PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 18, 1999
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 1999 - Amends the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to authorize appropriations to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for earthquake hazards reduction for FY 2000 and 2001. Authorizes appropriations for FY 2000 and 2001 to the Secretary of the Interior for carrying out, through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), responsibilities assigned under the Act, with specified amounts available for the Global Seismic Network and the Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee. Makes specified amounts available for FY 2000 and 2001 for a related USGS grant program. Authorizes additional appropriations for FY 2000 and 2001 for a USGS program to develop a prototype real-time seismic warning system. Authorizes appropriations under the Act for FY 2000 and 2001 for National Science Foundation (NSF) engineering and geosciences research and for the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Repeals a provision regarding non-Federal cost sharing for supplemental funds. Requires the USGS Director to: (1) establish an Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System to modernize, standardize, and stabilize the national, regional, and urban seismic monitoring systems in the United States into a coordinated system; and (2) transmit a five-year management plan for the System to the Congress. Authorizes appropriations. Requires the NSF Director to establish a Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation that will upgrade, link, and integrate a system of geographically distributed experimental facilities for earthquake engineering testing of full-sized structures and their components and partial-scale physical models. Authorizes appropriations. Requires the USGS Director to establish a Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Nick [R-MI-7] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 414 - 3 (Roll no. 95).
House roll call 95 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 414 - 3 (Roll no. 95).
House roll call 95 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 1184.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 1184.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Ray LaHood to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 142 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1184 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be read by section. Bill is open to amendments. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the bill.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 142. (consideration: CR H2219-2225)
Rule H. Res. 142 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 142 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1184 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be read by section. Bill is open to amendments. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 56.
Committee on Resources discharged.
Committee on Resources discharged.
House Committee on Resources Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than April 19, 1999.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 106-99, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 106-99, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on Resources, 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.
Referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on Resources, 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.
Referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on Resources, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1184 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.1184 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.1184 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.1184 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.