Bill Overview
Title: Civilian Conservation Center Enhancement Act of 2022
Description: This bill authorizes various activities in connection with Civilian Conservation Centers. For example, the Departments of Agriculture and of the Interior shall offer at Civilian Conservation Centers specialized training programs focused on (1) forestry and rangeland management, (2) wildland firefighting, or (3) any other topic related to the mission of the Forest Service or Interior or the public interest.
Sponsors: Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR]
Target Audience
Population: People enrolled in or working with Civilian Conservation Centers
Estimated Size: 200000
- Civilian Conservation Centers are facilities that provide education and vocational training to young people, often those from disadvantaged backgrounds.
- Enhancing these centers with specialized training programs in forestry, rangeland management, and wildland firefighting will benefit current and future enrollees by providing them with additional skills and employment opportunities.
- The Forest Service and the Department of the Interior are responsible for these centers, and therefore, their operations and staffing may also be impacted.
- The general public may see indirect benefits through improved conservation efforts and firefighting capabilities, impacting environmental quality and public safety.
Reasoning
- The targeted population is young and often comes from disadvantaged backgrounds; thus the policy's vocational training may significantly improve their job prospects.
- The impact of the policy on individuals already in related professions or those not in need of vocational training may be insignificant.
- With budget limitations, not all Civilian Conservation Centers can be expanded simultaneously, so regional differences in impact are likely.
- The indirect benefits of improved conservation and firefighting could affect public safety and environmental quality more broadly, although not captured in immediate wellbeing scores.
Simulated Interviews
Unemployed (West Virginia)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited about new training opportunities, especially in forestry. This could lead to a stable job.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Wildland Firefighter (California)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this is a great initiative but not directly beneficial to me since I'm already trained.
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 |
College Dropout (Montana)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Forest Service training could be a game changer for people like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (Oregon)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is directed more at young people starting out, but increased skills in the field benefits us all indirectly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
High School Student (Texas)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing such programs exist makes me more hopeful for following a forestry career.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Single Mother (Missouri)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I might consider training if it allows daycare options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Firefighter (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see increased support for firefighting, but it doesn't affect me now.
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 |
Construction Worker (Alabama)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If training is accessible and affordable, I'd consider joining.
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 |
Wildlife Photographer (Arizona)
Age: 33 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It could indirectly help by protecting more environments, which is beneficial for my work.
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 |
Student (Florida)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Expanding such programs provides much needed practical experience for students like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $46000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $75000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $90000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Key Considerations
- Continued investment in training can have multiplicative effects on the economy through increased skill levels and reduced unemployment.
- Coordination between federal departments is crucial for the smooth operation and effectiveness of the training programs.
- Potential cost overruns should be monitored closely, especially in infrastructure expansion.
- The impact on public safety and environmental management through enhanced firefighting and conservation efforts could extend benefits beyond measurable economic metrics.