PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 20, 2007
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Environmental Justice Act of 2007 - Defines "environmental justice" to mean the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and socioeconomic groups with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of laws and policies affecting the environment.
Requires the heads of federal agencies to make achieving environmental justice part of their missions by identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse effects of their programs on minority, low-income populations in the area affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Requires agencies to conduct programs in a manner to prevent discrimination.
Establishes the Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (Working Group).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires federal agencies to develop agency-wide environmental justice strategies that identify and address disproportionately high and adverse effects or disproportionately low benefits of their programs with respect to minority, low-income populations. Requires such strategies to identify programs that should be revised to: (1) promote enforcement of all health and environmental statutes in areas with such populations; (2) ensure greater public participation; (3) improve research and data collection; and (4) identify differential patterns of use of natural resources among such populations.
Establishes the Federal Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Environmental Justice Advisory Committee to provide independent advice and recommendations to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Working Group on areas relating to environmental justice.
People & committees
Rep. Jefferson, William J. [D-LA-2] · D–LA
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 Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.1602 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.1602 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.1602 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.1602 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.