PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 21, 2009
Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Modernization Act of 2009 - Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to direct the President, acting through the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to modernize and implement the integrated U.S. public alert and warning system to ensure that the President can alert governmental authorities and the civilian population in areas endangered by disasters under all conditions.
Directs the Administrator, consistent with the final recommendations of the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Advisory Committee (established by this Act), to: (1) establish common alerting and warning protocols, standards, terminology, and operating procedures; (2) include in such system the capability to adapt the distribution and content of communications on the basis of geographic location, risks, or personal user preferences and to alert individuals with disabilities or limited English proficiency; and (3) ensure the conduct of system training, tests, and exercises.
Requires the system to: (1) incorporate multiple communications technologies; (2) be designed to incorporate future technologies for communicating directly with the public, to provide alerts to the largest portion of the affected population feasible, including nonresident visitors and tourists, and to improve the ability of remote areas to receive alerts; (3) promote local and regional partnerships to enhance community preparedness and response; and (4) provide redundant alert mechanisms.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Administrator to conduct pilot programs to demonstrate the feasibility of using a variety of methods for achieving system requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Diaz-Balart, Mario [R-FL-25] · R–FL
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 Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
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.2591 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.2591 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.2591 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.2591 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.