PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 461.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Nov 1, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act to revise the definition of an act of terrorism for terrorism risk insurance purposes to eliminate the requirement that the individual or individuals committing a terrorist act be acting on behalf of any foreign person or foreign interest.
Extends the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program through calendar 2014.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 4) States that no insurer may be required to make payment for insured losses in excess of its statutory deductible, combined with its statutory share of insured losses.
Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to: (1) notify Congress within 15 days of an act of terrorism on whether the Secretary estimates that aggregate insured losses will exceed $100 billion; (2) promulgate final regulations for determining the pro rata share of insured losses which exceed $100 billion; and (3) report to Congress on the process used to determine the allocation of pro rata payments when insured losses exceed $100 billion.
Requires insurers to disclose to policyholders the $100 billion cap on liability.
(Sec. 5) Directs the Comptroller General to study and report to certain congressional committees regarding: (1) the availability and affordability of insurance coverage for losses caused by terrorist attacks involving nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological materials; (2) the outlook for such coverage in the future; (3) the capacity of private insurers and state workers compensation funds to manage risk associated with such events; and (4) whether there are specific markets in the United States with unique capacity constraints on the amount of terrorism risk insurance available.
People & committees
Sen. Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT] · D–CT
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. 461.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Dodd. With written report No. 110-215.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Dodd. With written report No. 110-215.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.2285 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.2285 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.2285 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.2285 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.