Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/4856

Bill Overview

Title: SEVER Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the President to deny an individual's admission to the United States as a representative to the United Nations if the individual is subject to sanctions regarding Iran and may pose a threat to U.S. national security interests.

Sponsors: Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]

Target Audience

Population: Iranian individuals subject to sanctions representing at the UN

Estimated Size: 0

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Policy Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 34 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a prudent measure to ensure national security.
  • It aligns with U.S. interests to prevent sanctioned individuals from gaining undue influence.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Journalist (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could have diplomatic repercussions depending on the international response.
  • While it addresses security concerns, it must be balanced with diplomatic considerations.

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 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Diplomat (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The SEVER Act is an essential tool for maintaining diplomatic decorum and security.
  • It sets a clear boundary on who can represent potentially hostile nations like Iran.

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

Oil Industry Executive (Houston, TX)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Security policies like these can impact our business strategies.
  • While not directly affecting us, the geopolitical implications are noteworthy.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

UN Program Consultant (Chicago, IL)

Age: 53 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might complicate our work if it leads to increased tensions.
  • It's crucial for ongoing dialogue to prevent diplomatic fallout.

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 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Retired (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It is a strategic move but may lack transparency on how it's applied.
  • Critical that the policy does not become a blanket diplomatic barrier.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Graduate Student (Boston, MA)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The legal frameworks set by such policies are intriguing from a human rights perspective.
  • It opens discussions on the balance between security and rights of representation.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Attorney (Miami, FL)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We must ensure such policies do not infringe on legitimate business interests.
  • Legal challenges could arise based on the interpretation of 'threat'.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Tech Startup Founder (Seattle, WA)

Age: 31 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like the SEVER Act increase demand for security solutions.
  • It's a motivator to innovate, though it does not change everyday life much.

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

Community Organizer (Portland, OR)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 17/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy seems unrelated to my work with immigrants but raises general concerns about arbitrary exclusions.
  • Awareness of policy evolution and its implications is crucial.

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 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)

Year 2: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)

Year 3: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)

Year 5: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)

Year 10: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)

Year 100: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $700000)

Key Considerations