Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3621

Bill Overview

Title: CASC Act

Description: This bill provides statutory authority for the National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 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 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. The USGS shall establish an Advisory Committee on Climate and Natural Resource Sciences to identify and recommend priorities for ongoing research needs on such impacts in informing the research priorities of the National Center.

Sponsors: Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI]

Target Audience

Population: People affected by climate change and needing adaptation science

Estimated Size: 331000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Environmental Scientist (California)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The CASC Act could greatly support my work by providing much-needed data on sea-level rise impacts.
  • I see the policy as a critical step in enhancing our adaptive measures.

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 6
Year 20 9 6

Farmer (Florida)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having access to scientific advice would help me adapt my farming practices.
  • I hope the regional centers provide accessible resources for small farmers like me.

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 4

Museum Curator (New York)

Age: 53 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The implications of this act on cultural preservation are underemphasized.
  • I hope more research will focus on protecting cultural resources against climate threats.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Climate Activist (Texas)

Age: 34 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a strong nod to science-led climate strategy.
  • Regional centers should involve activists in advisory roles to bridge community needs.

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 10 5

Agricultural Researcher (Iowa)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The National and Regional Centers could provide data critical for developing climate-resilient crops.
  • I'm optimistic about improved collaboration with other research institutions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Retired (Oregon)

Age: 60 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I hope this policy brings more resources to mitigate wildfire risks.
  • Information on climate trends would help me make better preparation decisions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

College Student (New Jersey)

Age: 25 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy represents a future job and research opportunity for me.
  • I look forward to potential internships with regional centers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Fishery Manager (Alaska)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could help provide necessary data on fishery health.
  • I hope regional centers will focus on specific local issues like ours.

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 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 8 4

Retired Engineer (Louisiana)

Age: 70 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More consistent information on storm predictions would be beneficial.
  • I worry about the financial burden of adapting properties to climate change.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Teacher (Colorado)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy emphasizes scientific literacy which aligns with my teaching goals.
  • I hope for more educational resources and training opportunities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)

Year 2: $155000000 (Low: $125000000, High: $185000000)

Year 3: $160000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $190000000)

Year 5: $170000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $200000000)

Year 10: $190000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $220000000)

Year 100: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)

Key Considerations