Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5246

Bill Overview

Title: National Development Strategy and Coordination Act of 2022

Description: This bill establishes the Interagency Committee for the Coordination of National Development Financing Programs within the Executive Office of the President. The committee must develop a national strategy to (1) address vulnerabilities in the domestic supply chains of critical industries, (2) strengthen U.S. industrial and manufacturing capabilities, and (3) support targeted job growth and economic development. The bill authorizes the Federal Financing Bank to provide financing assistance to carry out certain directives made by the committee.

Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals associated with U.S. domestic supply chains, industrial sectors, and economic development initiatives.

Estimated Size: 80000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Factory Worker (Detroit, MI)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is essential for protecting jobs like mine, especially with the global competition.
  • I'm hopeful that it will stabilize and potentially grow our local industry.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Logistics Coordinator (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It sounds like this could really streamline processes in my field.
  • I hope it leads to job security for us in logistics.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe this approach will help resolve supply issues that have plagued us.
  • Improving domestic manufacturing can only benefit my business.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Software Engineer (Portland, OR)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While this isn't directly in my field, improved industrial systems could boost my work indirectly.
  • I'm curious to see if this affects demand for our software.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Student (Raleigh, NC)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could open up more job opportunities in my field after graduation.
  • It's exciting to see national focus on industrial growth.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Manufacturing Plant Manager (Cleveland, OH)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policies like these are crucial for maintaining competitive manufacturing sectors in America.
  • Strengthening supply chains would greatly ease operational pressures.

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 7 4
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 8 3

Retired (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think it's a step in the right direction for U.S. industry, even if it doesn't affect me directly now.
  • National strategies like this could have really benefitted my industry when I was working.

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 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Retail Manager (Chicago, IL)

Age: 33 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This seems more focused on heavy industries, but indirect effects might trickle down to retail.
  • Better supply chains could improve stock levels and reduce shortages.

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 5
Year 20 7 5

Tech Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might spark more interest in AI solutions like ours.
  • I'm optimistic about new opportunities for growth.

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 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 5

Finance Analyst (New York, NY)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This seems promising for the industrial sector.
  • I'm interested in how this will affect investment opportunities.

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 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1250000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1500000000)

Year 2: $1225000000 (Low: $975000000, High: $1475000000)

Year 3: $1200000000 (Low: $950000000, High: $1450000000)

Year 5: $1100000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1300000000)

Year 10: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)

Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)

Key Considerations