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 25, 2006
Equitable Access to Disaster Relief and Preparedness Services Act - Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require regulations issued for the guidance of personnel providing federal assistance at major disaster sites to include provisions ensuring that relief activities be accomplished without discrimination based on English proficiency.
Directs the President to: (1) ensure that all federal entities that provide assistance maintain the capability to administer competent interpreter and translation services; (2) communicate with state and local governments to identify individuals with limited English proficiency and include them in disaster preparedness planning; (3) have available for activation a sufficient cadre of emergency assistance employees; (4) develop and maintain an informational clearinghouse of model language assistance programs and best practices; and (5) report to Congress on the treatment of individuals with limited English proficiency during Hurricane Katrina and on the feasibility of operating a toll-free number by which such individuals can obtain information in their primary language regarding federally funded disaster services and benefits.
Includes within the technical assistance the President is required to provide to states assistance to individuals with and without English proficiency following disasters.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to: (1) conduct an emergency preparedness demonstration program to study the needs of individuals and households with limited English proficiency for use in the design and development of community and family preparedness programs; and (2) develop initiatives to improve disaster awareness and readiness in communities that have individuals with limited English proficiency.
People & committees
Rep. Honda, Michael M. [D-CA-15] · D–CA
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 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.5498 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.5498 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.5498 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.5498 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.