Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
This bill would direct the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (NOAA) to establish a Coastal Flooding and Storm Surge Forecast Improvement Program to improve observations, modeling, forecasts, and warnings for coastal flooding (including high-tide flooding) and storm surge. The program would prioritize real-time operational prediction, incorporation of in situ sensors and probabilistic forecasts, development of skill metrics, and testing of advanced modeling approaches (including hybrid dynamical/machine-learning systems and novel sensors).
Funding and appropriations: Liberals want guaranteed funding for equity-focused implementation; conservatives want explicit cost offsets or caps.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear administrative program with defined goals, prioritized activities, named responsible officials, and near-term planning requirements, supplemented by interagency pilot project authority and explicit attention to technical innovation and skill metrics.
This bill would direct the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (NOAA) to establish a Coastal Flooding and Storm Surge Forecast Improvement Program to improve observations, modeling, forecasts, and warnings for coastal flooding (including high-tide flooding) and storm surge.
The program would prioritize real-time operational prediction, incorporation of in situ sensors and probabilistic forecasts, development of skill metrics, and testing of advanced modeling approaches (including hybrid dynamical/machine-learning systems and novel sensors).
The Under Secretary must produce a program plan within 180 days and submit an annual budget tied to that plan.
On content alone, this is a moderate-sized, technically focused bill that advances weather-forecasting and emergency-preparedness improvements—areas that historically attract bipartisan support. The absence of controversial policy measures, major new mandates, or explicit large new spending increases its prospects. Key constraints are competition for appropriations, possible overlap with existing NOAA/NWS/FEMA programs, and typical Senate procedures.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear administrative program with defined goals, prioritized activities, named responsible officials, and near-term planning requirements, supplemented by interagency pilot project authority and explicit attention to technical innovation and skill metrics.
Funding and appropriations: Liberals want guaranteed funding for equity-focused implementation; conservatives want explicit cost offsets or caps.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Funding and appropriations: Liberals want guaranteed funding for equity-focused implementation; conservatives want explicit cost offsets or caps.
Overall, a mainstream progressive would likely view this bill favorably as a targeted federal effort to reduce harm from climate-exacerbated coastal flooding and to improve equity in weather observation and emergency response.
They would welcome the emphasis on vulnerable and under-observed communities, workforce development, and integrating new observational technologies and probabilistic forecasts to inform planning.
They would be attentive to whether the program receives adequate, sustained funding and whether community engagement and equity are enforced in implementation.
A pragmatic moderate would likely view the bill as a useful, targeted investment in forecasting and emergency decision support that can reduce disaster losses if implemented well.
They would appreciate the emphasis on measurable improvements (skill metrics, pilot projects, annual budget submissions) but would be concerned about costs, overlap with existing programs, and the need for clear performance measures and timelines.
They would favor providing the program flexibility to use public-private partnerships while insisting on oversight, cost transparency, and clearly defined interagency roles.
A mainstream conservative would likely acknowledge the practical benefits of improved storm-surge and coastal flooding forecasts for public safety and critical infrastructure protection but be cautious about expanding federal programs and spending without clear offsets.
They would question the need for new federal authorities or mandates, emphasize state and private-sector roles, and seek protections for private data and infrastructure operators.
If the bill is structured as a modest, well-scoped research and coordination effort with limited appropriation demands and respect for local control, a conservative might be neutral-to-mildly supportive; if it leads to broad federal mandates or large unaccounted spending, they would be opposed.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
On content alone, this is a moderate-sized, technically focused bill that advances weather-forecasting and emergency-preparedness improvements—areas that historically attract bipartisan support. The absence of controversial policy measures, major new mandates, or explicit large new spending increases its prospects. Key constraints are competition for appropriations, possible overlap with existing NOAA/NWS/FEMA programs, and typical Senate procedures.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Funding and appropriations: Liberals want guaranteed funding for equity-focused implementation; conservatives want explicit cost offsets or…
On content alone, this is a moderate-sized, technically focused bill that advances weather-forecasting and emergency-preparedness improveme…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear administrative program with defined goals, prioritized activities, named responsible officials, and near-term planning requirements, supplemented…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.