PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 8, 2007
Multiple Peril Insurance Act of 2007 - Amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to require the national flood insurance program to enable the purchase of optional insurance against loss resulting from physical damage to or loss of real or related personal property located in the United States arising from any flood or windstorm (any hurricane, tornado, cyclone, typhoon, or other wind event).
Restricts multiperil coverage to areas (or their subdivisions) where an appropriate public body has adopted adequate land use and control measures, including effective enforcement provisions, which the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) finds are consistent with certain statutory criteria for land management and use relating to windstorms.
Prohibits provision of multiperil coverage to any structure (or related personal property ) covered, at any time, by flood insurance under the Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prescribes the nature and terms of coverage, and actuarial rates.
Prohibits new multiperil coverage for property declared by a duly constituted governmental authority to be in violation of state or local laws, regulations, or ordinances intended to reduce windstorm damage.
People & committees
Rep. Taylor, Gene [D-MS-4] · D–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Aug 14, 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.920 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.920 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.920 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.920 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.