PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 6, 2005
Declares that no limitation on the amount or percentage of assistance that may be provided in the form of a community disaster loan under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act shall apply to any community disaster loan to assist any local government with jurisdiction over a major disaster area relating to Hurricane Katrina or Hurricane Rita.
Declares that no prohibition or limitation on reimbursement of salaries shall apply with respect to reimburswement of straight- and regular-time salaries of public personnel that provide, on or after August 29, 2005, essential public services in Louisiana on behalf of that state.
Authorizes FY2006 appropriations.
Provides that, of the amounts made available to the Department of Homeland Security for disaster relief under Public Law 109-62, not less than $1.5 billion shall be available to the appropriate federal agency heads to carry out the programs and activities authorized by this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Landrieu, Mary L. [D-LA] · D–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 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 S.1846 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.1846 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.1846 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.1846 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.