Bill Overview
Title: PEACE Act of 2022
Description: This bill provides statutory standards for the use of lethal and less lethal force by federal law enforcement officers.
Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]
Target Audience
Population: People who have interactions with or are involved with federal law enforcement
Estimated Size: 331000000
- Federal law enforcement officers will directly be impacted as the bill sets new standards for their use of force.
- Individuals who have direct encounters with federal law enforcement officers may be impacted due to changes in use of force policies.
- Communities with significant interactions with federal law enforcement may experience changes in how officers approach situations involving potential use of force.
- Families of individuals involved in incidents with federal officers will be impacted if policies lead to changes in the outcomes of such incidents.
- General public and activists who advocate for police reform might be affected as this reflects their efforts and concerns in policy.
- Legal and law enforcement policymakers may also be impacted as they may need to adapt to and implement the new standards.
Reasoning
- Federal law enforcement officers and individuals interacting with them are the primary target for this policy impact simulation.
- Communities with heavy federal law enforcement presence might see changes in law enforcement behavior, safety, and community relations.
- The budget constraints suggest that while the policy is impactful, it may not reach every potential individual impacted nationwide beyond federal cases.
- The policy aims to reduce unnecessary use of force, potentially affecting perceived safety and well-being for those frequently encountering law enforcement.
Simulated Interviews
Federal law enforcement officer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy mandates additional training which is both a challenge and an opportunity for professional growth.
- I feel this will help improve public trust in our work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Immigration consultant (El Paso, TX)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is a positive development, as excessive force by federal officers has been a major concern.
- I am hopeful this improves interactions and outcomes for my clients.
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 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Community organizer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The PEACE Act could set a precedent for broader police reform.
- Awareness and education are key for this something truly impactful.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Legal analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act will introduce new legal challenges and cases as standards shift.
- Overall, helps align law enforcement actions with modern legal expectations.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Advocacy group leader (New York, NY)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is a significant step, showing that advocacy can change policy.
- We need to monitor its implementation closely.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Small business owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The act might reduce incidents of conflict, although change won't be immediate.
- Long-term, it could improve community relations and business.
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 | 7 | 5 |
Public defender (Detroit, MI)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could potentially lessen harsh encounters and improve my ability to advocate for clients.
- The policy needs strong enforcement mechanisms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Federal law enforcement trainer (San Antonio, TX)
Age: 31 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's critical we implement comprehensive training; officers need to fully understand these new standards.
- This can enhance safety for both officers and civilians.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Graduate student (Houston, TX)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is an interesting case study for criminal justice reform.
- It could impact how future policies are crafted and implemented.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Local law maker (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Federal changes necessitate adjustments at the local level too.
- It's a balanced policy but needs strong oversight for success.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 3: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 10: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- Uncertainty in predicting behavioral changes among federal law enforcement officers and the public.
- Potential need for ongoing revisions to training programs based on real-world feedback and outcomes.
- Societal response and the effect on community-law enforcement relations could vary significantly.
- Variable implementation costs across different federal agencies.