PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 126 - 254 (Roll no. 500). (text: CR H5105)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 26, 2012
Directs the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to approve the construction of a permanent flood risk reduction levee by a state, local, or tribal government under specified circumstances on land: (1) acquired and deed restricted under hazard mitigation provisions of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; and (2) located in North Dakota in a community that is participating in the National Flood Insurance Program on the date on which a state, local, or tribal government requests construction of such a levee and certifies to the Administrator and the Chief of Engineers that the community will continue to participate in the Program.
Requires such approval if the Administrator and the Chief of Engineers determine that: (1) construction of the proposed levee would more effectively mitigate against flooding risk than an open floodplain; (2) the proposed levee complies with federal, state, and local requirements, including the consideration of mitigation of adverse impacts and floodplain management requirements; and (3) the state, local, or tribal government seeking to construct the levee has provided an adequate maintenance plan that meets specified requirements.
Requires: (1) a state, local, or tribal government that constructs such a levee to submit to the Administrator and the Chief of Engineers an annual certification indicating whether such government is in compliance with the maintenance plan; and (2) the Chief to review such certification and determine whether such government has complied with that plan.
People & committees
Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND] · R–ND
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 126 - 254 (Roll no. 500). (text: CR H5105)
House roll call 500 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 126 - 254 (Roll no. 500).(text: CR H5105)
House roll call 500 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5115-5116)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 2039.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5105-5110)
Mr. Young (AK) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S136-137)
Introduced in the Senate, read twice.
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.2039 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.2039 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.2039 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.2039 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.