Bill Overview
Title: A bill to authorize additional appropriations to increase the production of munitions and ammunition to deter Russian and Chinese aggression, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill authorizes, through the Department of Defense, additional support for Ukraine, acquiring munitions, and expansion of the defense industrial base.
Sponsors: Sen. Cotton, Tom [R-AR]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved in or affected by U.S. defense and deterrence efforts against Russia and China
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill primarily impacts those involved in the defense industry due to increased production demands.
- Military personnel may be affected as they may receive more resources for readiness and operations.
- Citizens of Ukraine will be directly impacted as the bill includes additional support for their defense against aggression.
- Countries that are U.S. allies may feel secondary impacts due to increased deterrence capabilities by the U.S.
- Indirect impact on countries engaged in tensions with Russia and China due to strategic shifts.
Reasoning
- The policy directly affects individuals in the defense sector, hence focusing on employees and stakeholders in defense and munitions manufacturing will provide impactful insights.
- Military families and personnel will experience direct and indirect impacts through their roles and living conditions.
- A significant portion of the indirect impact is on the general taxpayer through federal spending allocations.
- Considering business owners and investors in local economies around defense manufacturing sites will provide a broader understanding of the economic ripple effects.
Simulated Interviews
Mechanical Engineer at Defense Contractor (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy will increase the workload but also job security for us in the defense sector. It's a double-edged sword.
- Ensuring support for Ukraine is important and aligns with my values.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Navy Officer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More resources mean better preparedness and hopefully safer operations during deployments.
- I hope these allocations will lead to long-term stability and benefits for international safety.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Factory Worker in Munitions Manufacturing (Detroit, MI)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems like it will secure jobs in our plant, which is a big relief.
- I have mixed feelings about where the munitions are going, but job security is paramount for me.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Technology Specialist in Defense Sector (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe increased defense spending is crucial for cybersecurity improvements.
- I hope it doesn't mean more cutbacks in other important areas like education and healthcare.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Military Veteran (Columbus, OH)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The added resources could mean better support systems for current servicemen, but I worry about federal spending priorities.
- I wish more of the budget focused on veterans' healthcare.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Small Business Owner Near Defense Plant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the economic boost from the defense industry, which this policy supports.
- I'm concerned about long-term community dependency on defense spending.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Graduate Student in International Relations (Chicago, IL)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a fascinating move in global strategy, affecting my research direction positively.
- I am anxious about the policy's opportunity costs in social sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public School Teacher (Anniston, AL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased defense spending might limit resources for education, which worries me.
- It seems necessary for global stability, but schools need support too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Defense Industry Executive (Fairfield, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy supports our operations and growth plans significantly.
- It's a strategic advantage, but we must be cautious of regulatory burdens.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental Policy Analyst (Portland, OR)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Defense spending increases typically sideline environmental initiatives.
- This could delay sustainable military technology adoption, though maintaining security is vital.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000000 (Low: $13000000000, High: $17000000000)
Year 2: $16000000000 (Low: $14000000000, High: $18000000000)
Year 3: $17000000000 (Low: $15000000000, High: $19000000000)
Year 5: $18000000000 (Low: $16000000000, High: $20000000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Geopolitical tensions with Russia and China could alter the required scale and duration of expenditures.
- Domestic political climate could affect long-term funding availability for defense initiatives.
- Cost overruns are common in defense procurement due to the complexity and scale of projects.
- Potential technological advancements could result in variable cost implications.