Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5164

Bill Overview

Title: HARM Act

Description: This bill requires the Department of State to designate the PMC Wagner Group as a foreign terrorist organization. Such designation also applies to any affiliated and successor entities undertaking malign activities against the United States and its allies or partners. (Among other things, such a designation allows the Department of the Treasury to require financial institutions to block transactions involving the organization.) The President may waive the application of sanctions against these entities if the President determines it to be in the national interest.

Sponsors: Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS]

Target Audience

Population: People working for or affiliated with the PMC Wagner Group

Estimated Size: 500

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Financial Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Significant new compliance challenges from policy.
  • Increased workload, especially in the early implementation phase.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

International Relations Consultant (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is an essential step to curb potential threats.
  • Implementation could open career opportunities due to increased demand for expertise.

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 9 8
Year 20 9 9

Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy may indirectly affect business opportunities.
  • Might need to pivot business strategy to mitigate risks.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 7 7

Law Enforcement Officer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy enhances ability to address complex threats.
  • Could increase workload, but viewed positively as important work.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Software Developer (Austin, TX)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Indirect impact, policy is necessary but personally unaffected.
  • Xenophobic sentiments concern but not seriously affected.

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

Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 56 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There will be new opportunities for reporting.
  • Concerned about increased tensions but necessary move.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 7

Export Manager (Miami, FL)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Potential disruption in business relations.
  • Need to establish new compliance strategies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 7
Year 5 6 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 8

Student (Boston, MA)

Age: 23 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Finds the policy crucial for her field of study.
  • Sees potential career paths and areas of research arising.

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 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 9

Government Employee (Philadelphia, PA)

Age: 47 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy provides important tools for national security agenda.
  • Anticipates increased operational requirements.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Retired Banker (Dallas, TX)

Age: 67 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Sees the policy as a necessary precaution.
  • Believes it might not have direct personal impact.

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $50000000)

Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $45000000)

Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $45000000)

Year 5: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $40000000)

Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $30000000)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations