A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed 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
The Emergency Response Authority Act provides authority and reimbursement for State disaster response duty. It allows a State chief executive who has declared an emergency to order National Guard members performing Active Guard and Reserve duty to respond to or prepare for a disaster. This duty requires consent from the Secretary of Defense and must not interfere with the member's primary duties. The duty is generally limited to 14 days per member per calendar year, though extensions are possible under specific conditions. The bill also establishes a reimbursement system where States pay the fully burdened costs of manpower.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster?
The bill expands the authority of State chief executives to deploy National Guard members for disaster response and preparation.
- Scored +2
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?
The bill creates a new category of service duty for active National Guard members during emergencies.
- Scored +2
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?
The bill provides specific authority for National Guard members on active duty to perform disaster response tasks.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Disaster Response Capability: State chief executives can order National Guard members performing Active Guard and Reserve duty to perform duties in response to, or in preparation for, a declared disaster (Section 2(a)).
-
Extensions for Major Events: The Secretary of Defense can authorize an extension of duty for up to 46 days if the duty is in support of a response to a catastrophic incident (Section 2(b)(3)(B)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Financial Burden on States: The Secretary of the military department concerned will charge a State for the fully burdened costs of manpower, and these charges must be paid from the funds of the State or other non-Federal funds (Section 2(c)(1) and (2)).
-
Restrictions on Duty due to Debt: If a State is more than 90 days in arrears in reimbursing the Secretary, the duty may not be performed unless authorized by the Secretary of Defense and after the State obligates funds for the amount in arrears (Section 2(c)(4)).
-
Liability Risks: A National Guard member performing this duty is not considered an instrumentality of the United States, and the United States is not responsible for any claim or judgment arising from the use of the member (Section 2(d)).
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.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — The bill expands the authority of State chief executives to deploy National Guard members for disaster response and preparation.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill creates a new category of service duty for active National Guard members during emergencies.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — The bill provides specific authority for National Guard members on active duty to perform disaster response tasks.
- 12/11/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
- Introduced in Senate
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.