A Democratic bill with 21 Democratic cosponsors · See all 21 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill directs the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA to create a pilot grant program for community-based catastrophe insurance. Under this program, grants will be awarded to states, tribes, local governments, and non-profits to design and implement community-wide insurance options for natural disasters. The goal is to help cover risks that traditional property insurance does not handle well, stabilize the private insurance market, and promote disaster resilience. The bill outlines specific rules for policy requirements, consumer disclosures, and coordination with state insurance regulators. It also requires the Government Accountability Office to submit reports evaluating the effectiveness of the pilot programs. The grant program is authorized to receive $20,000,000 for each fiscal year from 2027 through 2031, terminating on September 30, 2031.
Yes· 3 of 22
- Scored +6
Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster?
The bill directs FEMA to establish a pilot grant program for community-based catastrophe insurance to improve post-disaster recovery.
- Scored +5
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill mandates clear, plain-language consumer disclosures regarding coverage, deductibles, and parametric risks.
- Scored +4
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill focuses on addressing coverage gaps and affordability constraints for households facing high financial exposure to natural disasters.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Consumer Outreach and Research Funding: Section 2(b)(1) and Section 2(b)(2) allow grant recipients to use funds for consumer research, outreach, education, and enrollment. This is positive because it helps everyday people better understand their insurance options, coverage gaps, and financial risks related to natural disasters.
-
Clear Consumer Disclosures: Section 2(c)(1)(C) requires community-based insurance products to provide clear, plain-language disclosures about covered perils, exclusions, deductibles, and how the policy interacts with traditional insurance or disaster assistance. This benefits the public by ensuring consumers know exactly what they are buying and what to expect after a disaster hits.
-
Disaster Resilience Incentives: Section 2(c)(1)(E) requires programs to promote or incentivize community-wide and individual measures to reduce potential losses and increase disaster resilience. This can help people protect their homes and lower their long-term disaster risks.
-
Streamlined Claims and Payouts: Section 2(c)(1)(F) and Section 2(c)(3)(B) encourage streamlined claims processes and parametric programs that provide timely fixed or graduated payments when predetermined disaster triggers are met. This is a positive outcome for individuals who need fast financial help to recover after a catastrophe.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Potential Basis Risk in Parametric Programs: Section 2(c)(1)(G) and Section 2(i)(3) allow programs to operate using parametric triggers, which carries "basis risk"—defined as the potential difference between the actual loss a person suffers and the payout they receive from the program. This could negatively impact individuals if a disaster occurs and their payout does not fully cover their actual financial losses.
-
Premium Costs and Financial Sustainability: Section 2(c)(1)(D) requires premiums to be actuarially sound, and Section 2(b)(8) discusses the eventual need for long-term financial sustainability after the pilot program concludes. If non-Federal financial support or premium assistance runs out, individuals could face higher, unaffordable out-of-pocket premium costs to maintain their coverage.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill focuses on addressing coverage gaps and affordability constraints for households facing high financial exposure to natural disasters. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class homeowners benefit from expanded community-based insurance options and clearer policy disclosures. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Tribal governments are explicitly included as eligible covered entities for grants under the catastrophe insurance pilot program. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents benefit from targeted community grants and catastrophe insurance programs designed to address natural disaster risks. Would business owners be better off under this? — Business owners benefit from innovative risk transfer approaches and stabilizing property insurance markets. Would children be better off under this? — Improved disaster resilience and financial stability benefit families and children in disaster-prone communities. Would farmers be better off under this? — Rural communities and agricultural regions benefit from disaster resilience grants and risk mitigation programs. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged homeowners benefit from enhanced consumer disclosures and risk reduction incentives. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees benefit from greater financial stability and reduced vulnerability to catastrophic property losses. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors on fixed incomes benefit from more stable insurance markets and clearer disaster recovery options. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults and new homeowners benefit from improved transparency and options in catastrophe insurance.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — The bill directs FEMA to establish a pilot grant program for community-based catastrophe insurance to improve post-disaster recovery. Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill awards grants to local governments and tribal entities, supporting rural disaster planning and community resilience. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill incentivizes community-wide and individual measures to reduce potential losses and increase resilience to natural hazards.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill mandates clear, plain-language consumer disclosures regarding coverage, deductibles, and parametric risks. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill provides grants and tools to help small businesses and communities manage catastrophe insurance and natural disaster risks. Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill establishes a pilot program to stabilize property insurance markets and promote disaster resilience, supporting broader economic stability in disaster-prone areas.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The bill provides financial protection and disaster assistance grants that help vulnerable households recover from catastrophic losses. Does this make housing cost less? — The bill helps stabilize property insurance markets, potentially easing housing cost burdens related to natural disaster risks. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — By improving disaster resilience and financial recovery options, the bill helps prevent housing displacement following natural catastrophes.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires comprehensive GAO reports and clear data sharing to evaluate the effectiveness of the disaster insurance pilot programs. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill explicitly preserves state insurance authority under the McCarran-Ferguson Act and requires coordination with state regulators.
- 10/22/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/9/2026
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 10/5/2026
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 10/1/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- 14 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Suzanne BonamiciDemocrat · Oregon
Ami BeraDemocrat · California
Ed CaseDemocrat · Hawaii
Kathy CastorDemocrat · Florida
Steve CohenDemocrat · Tennessee
Sean CastenDemocrat · Illinois
Gilbert CisnerosDemocrat · California
Maxine DexterDemocrat · Oregon
Timothy KennedyDemocrat · New York
Mike LevinDemocrat · California
Kevin MullinDemocrat · California
Johnny OlszewskiDemocrat · Maryland
Chellie PingreeDemocrat · Maine
Jimmy PanettaDemocrat · California
Mike QuigleyDemocrat · Illinois
Deborah RossDemocrat · North Carolina
Andrea SalinasDemocrat · Oregon
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California
Shri ThanedarDemocrat · Michigan
Nikema WilliamsDemocrat · Georgia
Debbie Wasserman SchultzDemocrat · Florida