PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness and Response, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 26, 2003
First Responder and Emergency Preparedness Block Grant Program for Local Governments - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish additional duties of the Office of Domestic Preparedness with respect to Federal, State, tribal, and local government terrorism preparedness and response, including establishing standards for the training of first responders (fire, emergency medical service, and law enforcement personnel) and for equipment used by first responders in responding to incidents of terrorism.Requires the Office Director to: (1) establish a program to provide assistance to enhance the ability of State and local first responders to respond to incidents of terrorism, including incidents involving weapons of mass destruction; and (2) assist States and localities in securing vital infrastructure resources. Provides for the allocation of such assistance funds among the States, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories. Requires a State to provide at least 75 percent of its assistance to local governments. Provides deadlines for assistance distribution to States and local governments.
People & committees
Rep. Millender-McDonald, Juanita [D-CA-37] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness and Response, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security (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.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security (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.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security (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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. 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.1449 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.1449 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.1449 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.1449 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.