary citizens is likely minimal, though some may feel security-related reassurance.
- Secondary impacts might include academic researchers, consultants, or technology providers involved in tracking compliance and reporting.
- The true benefit or drawbacks on civilian wellbeing are nebulous as they largely relate to broader national security and global stability concerns.
Simulated Interviews
Foreign Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy increases transparency which is beneficial for diplomatic analysis.
- Increased reporting helps us prepare for potential shifts in policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Engineer (California)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More oversight means more work for us developing tracking software.
- It's beneficial to have consolidated data on compliance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Professor of International Relations (New York)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better reporting enhances research effectiveness and accuracy.
- Greater clarity on diplomatic stances benefits academic discourse.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
State Department Official (Virginia)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increases workload but improves international accountability.
- The clarity of objectives helps in policy execution.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Military Spouse (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that aims to ensure peaceful diplomacy is reassuring.
- Unclear how this specific policy impacts daily life directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Military Officer (Hawaii)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A proactive oversight policy helps strategic military planning.
- It offers assurance on diplomatic fronts reducing potential conflict threats.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Diplomat (Florida)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This ensures diplomatic efforts are accountable.
- Implementing oversight is crucial for peace negotiations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Lobbyist (District of Columbia)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased reporting may influence legislative agendas and budgets.
- Dynamic changes provide new advocacy opportunities.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Colorado)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New data sources available for research will be beneficial.
- Impacts understanding of diplomatic processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Business Consultant (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such policies provide guidelines for risk assessments for businesses.
- The clarity reduces uncertainties in investment planning.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)
Key Considerations
- The scope of additional workload on existing staff at the State Department and necessity for new hires or overtime pay.
- Potential technological investments for enhanced verification processes in compliance assessments with international agreements, although it seems mainly operationally driven by people resources.
- Interaction and dependency on diplomatic activities with North Korea and other international players.
- Reliability and frequency of high-level meetings resulting in variable reporting workload intensity.