PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 440.
Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · Dec 8, 2022
Community Disaster Resilience Zones Act of 2022
This bill requires the President to continue to maintain a natural hazard assessment program that develops and maintains publicly available products to show the risk of natural hazards across the United States.
Such products shall show the risk of natural hazards and include ratings and data for loss exposure, social vulnerability, community resilience, and any other element determined by the President.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The President shall (1) review the underlying methodology of any product that is a natural disaster hazard risk assessment, and (2) consider including additional data in any product that is a natural hazard risk assessment. Additionally, the President must conduct such reviews to evaluate and update the assessments at least every five years.
Using the reviewed assessments, the President must periodically identify and designate community disaster resilience zones (CDRZs), which shall be (1) the 50 census tracts assigned the highest individual hazard risk ratings; and (2) in each state, not less than 1% of census tracts that are assigned a high individual risk rating, taking into consideration specified geographic balance.
The President may provide financial, technical, or other assistance to an eligible entity (a state, Indian tribal government, or local government) that plans to perform a resilience or mitigation project within, or that primarily benefits, a CDRZ.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) must develop criteria (taking into consideration the economic effects) to assess damage caused by a harmful algal bloom and report to Congress describing such criteria.
People & committees
Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3] · D–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 440.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 117-609.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 117-609.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management Discharged.
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: Dec 6, 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.7242 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.7242 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.7242 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.7242 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.