Scott Peters (D-CA)
National Coordination on Adaptation and Resilience for Security Act of 2026
A Democratic bill with 2 Republican cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "National Coordination on Adaptation and Resilience for Security Act of 2026," seeks to amend the National Security Act of 1947. It requires the Federal Government to develop and maintain a national resilience strategy to address natural hazards. To achieve this, the President will designate a Chief Resilience Officer within the National Security Council. This officer will coordinate interagency efforts and establish working groups to build resilience for the United States. Additionally, the bill creates a "Partners Council on Resilience" to provide recommendations and support for non-Federal partners. The strategy aims to improve the nation's ability to prepare for and recover from environmental threats and natural hazards.
Yes· 3 of 33
- Scored +7
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Establishes a national resilience strategy to address climate and natural hazard vulnerabilities.
- Scored +6
Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster?
Creates a comprehensive national resilience strategy and clearinghouse for pre-disaster planning.
- Scored +5
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Explicitly includes rural communities in technical assistance and council representation.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Community Resilience: The bill aims to build resilience to natural hazards based on the best available science, which can help protect communities and infrastructure (Section 2(a)(b)(1)).
-
Support for Vulnerable Communities: The creation of the Partners Council on Resilience is intended to help the Federal Government better support non-Federal partners, specifically targeting rural and underresourced communities, to build resilience to natural hazards (Section 2(a)(d)(2)).
-
Improved National Security Posture: The strategy intends to bolster national security by increasing resilience both domestically and abroad, specifically regarding military installations (Section 2(a)(b)(2)).
-
Better Access to Federal Resources: The bill includes provisions to clarify, simplify, and harmonize planning and application processes, making it easier for non-Federal partners to access Federal funds for resilience efforts (Section s 2(a)(e)(1)(D)(i)(II)).
-
Technical Assistance for Local Entities: The establishment of an adaptation and resilience clearinghouse is intended to increase the accessibility and utility of technical assistance for non-Federal partners (Section 2(a)(f)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Government Spending and Oversight: The bill establishes several new entities, including a Chief Resilience Officer, interagency working groups, a Partners Council on Resilience, and a clearinghouse, all of which require personnel and resources (Section 2(a)(b), (c), (d), and (f)).
-
Burden on Federal Agencies: Federal agencies may be required to detail employees to various working groups and provide resources as determined by agency heads in consultation with the Chief Resilience Officer (Section 2(a)(c)(3)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Explicitly includes rural communities in technical assistance and council representation. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Includes tribal governments directly in the Partners Council on Resilience. Would farmers be better off under this? — Addresses drought, water scarcity, and soil salinization affecting agricultural sectors. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Focuses resilience efforts on vulnerable communities which often include minority populations. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Focuses resilience efforts on vulnerable communities. Would business owners be better off under this? — Aids businesses with resilience planning and supply chain continuity. Would children be better off under this? — Improves long-term community resilience benefiting younger generations. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Focuses resilience efforts on vulnerable communities which often include minority populations. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Protects homes and local assets from natural hazards. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Protects community infrastructure and homes from natural hazards. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Considers vulnerable populations in national disaster resilience strategies. Would retired people be better off under this? — Protects communities where retirees live from extreme weather and natural disasters. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Protects vulnerable populations from the impacts of extreme weather events. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Improves infrastructure resilience in urban centers. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Includes resilience planning for military installations and national security assets. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Enhances community planning and infrastructure protection.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Establishes a national resilience strategy to address climate and natural hazard vulnerabilities. Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — Creates a comprehensive national resilience strategy and clearinghouse for pre-disaster planning. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Promotes ecosystem resilience and addresses vulnerabilities of public lands and natural resources. Does this repair or build roads and bridges? — Focuses on protecting critical infrastructure and assets from extreme weather and natural hazards. Does this invest in rural communities? — Explicitly targets rural and underresourced communities for resilience technical assistance. Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power? — Encourages investments in natural infrastructure and ecosystem resilience. Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport? — Addresses cascading effects on transportation and supply chain systems.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires regular progress reports, public comment periods, and oversight by the Comptroller General. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Partners with state, local, territorial, and tribal governments through a dedicated council. Does this give the federal government more power? — Establishes a new Chief Resilience Officer and interagency working groups within the federal government. Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — Protects critical supply chains and interstate transportation from natural hazards.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Improves economic predictability and resilience planning against natural hazards. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Includes small businesses and local entities in resilience planning and resources. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Aims to improve the efficiency of federal investments and minimize waste in resilience funding.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Requires resilience strategies and clearinghouses based on the best available science.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Aids underresourced communities in building resilience against environmental hazards. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Prioritizes support for vulnerable communities facing natural hazards.
- 9/14/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/16/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs, and Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Michael LawlerRepublican · New York
Maria SalazarRepublican · Florida