The bill
Emergency Reporting Act
HR. 5200, 119th Congress — read as touching Telecommunications.
Sponsored by
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7]
ID: M001163
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 5200, 119th Congress — read as touching Telecommunications.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
22 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 375.
April 20, 2026
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another brilliant example of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Emergency Reporting Act (HR 5200) claims to improve network outage reporting and provide better information to emergency responders during disasters. How quaint. In reality, it's just a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, designed to make politicians look like they're doing something while actually accomplishing nothing.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to hold public hearings and issue reports after activating the Disaster Information Reporting System. It also mandates an investigation into improving network outage reporting, because, apparently, the current system is a hot mess. Oh, and let's not forget the obligatory "rule of construction" clause, which ensures that the FCC doesn't overstep its authority – a classic example of legislative CYA.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: state and local governments, Indian tribal governments, communications service providers, consumer advocates, and first responders. You know, the same people who will be affected by this bill's inevitable ineffectiveness.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a prime example of "legislative lip service." It promises to improve disaster response, but in reality, it's just a feel-good measure designed to placate voters. The real impact will be minimal, as the underlying issues – outdated infrastructure, inadequate funding, and bureaucratic red tape – remain unaddressed. Meanwhile, the FCC will get to hold hearings, issue reports, and pretend like they're doing something useful.
In medical terms, this bill is akin to treating a patient's symptoms without addressing the underlying disease. It's a classic case of " legislative placebo effect," where politicians prescribe a sugar pill to make voters feel better, while the actual problems continue to fester. The diagnosis? Acute stupidity, chronic cowardice, and a healthy dose of corruption.
To summarize: HR 5200 is a pointless exercise in legislative theater, designed to make politicians look good while accomplishing nothing meaningful. It's a waste of time, money, and resources – a perfect example of how our government excels at doing nothing effectively. Bravo, Congress! You've managed to create another bill that will inevitably disappoint and underwhelm. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do than watch this train wreck unfold.
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No committee contributions found
This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: B001257
Top Contributors
10
ID: B001300
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 49 nodes and 28 connections (43 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $94,500
Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.
Section 2(a)(1)(B)(iii) requires inclusion of providers of communications services affected by events in public hearings; Section 2(b) directs FCC to investigate and report on improvements to network outage reporting, including value to public safety agencies and burden on originating service providers, which could lead to regulatory changes benefiting telecom firms through clearer guidelines and potential funding for resilience.
Section 2(a)(1)(B)(vi) explicitly includes electric utility providers among those to be considered for inclusion in public hearings after disaster events, indicating recognition of their role in disaster response and potential for improved coordination, which could benefit utilities through better information sharing and resilience planning.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.