Bill Overview
Title: A bill to establish procedures for the removal of the Architect of the Capitol.
Description: This bill provides for the removal of the Architect of the Capitol through impeachment or through a joint resolution of Congress. The grounds for removal through a joint resolution are limited to permanent disability, inefficiency, neglect of duty, malfeasance, or a felony or conduct involving moral turpitude.
Sponsors: Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]
Target Audience
Population: Persons impacted by the removal of the Architect of the Capitol
Estimated Size: 700000
- The Architect of the Capitol is a key supervisory position responsible for the maintenance and operation of the U.S. Capitol complex.
- This position directly impacts a limited number of people who work under the Architect of the Capitol, including staff and contractors who are responsible for executing architectural and operational tasks.
- The position indirectly affects members of Congress and their staff, as well as visitors, due to their reliance on the functionality and safety of the Capitol.
- The role also has some impact on historical preservation and the architectural integrity of national landmarks that hold cultural significance.
Reasoning
- The policy targets a niche group of individuals directly engaged with the U.S. Capitol operations either as workers or in roles benefiting from its maintenance and integrity.
- Operationally, this affects less than 1% of the U.S. federal government employees, implying minimal impact to their day-to-day lives and economic conditions.
- The budget constraint is reasonable given the limited scale of the affected population, primarily addressing procedural and potential psychological effects.
- Most effects are indirect, with psychological and operational effects being the primary focus, likely manifested through job satisfaction and national pride rather than direct economic impact.
Simulated Interviews
Capitol Maintenance Staff (Washington D.C.)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am concerned about job security if leadership becomes unstable.
- I hope new leadership priorities will mean better resources for us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Capitol Operations Manager (Virginia)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stable leadership is crucial for our projects.
- Accountability is good but regular removal processes can be destabilizing.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Historical Preservation Specialist (Maryland)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our focus is on preservation, so leadership changes are less important.
- I'm concerned that frequent changes might neglect historical priorities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Congressional Staff (Washington D.C.)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might not affect us on a day-to-day basis.
- It's more of an accountability check for leadership.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Tourist visiting historical sites (South Carolina)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Unaware of how internal changes affect visits.
- Overall experience at the Capitol matters more.
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 |
Retired Architect (New York)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Architectural integrity is crucial and shouldn't be politicized.
- Legislative oversight can be good but should be balanced with 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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Educator (California)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I would like students to experience a well-maintained Capitol.
- I value stability in roles that maintain national heritage sites.
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 |
Capitol Security Officer (Washington D.C.)
Age: 37 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Security operations are stable.
- Leadership changes shouldn't affect security protocols much.
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 |
Intern for a Congress member (Washington D.C.)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Mostly focused on legislative work.
- The functional Capitol is important, but we're more focused on lawmaking.
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 |
Political Analyst (Texas)
Age: 44 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Might slightly affect discussion topics, depending on how politics influence removal.
- Overall trust in government operations is a broader issue.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000 (Low: $25000, High: $100000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Impeachment and joint resolutions are existing legislative powers specifically provided in other contexts, making additional cost minimal.
- The Architect's role, though significant, impacts a contained and specific set of individuals and operations, reducing widespread financial impact.
- Legal considerations regarding the removal process must be well-defined to avoid undue litigation costs.
- Costs associated with inefficiency, neglect, or malfeasance might be mitigated through streamlined removal ability.