PolicyBrief
S. 2340
119th CongressJul 17th 2025
Climate Change Health Protection and Promotion Act of 2025
IN COMMITTEE

This Act establishes the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity within HHS to develop a national strategic action plan and advisory board to address the health impacts of climate change, especially on vulnerable communities.

Edward "Ed" Markey
D

Edward "Ed" Markey

Senator

MA

LEGISLATION

New HHS Office to Tackle Climate Change Health Risks, Starting with $10M Annual Budget

This new piece of legislation, the Climate Change Health Protection and Promotion Act of 2025, is primarily about creating a dedicated federal infrastructure to deal with the health fallout from a changing climate. It establishes the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), giving it a mandate and a proposed budget authorization of $10 million annually from fiscal years 2026 through 2031 (Sec. 7).

The core mission of this new office is to act as the central hub for understanding, predicting, and responding to the physical and mental health risks posed by climate change—think heat waves, severe weather, and new infectious diseases. Essentially, the government is creating a specialized team to make sure our healthcare system doesn't get blindsided by climate-related crises.

The National Game Plan: Climate-Proofing Healthcare

Within one year of the law passing, the HHS Secretary must publish a National Strategic Action Plan (Sec. 4). This isn't just a roadmap; it’s the blueprint for coordinating every federal agency’s efforts to make public health and healthcare systems resilient against climate impacts. The plan must prioritize communities that are already hit hardest, which the bill defines as Environmental Justice Communities (low-income, high-minority, or Tribal populations facing worse environmental burdens) and Medically Underserved Communities (Sec. 2).

For someone working in public health, this means clearer guidance and potentially more resources to deal with issues like wildfire smoke or increased vector-borne diseases (think ticks and mosquitoes). For the rest of us, it means the federal government is supposed to be tracking risks, improving disease surveillance, and ensuring that vital services remain accessible during extreme weather events (Sec. 4).

Who Pays the Price and Who Gets the Focus?

One of the most interesting mandates in the bill is the requirement for the new office to lead efforts to reduce the healthcare sector’s own greenhouse gas emissions (Sec. 4). If you work in a hospital or run a clinic, this means you can expect new guidance, and potentially future regulations, aimed at cutting your facility's environmental footprint. This is a direct cost and compliance challenge for the industry, but it’s framed as part of the solution.

The bill also requires massive consultation, specifically with Tribal governments, state and local officials, and crucially, the groups disproportionately affected by climate change (Sec. 4). This means that if you live in an area already dealing with air quality issues or frequent flooding, your community's input is supposed to be central to how this national plan is built. The goal is to correct past environmental injustices by prioritizing those communities in the national strategy.

The Fine Print: Science and Funding Gaps

To keep the plan grounded in reality, the bill establishes a permanent Advisory Board of 10 to 20 experts, appointed by the Secretary based on recommendations from the National Academies (Sec. 5). Their job is to provide continuous scientific advice on preparedness and response strategies. The Secretary must also contract with the National Academies to produce comprehensive reports every four years on the effectiveness of the national plan (Sec. 6).

However, while the new Office gets steady funding authorization through 2031, the crucial funding for the National Strategic Action Plan ($2 million) and the Advisory Board ($500,000) is only authorized for fiscal year 2026 (Sec. 7). This creates a potential wobble: the planning and advisory components that are supposed to guide the entire effort only have guaranteed funding for the first year. After that, Congress would need to appropriate funds annually, which could destabilize the long-term strategic planning if not secured.