Bill Overview
Title: PANIC Act of 2022
Description: This bill expands the definition of major illicit drug producing country to include a country that is a significant direct source of certain drugs (or precursor chemicals for producing such drugs) that are significantly affecting the United States. The bill also expands the definition of major drug-transit country to include countries through which certain synthetic drugs are transported. (Under current law, a country designated a major illicit drug producing country or major drug-transit country may be eligible for certain U.S. foreign assistance, including transfers of excess defense articles. However, a designated country that fails to adhere to commitments related to drug control measures may be barred from receiving other forms of foreign assistance and may also be subject to trade restrictions.)
Sponsors: Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in countries classified as major illicit drug producing or transit countries
Estimated Size: 20000000
- The legislation targets international drug trafficking and production, affecting countries classified as major producers or transit countries of illicit drugs.
- These countries may have changes in their eligibility for US foreign assistance and be subjected to trade restrictions, impacting their economies and populations.
- Individuals involved in drug production and distribution in these countries would be directly affected by any changes in legal and economic sanctions.
Reasoning
- The policy is intended to reduce drug-related harm by focusing on the international sources of illicit drugs entering the US, which primarily affects individuals and communities dealing with drug abuse here.
- We need to consider a broad spectrum of the US population, from those directly impacted by drug abuse to those indirectly influenced by it (e.g., families, law enforcement, and healthcare workers).
- Budget constraints mean that the reach of any positive effects from the policy will be limited, at least initially.
- Effects on wellbeing may not be immediately visible, it may take several years for significant changes to ripple through communities.
- Individuals already deeply entrenched in addiction or those in rural or economically disadvantaged areas may see less immediate benefit without supporting domestic policies.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (Detroit, MI)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen many patients suffer from addiction. Reducing drug availability is crucial, but we also need more support on the ground.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Unemployed (West Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My town has been hit hard by opioids. Anything to stop these drugs is welcomed, though jobs and health programs are also needed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Tech worker (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't really affect me. I live a comfortable life away from these issues.
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 |
College student (New York, NY)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Losing family to drugs was devastating. I hope this policy helps prevent others from experiencing the same.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Social Worker (Portland, OR)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My clients face huge challenges. The policy might help, but they need more direct support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Law Enforcement Officer (Miami, FL)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen direct benefits from similar policies in the past. However, enforcement alone isn't enough.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We don't notice much drug activity here. This doesn't seem to impact us directly.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Students face many challenges with drugs at home. A reduction in drug flow would be a blessing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Boston, MA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Drugs affect my employees and business indirectly. Improvements here would be positive, though I'm skeptical about enforcement alone.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen drugs around campus. Reducing their availability could mean fewer distractions for my peers.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $25500000 (Low: $20500000, High: $30500000)
Year 3: $26000000 (Low: $21000000, High: $31000000)
Year 5: $27000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $32000000)
Year 10: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 100: $40000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $45000000)
Key Considerations
- The potential economic impact on countries designated as major drug producing or transit nations could lead to geopolitical tensions.
- The effectiveness of the policy largely depends on the international cooperation of the countries involved.
- The policy requires robust monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance and penalize non-compliance effectively.