PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 8, 2003
Two Floods and You Are Out of the Taxpayers' Pocket Act of 2003 - Amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to require the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, in awarding grants for mitigation activities, to give priority to properties for which repetitive flood insurance claim payments (as specified by this Act) have been made. Authorizes the Director to waive mitigation assistance limits when the State or community has repetitive insurance claims properties and such waiver is cost-effective and in the best interests of the National Flood Insurance Fund.Increases amounts credited to the National Flood Mitigation Fund from the National Flood Insurance Fund, such amounts to be used only for repetitive insurance claims properties.Extends through FY 2007 the authority to enter into flood insurance contracts and the authorization of appropriations for the national flood insurance program.Provides chargeable national flood insurance premium rates for: (1) repetitive insurance claims properties; and (2) certain coastal and river properties leased from the Government. Authorizes annual premium increases with respect to such properties.Amends the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 to prohibit Federal disaster relief assistance from being used for repair, replacement, or restoration of any property in the area for which: (1) repetitive claim payments have been made; and (2) Federal mitigation assistance has been offered to, but refused by, the property owner.Authorizes the Director to provide for funding for mitigation actions that reduce flood damages to repetitive insurance claims properties, under certain conditions. Provides funding for such assistance from the National Flood Insurance Fund.
People & committees
Rep. Bereuter, Doug [R-NE-1] · R–NE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 352 - 67 (Roll no. 655). (text: CR H11833-11835)
House roll call 655 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 352 - 67 (Roll no. 655).(text: CR H11833-11835)
House roll call 655 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H11844)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 253.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11833-11842)
Mr. Ney moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 152.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 108-266.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 108-266.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.253 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.253 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.253 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.253 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.