PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 21, 2013
Amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to repeal the prohibition against provision of flood insurance by the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to prospective insureds at rates less than standard estimates for property purchased after enactment of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (Biggert-Waters). (Thus allows risk premium rates lower than standard rates for certain property purchased after Biggert-Waters.)
Delays the effective date of any flood insurance rate changes until 180 days after FEMA submits: (1) a certain report on methods to establish an affordability framework for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), or (2) notice to the congressional committees concerned of an alternative method of gathering information for such report if the report cannot be submitted by its due date. Directs FEMA to study options, methods, and implementing strategies for making available voluntary community-based flood insurance policies through NFIP.
Prohibits FEMA, when determining whether a community has made adequate progress on the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of a flood protection system, from considering the level of federal funding or participation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Deems an action for the repair, restoration, and replacement of a totally destroyed structure or facility located in a coastal high hazard area for which an eligible entity received a contribution under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to be a "substantial improvement" for which grant funds may be used, if specified conditions are met.
Requires a replacement structure or facility to be relocated to an alternative site if FEMA determines that a practicable alternative located outside the coastal high hazard area exists and provides better protection against hazards associated with coastal high hazard areas.
Prescribes deed restrictions to dedicate and maintain it in perpetuity as open space for the conservation of natural floodplain functions for any property involved in the construction of replacement structures or facilities, either the original site if the replacement structure or facility is relocated, or an alternative parcel of land in the coastal high hazard area if the replacement is rebuilt at the same location.
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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.996 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.996 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.996 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.996 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.