Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5198

Bill Overview

Title: Local Assistance Fairness Act

Description: This bill expands eligibility for the Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency Fund to revenue-sharing consolidated governments. (The Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency Fund is a general revenue enhancement program that provides additional assistance to eligible counties and tribal governments for any governmental purpose except lobbying.)

Sponsors: Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT]

Target Audience

Population: People living in areas covered by the Local Assistance Fairness Act

Estimated Size: 30000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Public School Teacher (Tulsa County, OK)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the local government gets more revenue, it could improve funding for our schools.
  • I hope this means more support for educational initiatives and perhaps better wages for teachers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small Business Owner (Orange County, CA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This might not directly impact my business, but better funded local programs could attract more customers.
  • I'll support anything that betters our neighborhood, even if indirectly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

College Student (Missoula County, MT)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If these funds lead to better public services or lower tuition through state programs, it could positively influence my college experience.
  • I hope some of this funding goes towards supporting educational infrastructure.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 5 4

Retiree (Navajo Nation, AZ)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is great news, as any additional funding could enhance healthcare services critical for us retirees.
  • I'm hopeful for improvements in local healthcare facilities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

Police Officer (Fresno County, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy allows for better allocation of resources towards public safety initiatives and community outreach.
  • Increased funding might improve equipment and personnel support.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Healthcare Worker (Harris County, TX)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could mean better support for our clinic and improved community health benefits.
  • I'm looking forward to seeing tangible improvements for the healthcare industry in local contexts.

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 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

City Planner (Cook County, IL)

Age: 56 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With more funds, we could pursue more ambitious infrastructure projects earlier.
  • I look forward to utilizing any additional support for sustainable developments.

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 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Social Worker (Robeson County, NC)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 12.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • An increase or improvement in funding could enable better resources for our tribe's welfare programs.
  • I'm optimistic about potential positive changes to our community structure and resource availability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 8 3

Casino Worker (Clark County, NV)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 17/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While the impact might be minimal personally, any increase in local government resources is welcome.
  • I'd like to see how this affects our community at large.

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 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Tribal Council Member (Cherokee, NC)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This Act expands an important funding source, reinforcing our community's self-sufficiency.
  • Our focus will be on efficiently directing these resources to enhance health, education, and housing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 10 6
Year 20 9 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)

Year 2: $50500000 (Low: $40500000, High: $60500000)

Year 3: $51005000 (Low: $41005000, High: $61005000)

Year 5: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)

Year 10: $55000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $65000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)

Key Considerations