PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-64.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Sep 20, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on July 12, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to declare that assistance provided under a program for flood mitigation activities with respect to a property shall not be considered income or a resource of the owner of the property when determining eligibility for or benefit levels under any income assistance or resource-tested program that is funded in whole or in part by a federal agency or by appropriated federal funds.
People & committees
Rep. Baker, Richard H. [R-LA-6] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-64.
Became Public Law No: 109-64.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9861)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9861)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 189.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Reported by Senator Shelby without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Reported by Senator Shelby without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H5646)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5646)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 804.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5646-5649)
Mr. Baker moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 24.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 109-44.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 109-44.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.804 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.804 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.804 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.804 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.