PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Nov 17, 2020
FEMA Assistance Relief Act of 2020
This bill modifies the federal cost share of certain emergency assistance relating to COVID-19 (i.e., coronavirus disease 2019).
Specifically, the bill provides for (1) a 100% federal cost share of assistance provided under the emergency declaration issued by the President on March 13, 2020, relating to COVID-19 and any subsequent major disaster declaration that supersedes it; and (2) at least a 90% federal cost share of assistance provided for any emergency or major disaster declared by the President from January 1-December 31, 2020. These provisions shall apply to funds appropriated on or after this bill's enactment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
With respect to the emergency declaration issued on March 13, 2020, the President may provide assistance for activities, costs, and purchases of states, Indian tribal governments, or local governments, including, among other things
backfill costs for first responders and other essential employees who are ill or quarantined;
increased operating costs for essential government services due to such emergency;
personal protective equipment and other critical supplies and services for first responders; and
costs of procuring and distributing food to individuals affected by the pandemic.
The bill (1) directs the President to provide financial assistance to meet disaster-related funeral expenses (subject to the availability of appropriations), and (2) authorizes specified assistance in advance.
FEMA must enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to convene a committee of experts to study the use of certain assistance to respond to an emergency that does not cause physical damages.
The bill extends by one year federal disaster assistance to individuals and households.
People & committees
Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 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 H5847-5848)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5847-5848)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 8266.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5847-5849)
Mr. DeFazio moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 478.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 116-580.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 116-580.
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 5, 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.8266 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.8266 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.8266 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.8266 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.