PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · Dec 7, 2022
Climate Adaptation Science Centers Act or the CASC Act
This bill provides statutory authority for the Department of the Interior's National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers. The centers must provide scientific expertise to managers of natural resources, cultural resources, and ecosystem services to inform decisions that aid adaptation to a changing climate and extreme weather events. The program shall include a National Climate Adaptation Science Center and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers.
Among its activities, the National Center shall
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
serve as the national office for the regional centers,
develop and facilitate coordination among the regional centers, and
conduct research on cross-regional and national science priorities.
Regional centers shall develop research, education, training, and advisory service priorities regarding the impacts of climate trends and variability on natural and cultural resource management.
Interior shall establish an Advisory Committee on Climate and Natural Resource Sciences to advise the National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers on specified matters, including (1) the contents of a national strategy identifying key climate adaptation science priorities to advance the management of natural and cultural resources in the face of climate change; and (2) the integration of equity, particularly for historically underserved communities, in the operation of the National Center and regional centers.
People & committees
Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-3] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 435.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 117-602.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 117-602.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 22 - 18.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States Discharged.
Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.6654 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.6654 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.6654 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.6654 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.