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 S2031-2038)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 15, 2007
Risk-Based Homeland Security Grants Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to set forth provisions governing Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grant funding for first responders pursuant to the State Homeland Security Grant Program, the Urban Area Security Initiative, the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program, and the Citizen Corps Program.
Makes eligible for a covered grant any state, region, or directly eligible tribe. Sets forth grant application requirements.
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish: (1) a Homeland Security Grants Board; (2) clearly defined essential capabilities for state and local government preparedness for terrorism (sets forth factors to address in establishing such capabilities and lists critical infrastructure sectors and types of threats to consider); and (3) a Task Force on Essential Capabilities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to promulgate national voluntary consensus standards for first responder equipment and training.
Lists authorized and prohibited uses of grants. Requires each grant recipient to submit quarterly and annual reports on homeland security spending.
Establishes penalties for states that fail to pass through to local governments, first responders, and other local groups funds or resources within 45 days of receipt.
Expresses the sense of Congress regarding interoperable communications and Citizen Corps councils.
Requires the Secretary to ensure coordination of federal efforts to prevent, prepare for, and respond to emergencies.
Directs the Secretary to conduct studies regarding: (1) implementation of a nationwide emergency telephonic alert notification system; (2) modifying the definition of "National Capital Region" to expand the area under the jurisdiction of the Office of National Capital Region Coordination; (3) risk-based funds allocation for port security grants; and (4) funds allocation under the Assistance to Firefighter Grants Program.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
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 S2031-2038)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2030-2031)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.608 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.608 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.608 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.608 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.