PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1738-1740)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 15, 2012
Preparedness and Resilience Foundation Act - Establishes the Preparedness and Resilience Foundation as a nonprofit, private corporation to support and carry out activities that: (1) promote the resilience of individuals, communities, structures, and systems against natural disasters and terrorist attacks and other human caused disasters; and (2) build and sustain capabilities of the public, private, and civic sectors to work together to prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all such hazards.
Directs the Foundation to establish an Endowment Fund for providing endowments for positions that are associated with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and dedicated to the Foundation's purpose. Includes among Foundation activities providing for: (1) fellowship programs among state, local, and tribal officials to work and study in association with each other and FEMA or the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); (2) international exchange programs for voluntary or reciprocal service by officials engaged in preparedness or resilience activities; and (3) programs to improve the collection and analysis of data on preparedness and resilience programs, practices, activities, and events.
Authorizes the FEMA Administrator to: (1) accept any gift or devise of property and any voluntary service provided by the Foundation for the purpose of aiding or facilitating the work of FEMA; and (2) provide to the Foundation facilities, utilities, and support services as determined to be advantageous to FEMA or DHS programs.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes a committee to incorporate, provide for initial operation of, and appoint the initial Board of Directors of, the Foundation.
People & committees
Sen. Inouye, Daniel K. [D-HI] · D–HI
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. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1738-1740)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1737-1738)
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: 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 S.2202 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.2202 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.2202 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.2202 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.