PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 8, 2001
Preparedness Against Domestic Terrorism Act of 2001 - Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (the Act) to include snow droughts, acts of terrorism or other catastrophic events within its definition of "major disaster" for purposes of authorized disaster relief.Requires the President (current law authorizes the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA Director)) to be responsible for carrying out Federal emergency preparedness plans and programs. Includes as a covered hazard a domestic terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction.Requires the President to ensure that Federal response plans and programs are adequate to respond to the consequences of terrorism directed against a target in the United States. Includes the development of equipment, clothing, and facilities within authorized preparedness measures.Repeals provisions of the Act which: (1) allow State preparedness funds to be used to prepare for hazards and for providing emergency assistance in response to hazards; and (2) require the FEMA Director to establish emergency preparedness security regulations.Establishes the President's Council on Domestic Preparedness. Requires the Council to: (1) publish a Domestic Terrorism Preparedness Plan and an annual implementation strategy; (2) designate an entity to assess the risk of terrorist attacks against transportation, energy, and other infrastructure facilities; and (3) establish voluntary minimum guidelines for preparedness programs. Authorizes the Council to attend meetings of the National Security Council pertaining to domestic terrorist attack preparedness matters, subject to the direction of the President.
People & committees
Rep. Gilchrest, Wayne T. [R-MD-1] · R–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Joint Hearings Held by the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management and by the Subcommittee on National Security, Veteran's Affairs and International Relations (Government Reform Committee).
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.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.525 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.525 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.525 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.525 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.