Bill Overview
Title: Gang Activity Reporting Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Justice to report on gang activity, reporting, investigation, and prosecution.
Sponsors: Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: people living in communities with significant gang activity
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The bill affects individuals involved in gang activity, as the reporting may focus on their activities.
- Communities with active gang problems will be affected, as reports can lead to targeted law enforcement actions.
- Law enforcement agencies will be impacted by changes in reporting requirements.
- The local community members might be affected indirectly due to changes in policing and safety.
- If DOJ uses data for policy planning, communities may experience changes in policing and resources allocation.
- Researchers and policymakers will have more data for decision making and policy formulation.
Reasoning
- The population distribution for the interviews will consider the presence of gang activity across urban and suburban areas, as well as varying degrees of its impact on individuals directly involved, residents, and law enforcement.
- I will choose a diverse set of individuals who are either directly affected by gang activity, indirectly influenced by it, or part of the law enforcement or policy-making process that engages with gang-related concerns.
- It is viable to include individuals who are not in current danger but live in communities where gang activity might increase the likelihood of enforcement changes, thus impacting their well-being.
- Given the budget limits and the scale of the population involved, the policy's impact will range from low to high, affecting more strongly those directly related to, or involved with gangs, and those in communities with high crime rates attributed to gangs.
- The policy aims to better resource law enforcement agencies and shift community interactions, which can alter public safety,
- Wellbeing impacts will depend also on perceptions of safety changes, the effectiveness of law enforcement intervention as a result of new data, and the causal effect on gang dynamics. I’ve accounted for the variance in expectations and realities of policy implementation.
Simulated Interviews
Store Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could make my neighborhood safer as there might be increased police activity.
- I'm hopeful but also worried about potential racial profiling and increased tension.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Community Organizer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could bring more data which might help but needs to be paired with community programs.
- Worried about more policing instead of preventive measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Police Officer (New York, NY)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Enhances our ability to gather intelligence and act proactively.
- Bracing for the workload increase but hopeful about long-term impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
College Student (Detroit, MI)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am indifferent to the policy as my campus life feels detached from it.
- If it does reduce crime, it could improve area reputation and my peace of mind.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Software Developer (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My everyday life isn’t directly impacted, but any reduction in gang activity would probably improve my quality of life.
- Concern over potential increase in neighborhood tensions if law enforcement activities rise sharply.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Public Policy Analyst (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy creates important data points for further analysis and reform.
- Crucial to watch how data translates into actions on the ground.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
High School Teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A focused report could highlight areas needing educational interventions.
- Fear that increased policing could scare students away from attending school.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (Newark, NJ)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving safety could directly boost my business prospects.
- Concerned about increased security measures affecting customer footfall.
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 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Nurse (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased reporting might help address structural violence issues.
- Policies leading to more arrests can also overwhelm ER services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Academic Researcher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill can be a bridge to better understanding gang dynamics nationwide.
- Great potential for using data to support comprehensive community responses.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $13000000)
Year 2: $9000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $8500000 (Low: $5000000, High: $11500000)
Year 5: $8000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $11000000)
Year 10: $7500000 (Low: $4000000, High: $10500000)
Year 100: $7000000 (Low: $3500000, High: $10000000)
Key Considerations
- Ensuring privacy and security of the collected data is vital for community trust.
- The impact of additional reports on the workload of the DOJ and local agencies.
- Resources required for system implementation and training across the DOJ and local agencies.