Bill Overview
Title: Federal Contracting for Peace and Security Act
Description: This bill requires executive agencies to terminate their contracts with entities conducting business operations in territory internationally recognized as Russia, with certain exceptions. This requirement ends when Russia takes steps to restore the safety, sovereignty, and condition of Ukraine.
Sponsors: Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]
Target Audience
Population: People employed by U.S. federal contractors with business operations in Russia
Estimated Size: 5000
- This bill impacts companies currently holding federal contracts that have business operations in Russia.
- Contractors making good faith efforts to exit Russian business operations may be exempt, reducing immediate impacts.
- U.S. Government consular operations in Russia are exempt from this bill, minimizing government function disruptions.
- Businesses that are authorized by OFAC or BIS to operate under sanctions would not be in immediate breach of contract under this bill.
- Operations that benefit Ukraine or serve humanitarian needs are also exempt, suggesting special targeting of other business areas in Russia.
Reasoning
- Targeting a subset of the workforce in federal contractors that operate in Russia limits impact to a minority of overall employees.
- Operations either aiding Ukraine, serving humanitarian purposes, or within sanctioned exceptions are not likely to disrupt U.S. personnel, focusing changes on other sectors.
- Initial effects will be limited among contractors actively disengaging from Russian operations, where budgetary constraints may allow for contractual renegotiations or limited workforce restructuring.
- The policy primarily affects businesses directly, not individuals, thus mitigating personal financial risks unless layoffs occur due to contract losses.
- By understanding the common profiles within this specialized field, one can gauge the extent and variation of personal impacts.
Simulated Interviews
Contract Manager (Washington D.C.)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems well-intentioned to support Ukraine, but it could disrupt our business and lead to layoffs if not properly managed.
- There might be some opportunities to pivot our resources to other regions but that needs careful strategic planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
IT Specialist (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about the shift in workload, but I think it's possible to redirect my skills to other projects within the company.
- If the transition is smooth, this policy shouldn't impact me negatively over the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see initiatives supporting Ukraine, but it's uncertain how much this will alter our projects.
- I hope we can transition smoothly to other market needs identified by our strategic department.
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 | 10 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 10 |
Business Analyst (Austin, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could lead to a restructuring within our company if contracts are lost or not renewed.
- I'm worried about the job security and hope strategies are in place to manage these changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Civil Engineer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Collaborations in other regions might need to supplement the loss from Russian projects if this policy passes.
- The company has been diversifying, which might mitigate impacts on my role. I'm optimistic but vigilant.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Marketing Manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.5 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy is manageable for us; we should be able to adjust without major issues.
- We might even find new opportunities in different markets due to changes in focus and client interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 10 |
Operations Director (Boston, MA)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This may force our department to re-evaluate supply chains, which could be costly and time-consuming.
- Job security could fluctuate depending on how effectively we coordinate these strategic shifts.
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 |
Financial Analyst (Houston, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Depending on how our company diversifies, the impact might be negligible for my role.
- I anticipate some budget reallocation but not a direct impact on my career path.
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 | 10 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 10 |
Legal Advisor (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could increase the demand for legal reassessment of policies and compliance requirements.
- I'm optimistic, as it could lead to an expansion of my consultancy services if adjusted carefully.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Business Development Manager (Miami, FL)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could necessitate shifts in new client engagement strategies, particularly if the pivot requires new regional focus.
- Overall, I am hopeful this policy will prompt beneficial realignment, though not without temporary hurdles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $12000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $16000000)
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
- Monitoring compliance and enforcing contract terminations could require significant administrative resources.
- Re-procurement of services from alternative vendors could lead to temporary cost increases.
- The exemptions provided could limit the immediate impact on certain federal operations or contractor functions, particularly those authorized by OFAC or involved in humanitarian efforts.
- Conditional reinstatement upon Russia's compliance introduces uncertainty in duration and impact.