Bill Overview
Title: Preserving the Readiness of our Armed Forces Act of 2022
Description: This bill provides that a member of the National Guard (or another reserve component) must maintain access to pay and benefits while a request for a religious or health accommodation is pending. Additionally, a member of an active or reserve component of the Armed Forces may not be involuntarily separated from the Armed Forces based solely on COVID-19 vaccination status until specified recruiting goals are achieved.
Sponsors: Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN]
Target Audience
Population: members of the United States Armed Forces
Estimated Size: 2100000
- The bill specifically targets members of the National Guard and other reserve components, as well as members of active components of the Armed Forces.
- Since the US Armed Forces include about 1.3 million active duty members and 800,000 reserve members, all of these personnel are relevant to consider for this bill.
- The bill also mentions vaccination status, which has been a significant issue during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Reasoning
- We need to select a representative sample from members of the National Guard and active duty personnel, both vaccinated and unvaccinated due to the policy's impacts.
- The diversity in roles within the military could influence how the policy is perceived: consider roles ranging from frontline deployment to administrative duties.
- Consider regions with differing vaccination rates to capture variability in the policy’s impact.
- The overall population impacted by this policy, 2.1 million, suggests we are simulating a representative rather than exhaustive cross-section.
- The budget constraints suggest more moderated increases in immediate wellbeing for most affected individuals.
Simulated Interviews
Active Duty - Engineer (California)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm relieved that I won't have to worry about losing my job while my exemption request is pending. It feels like a safety net.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
National Guard - Logistics (Texas)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't affect me directly because I'm vaccinated, but it reassures me about the fairness in treatment for my unvaccinated peers.
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 |
Reserve Component - Cybersecurity (Virginia)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy is a step in the right direction to protect rights without compromising our readiness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Active Duty - Military Police (Florida)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a lifeline. Without it, I might have been separated, and my family depends on that income.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
National Guard - Infantry (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy helps us focus on our mission without internal conflict over vaccination.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Reservist - Medical Corps (Ohio)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about readiness without vaccination, but I support fair treatment until alternatives are found.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Active Duty - Infantry (North Carolina)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing that my job is safe for now helps me focus on my duties and long-term career.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Active Duty - Intelligence (Georgia)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy is necessary for morale. We need to prevent good soldiers from leaving over these issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Navy, Part-time Reservist (Washington)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It won't impact me directly, but I know many who are affected. It's about fairness and protecting rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
National Guard - Engineer (Colorado)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy eases some of the stress on my family. We can plan a bit more securely now.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $31000000, High: $72000000)
Year 3: $54080000 (Low: $32040000, High: $74080000)
Year 5: $56243200 (Low: $33321600, High: $77123200)
Year 10: $62451200 (Low: $36921600, High: $86931200)
Year 100: $111102400 (Low: $65664000, High: $154492800)
Key Considerations
- Maintaining readiness involves ensuring no personnel are unfairly disqualified, directly impacting organizational strength.
- Broader policy impacts on public perception, particularly relating to vaccination status and health accommodations, could influence recruitment interests and community relations.
- Long-term implications of retention vs. recruitment could shift based on future global and technological military demands.