PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 269.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 1, 2001
World Trade Center Attack Claims Act - Establishes within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) the Office of World Trade Center Attack Claims. Entitles persons (individuals and entities) who suffered injury as a result of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, and who reside or maintain a place of business in a designated area in lower Manhattan to Federal compensation. Requires the Director of FEMA (or an Independent Claims Manager if appointed to head such Office) to investigate and deny or pay (and determine appropriate amounts for) claims submitted for such compensation.Requires an injured person to use a claim payment only to continue repair, replace, start, establish, or locate in New York City a business or residence that was located in the designated area before the attack. Limits claim payments to: (1) the amount necessary to compensate for injuries suffered during the 18-month period following the attack; and (2) $500,000, with exceptions. Prescribes types of compensable injury, including uninsured or under-insured property loss, damage to physical infrastructure or to tangible assets or inventory, and business interruption loss. Requires the Director to reduce the amount to be paid for any claim by the amounts of any insurance or other Federal assistance program payments or charitable financial assistance in order to prevent a claimant's recovery in excess of actual compensatory damages.Requires the Director to establish procedures under which a claim dispute may be settled by arbitration and provides for judicial review of the Director's decisions.Provides that nothing in this Act affects any right of an injured person to request benefits under any Federal entitlement program.
People & committees
Sen. Clinton, Hillary Rodham [D-NY] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 269.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Jeffords with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 107-116.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Jeffords with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 107-116.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.1624 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 S.1624 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 S.1624 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 S.1624 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.