PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Science, and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 2005
First Responders Funding Reform Act of 2005 - Amends the USA PATRIOT Act to require: (1) that each State be allocated in each fiscal year not less than .5 percent (currently, .75 percent) of the total amount appropriated for domestic preparedness grants; (2) such grants to be awarded based on a quantitative risk assessment for threat, vulnerability, and consequences; and (3) the Office for State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support of the Office of Justice Programs, by March 1 of each year, to submit that assessment to Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Sweeney, John E. [R-NY-20] · R–NY
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, Science, and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security (Select).
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 15, 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.228 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.228 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.228 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.228 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.