[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 115 (Wednesday, September 14, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H7883-H7887]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                KATRINA VOLUNTEER PROTECTION ACT OF 2005

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 3736) to protect volunteers assisting the victims of 
Hurricane Katrina.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3736

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Katrina Volunteer Protection 
     Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF VOLUNTEERS.

       (a) Qualified Immunity From Suit.--Any person or entity 
     (including any Indian Tribe) that, in response to harm caused 
     by Hurricane Katrina of 2005, voluntarily, in good faith, and 
     without a preexisting duty or expectation of compensation, 
     renders aid (including medical treatment and rescue 
     assistance) to any individual, shall not be liable for any 
     injury (including personal injury, property damage or loss, 
     and death) arising out of or resulting from that aid that was 
     not caused by--
       (1) willful, wanton, reckless or criminal conduct of that 
     person or entity; or
       (2) conduct of that person or entity that constitutes a 
     violation of a Federal or State civil rights law.
       (b) Preemption.--This Act preempts the laws of a State to 
     the the extent such laws are inconsistent with this Act, 
     except that this Act shall not preempt any State law that 
     provides additional protection from liability relating to 
     volunteers.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3736 currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1130

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, thousands of America's volunteers have already answered 
the call to help those suffering in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. But, 
unfortunately, many are hindered in their efforts or held back from 
joining the relief effort in the first place by the threat of legal 
liability.

[[Page H7884]]

  In too many parts of the country, including Louisiana and the other 
areas affected by Hurricane Katrina, it is not only unclear what 
defines the legal protections for Good Samaritans, but it is also 
unclear which of those legal protections would govern where citizens of 
multiple States converge on another State to give aid and comfort to 
their fellow citizens in need.
  At the Federal level, the Volunteer Protection Act does not provide 
any protection to volunteers who are not working under the auspices of 
an official nonprofit organization, namely, a 501(c)(3) organization; 
and it provides no protection at all to the nonprofit organizations 
themselves.
  Consequently, under Federal law there are absolutely no legal 
protections for the average person who wants to volunteer on their own, 
and there are also absolutely no legal protections for America's 
wonderful nonprofit organizations themselves, such as the Red Cross; 
but only an extremely small percentage of the some 1.4 million 
nonprofit organizations in the United States actually purchase 
liability insurance due to excessive costs.
  The bill before us today closes the gaps in existing law for those 
individuals and organizations wanting to give of themselves to aid 
those suffering the worst effects of one of the most tragic weather 
disasters in American history. This bill makes crystal clear that 
everyone who helps those who have suffered harm in the wake of 
Hurricane Katrina will be covered by some basic legal protections.
  If a volunteer's own State law provides greater protections for them, 
all the better; and this legislation would allow those stronger 
protections to govern in their situation. But this bill provides a 
uniform Federal floor on which all volunteers can confidently stand 
when helping those in need in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
  Such a uniform Federal law is clearly needed. As the Los Angeles 
Times recently reported, ``the lack of liability protection is one of 
several concerns delaying some 900 churches from joining the evacuation 
network.'' According to recent press accounts, the Red Cross feels 
constrained in giving out the names of refugees to those who want to 
offer their homes to them for shelter because they have concern about 
liability. The Red Cross has cited liability issues as a reason for 
people not to volunteer to take refugees into their homes and complain 
generally that ``there is so much liability involved.''
  The Minnesota Department of Public Safety spokesman has said of 
volunteer efforts, if things go south, there are liability problems. In 
Grandville, Michigan, a local school district wants to let evacuees use 
a vacant school for shelter, but the school's superintendent is 
concerned about liability issues. The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports 
that a specially trained group of 50 international physicians and 
psychologists who have extensive experience treating children in Third 
World countries could face liability issues here if they venture into 
States where they are not licensed.
  Anytime lawsuits or threats of lawsuits limit private persons and 
entities, State and local governments from acting to help those in 
need, the response costs of the Federal Government only increase.
  H.R. 3736 simply ensures that if one is a volunteer who acts in good 
faith to assist the victims of Hurricane Katrina without compensation, 
then they do not have to worry about lawsuits unless they either act in 
a willful, wanton, reckless, or criminal matter or violate a Federal or 
State civil rights law. All volunteers under this bill will have to 
worry about is saving those in need, and they will not have to worry 
about hiring an attorney to defend themselves from a frivolous lawsuit.
  The bill does not apply to those with preexisting duties to aid. That 
is, it does not apply to those with the statutory duty to aid the 
victims or those with prior contractual obligations to do so. The bill 
does apply to all volunteers who in good faith and without expectation 
of compensation render aid, medical treatment, or rescue assistance to 
any person in response to harm caused by Hurricane Katrina.
  The Congress voted overwhelmingly to give far greater legal 
protections to selected entities following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. 
At the very least, this Congress should pass some legal protection for 
volunteers working in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
  While we all keep the victims of Katrina in our prayers, let us keep 
all the individual volunteers and organizations that support them in 
our hearts and free them to act on their compassion without the 
distracting fear of unnecessary lawsuits.
  This bill should be passed. I urge the Members to vote in favor of 
it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is with reluctance that I rise in opposition to this legislation. 
I cannot support it, and I am reluctant about that because it has been 
my intention to work with everyone on the committee to eliminate the 
problems of this bill, the excesses and flaws that are in it now; and 
my suggestions have not been received, and the bill has been put 
together in an extremely hasty manner that I believe will insulate 
negligent and dangerous behavior that we would otherwise have no 
inclination to do.
  I begin by pointing out that we already have a Volunteer Protection 
Act in the law, passed in the year 1997, which protects volunteers. 
This bill had hearings. It was carefully crafted and bipartisan in 
nature. It protects volunteers from their good deeds, but not from 
their misconduct.
  This bill, unfortunately, goes much further. And the problems that I 
have referred to and will continue to refer to are the result of the 
fact that this bill has never had a hearing: in no subcommittee, not in 
the full Committee on the Judiciary. There have never been witnesses to 
testify for or against it. There has never been a markup. Nothing. We 
come today with a measure that has been pulled out of the air. We have 
not heard from a single interested party as to why the bill is 
necessary. We have not received so much as a shred of evidence that 
there is any shortage of volunteers to assist in Hurricane Katrina as a 
result of our civil justice system.
  So I point out to the Members that in the first instance the bill is 
not limited to protection of volunteers. It would protect many 
organizations, public and private, that might be involved in Hurricane 
Katrina, which could be government organizations. It could even protect 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency. It could protect cities and 
counties and States. It could protect business entities.
  This bill is off the charts. And in the past, when we were more 
carefully considering the matter, we decided not to cover these 
entities because we did not want to protect firms that retain people 
who were criminals. We did not want to give comfort to drug addicts who 
may be working there or even sex offenders from liability that they 
might be involved with. This bill creates a green light for all kinds 
of behavior, that it will now receive a protection. For the life of me, 
I cannot suggest one reason why we ought to pass this measure. I am not 
aware of any business or even a nonprofit entity that has asked this 
committee for relief from liability in order to help out in Katrina.
  Nobody knows about it. This is a phantom measure that has come out of 
nowhere, and if it is just to pass the time of day and keep us busy, it 
is probably doing a great harm to our civil justice system.
  The bill goes beyond the Volunteer Protection Act to, if the Members 
can grasp this, immunize gross negligence and intentional conduct. We 
would immunize negligent and purposeful misconduct. Never in the 
history of Congress have we ever considered immunizing such actions. 
Why should we do it today? There is no reason to protect such blatant 
wrongdoing from such important responsibility.
  The drafting that I have talked about is so broad, it would protect 
unlicensed volunteers who are attempting to operate as professionals. 
This would include individuals who provide medical treatment without 
training if something like that were to come along. It could protect 
people flying airplanes without licenses. Under this measure, an 
individual could travel to Louisiana without a license to conduct 
surgery and claim in a civil action that he has a liability waiver 
coming from this bill.
  This measure would even go further. It would insulate simple traffic 
accidents from liability. A person working

[[Page H7885]]

around the Katrina disaster could negligently have an accident and 
injure a child on the way to New Orleans, and the family would be left 
with no recourse whatsoever. I can imagine that this bill will be 
brought up in civil cases in ways that we have never had an opportunity 
to contemplate.
  So I make a simple proposition. Why do we not just move this bill off 
the floor, set up the subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary 
that is anxiously waiting to schedule witnesses for the bill, and have 
them do their work and bring it to the full committee where it may 
receive even further amendments and inquiry?
  It makes no sense to exempt irresponsible people from their own 
negligence. It would even insulate nursing homes, hello, from civil 
liability who use volunteers and their failure to evacuate resulted in 
death. One could lose their loved one as a result of negligence by a 
nursing home; and if they raise these protections that are involved in 
this legislation, the person bringing the action could be left without 
compensation.
  We are setting up, whether we admit it or not, a two-tier system of 
civil justice. One for the people that were able and could afford to 
escape Katrina who will have their full right in the civil justice 
system, just as all people always have, but a lesser system for 
indigent individuals, many of whom, if not most, are, in fact, 
minorities, who may have, and I hope this is very few, but some who may 
have suffered abuse as a result of additional negligence and 
misconduct.

                              {time}  1145

  So what we have here is a horrible attempt to insulate volunteer 
liability, but it has been put together in such a way that we have a 
piece of legislation that I do not think can withstand the reasonable 
scrutiny of the Members of this body. If we adopt this unthinking bill 
without bothering to figure out what we are doing and who we are 
further exposing to harm, we may, in all likelihood, be compounding the 
tragedy that exists to which we are trying to bring some closure to.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller).
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise and applaud the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) for this reasonable 
approach to volunteers who are trying to help people.
  This is an amazing debate that is taking place today because, last 
week, we were concerned about people dying, getting help to them, 
providing all the assets we could provide to save lives.
  Now, think about the people in the construction industry who want to 
do good. The people after 9/11, some of them were sued because they 
volunteered to go help prior to contracts being let. There were no 
government contracts being let. They wanted to volunteer. They might 
have provided an excavator, a grader, a backhoe, a dump truck.
  Let us say someone in New Orleans happened to own a boat, and he 
wanted to go help people. He went to pull somebody into his boat to 
save them, and they slipped, broke an arm, a total accident. Some trial 
lawyer says, hey, we can make you rich. Let us sue the guy who brought 
the boat.
  Somebody is out there trying to help people. There is a dirt road 
that needs grading, and the guy volunteers to go out there with his 
blade, regrade the road, somebody walks across it afterwards, slips, 
and some trial lawyer says, hey, we can make you a fortune. You just 
slipped on something somebody did, and we will hold the contractor 
liable because they volunteered to do good.
  We have construction expertise in this country that is sorely needed 
during times of disaster. We cannot continue to allow a message to be 
sent to those volunteers.
  I became a general contractor in my early 20s. I have been in the 
business for over 35 years. There are many good people out there who 
work very hard, earn a good living, and they want to give a little back 
to their country and to the people who they have benefited from through 
volunteering in a time of disaster when they know they can do good, 
they can make things better, and they can save lives. The argument I 
heard today was quite the opposite.
  Last week, we had a hearing in Financial Services talking about all 
the people who are living in football stadiums and warehouses. We have 
to get those people out of there, get them to some home to live in, 
some safe environment.
  Now, a person goes out there who owns a motor home, decides to haul a 
bunch of people from a stadium, somebody trips getting in their motor 
home and gets sued. Is that reasonable or fair? No.
  If there is negligence on the part of the individual who volunteered, 
hold them accountable. But the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman 
Sensenbrenner) is not for holding anybody unaccountable for gross 
negligence or violating the law. But if you volunteer to help in a case 
like this where people are dying, all of a sudden trial lawyers are 
more important than the people we are trying to save during a disaster.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make a response to my 
friend, the previous speaker, to let him know that the examples that he 
made are quite logical and quite rational. We think that they should be 
given protection. But we do not want what is in this bill that goes way 
beyond that kind of protection, because we would give protection for 
gross negligence, and it is in that respect that I am opposed to the 
bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6\1/2\ minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, let me, first of all, suggest that we owe a debt of 
gratitude to all of the volunteers across the country that have come in 
to places like Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and my own State of 
Texas. So this is not an expression of concern with disregard for the 
charity that has been shown by the throngs of volunteers. And, might I 
suggest, like the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), that 
volunteers have come from everywhere without the question of whether or 
not they are immune or protected.
  I refer my colleagues to the Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 which 
really crafts, I think, the latitude and the range of protection that 
makes sense. It provides immunity for volunteers serving nonprofit 
organizations and government entities, which include the likes of FEMA 
and the Red Cross and also the folks that come under that umbrella and 
the many nonprofits that exist.
  The idea that this legislation might, in fact, protect those who are 
grossly negligent seems flawed in several aspects. Even though the 
Attorney General of the State of Louisiana has now moved against this 
tragic circumstance with the loss of lives of a number of individuals 
in a particular nursing home, we do realize that this is now at a level 
of criminal charges, but suppose it was not. Certainly the American 
people and Louisianans and others would want that particular entity to 
be held liable for gross negligence, if you will, and they happen not 
to be, I assume, a nonprofit, so that they might be covered by this 
legislation for their gross negligence.
  What about the hospital? The facts will come out. Obviously, one 
cannot suggest guilt where one does not know all of the facts, but the 
facts will come out. But now it has been discovered, a number of bodies 
in a hospital in Louisiana, and that, too, may warrant consideration 
that this bill does not address.
  I would hope that in the rush to deal with the plaintiffs' bar, trial 
lawyers who have, in many instances, found justice where others could 
not on environmental issues, on medical malpractice issues, on issues 
dealing with occupational disasters that have caused injury to workers, 
that we would not be focused on that ``perceived problem'' versus the 
needs of people who are being served.
  We want the volunteers to be there. We want them to be protected, and 
we believe that we do have the protection.
  As I speak about this bill, might I also bring attention to a bill 
that I missed, Mr. Speaker, and I simply want

[[Page H7886]]

to add my support to the 50th recognition of the Rosa Parks legislation 
that acknowledges her quest for justice by sitting down. I weave this 
into this debate because I think that it is relevant when we begin to 
talk about how Congress fixes problems. Rosa Parks certainly spread 
across the land a new idea of justice and the refusal, if you will, to 
be subjected to unfair and unjust laws. I pay tribute to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and all of those who have spoken in support 
of what she did to change America, and I add my voice to the 
commemoration that was on the floor just previously.
  As I infuse back into the Katrina Volunteer Protection Act and 
mention the volunteers, one has to accept the time that they have to 
speak to important issues at hand.
  Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), I 
offer today an important issue that speaks to the question of justice 
and, I assume as well, the thoughts of this body, and that is the 
unfair position that Frances Newton finds herself in, an African 
American woman, but a woman that is now on death row today, September 
14, in Texas whose execution date is 6 p.m. central standard time.
  This Congress may have some cause, but this is now in the hands of 
the administration, the Solicitor General, the Supreme Court, and the 
governor of the State of Texas. If we do not act today, a woman who did 
not have effective counsel, whose counsel did not question one witness, 
whose counsel did not present one iota of evidence, who now has found 
that there were multiple weapons, who has a flawed DNA background in 
terms of this case and, likewise, who has protested and petitioned over 
and over again that she did not kill her children, will now go to her 
death.
  Whether or not this Congress has the power to instruct the Supreme 
Court of the United States, as we now hear the proceedings of Judge 
Roberts, we know that this body should be a body concerned about 
justice. I would wholly hope that those who can hear my voice will 
petition by way of their own way, their representatives, to ask the 
Solicitor General to petition on the side of the Innocence Project to 
allow the case to be reheard, a new trial to secure this evidence, to 
secure the ability to give Frances Newton a new trial of which she 
deserves.
  We cannot stand on the floor of the House today and talk about 
protecting volunteers, albeit I have the concerns as enunciated, and 
not suggest that we cannot protect the justice system. Frances Newton 
has protested and petitioned her innocence. She is a mother who says 
that she did not kill her children. The governor of the State of Texas 
has the power to give her a 30-day extension, and I would hope that our 
voices will be heard.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for their willingness to sign on 
to a letter asking for that petition to be heard, and I would ask other 
Members of Congress to do likewise.
  Mr. Speaker, I have expressed my views on the Katrina Volunteer 
Protection Act and I hope, as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) 
said, that we could work on this together.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the great success stories in this tragedy is the 
fact that thousands of volunteers from across the country responded to 
the needs of the victims. Physicians and nurses and other medical 
volunteers, health care professionals, volunteered their specialized 
skills to come to the aid of the victims of Katrina. Their efforts have 
ensured that these victims receive much-needed care and assistance, but 
many more have been hesitant to take part because they were threatened 
by the specter of lawsuits.
  I know this to be a fact. I was on the ground there in Louisiana. I 
helped to organize much of the medical relief effort, and this is a 
fact, that many were hesitant to come to the aid.
  Rules protecting good Samaritans vary greatly between States, and it 
is often unclear what legal protections volunteers have when performing 
charitable acts, and this was particularly so with such a tragedy of 
this magnitude.
  H.R. 3736 will clarify the rules for everyone involved and ensure 
that uniform standards are applied to relief efforts from Louisiana to 
Mississippi to Alabama. This bill will protect volunteers acting in 
good faith to assist Katrina victims, while still protecting the rights 
of victims who allege injuries as a result of willful, wanton, 
reckless, or criminal conduct on the part of a volunteer. Questions of 
liability should not and should never prevent individuals and 
organizations from offering their services in such a tragedy.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the Katrina Volunteer Protection 
Act. This is important legislation, and I urge its rapid and steady 
approval.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), our subcommittee 
ranking member.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, this did not go through 
committee, so I just had a question for the chairman of the committee, 
if the chairman would respond.
  My question is what impact this will have on someone minding their 
own business, sitting at a stoplight, that gets rear-ended by someone 
headed to New Orleans in an automobile accident, simple negligence, 
with insurance. Does the innocent party now have to pay their own 
medical bills, or is there some provision in the bill that allows the 
insurance to still be available to pay the medical bills?
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, the bill says that if the driver of 
the car is operating as a volunteer without compensation and acting in 
good faith, the provisions of the bill apply.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, in this case, 
if the volunteer is hit and has an automobile accident, fully insured, 
you lose the insurance, the innocent victim is now subject to pay his 
own medical bills. Where, ordinarily, there would be compensation for 
the automobile accident, that is lost. These are people who could be in 
States not even affected, just sitting at a stoplight.
  Usually, when we have these immunity bills, we provide that the 
insurance in an automobile accident, the insurance would apply. This 
would exempt the insurance. I think it is one of the problems of 
bringing bills like this to the floor without going through committee. 
I think we could have fixed that.

                              {time}  1200

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Virginia's 
example tells us the whole thing. This is over the edge. It is not that 
we do not want to give protection, but this goes way, way too far.
  Now, I remind my colleagues that the problem that we have here is 
that there have never been any hearings. There have never been any 
markups. There have never been any witnesses. There has never been a 
full committee hearing. Nobody has ever seen this measure before today 
when it is now on the floor.
  It sounds great, volunteer liability legislation. But that is what we 
did with the Volunteer Protection Act in 1997. That was carefully 
crafted, bipartisan in nature, and covers all of this activity.
  We go way beyond volunteer protection to immunize what could be 
misconduct of a deliberate and blatant nature, that can immunize 
negligence of the grossest sort, and never in the history have we ever 
imagined, thought of immunizing such actions. So there is no reason to 
protect such blatant wrongdoing from responsibility.
  And it is a fatal flaw of this legislation. I urge that it be sent 
back to the Judiciary Committee for appropriate action.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, after listening to the gentleman from Michigan, I am a 
little bit confused. Because last week, the Congress appropriated 
almost $52 billion without a hearing. Right before Labor Day, the 
Congress appropriated $10 billion without a hearing.

[[Page H7887]]

  Today, I had scheduled three Katrina-related bills for markup in the 
Judiciary Committee. They were not ready by our 24-hour deadline, and 
the gentleman from Michigan objected to that, so I called off that 
markup, and we are going to have to do that next week. Otherwise we 
would have it on the floor much more promptly.
  The fact of the matter remains that these people need to have the 
immunity for liability in order that they can volunteer and effectively 
deliver their volunteer services. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) and the other opponents of this bill have come up with a 
litany of horrors that this bill would allow criminal conduct to be 
immunized, and that is not the case.
  This bill specifically does not apply in any way to protect those 
whose willful, wanton, reckless or criminal conduct causes injury; nor 
does it apply to those who violate the Federal or State civil rights 
laws when injury occurs.
  Now, today we have a chance to cast a vote in favor of our 
volunteers, our volunteer individuals and those nonprofit organizations 
who have stepped up to the plate to provide essential relief services 
to the people who have been affected by Hurricane Katrina; or we can 
send it back to committee and have more hearings.
  Well, by the time those hearings are over with, I am sure the first 
series of frivolous lawsuits will be filed; and believe me, the next 
time there is a disaster, hopefully not of the magnitude of Hurricane 
Katrina, there will be a lot of organizations and a lot of individuals 
who will be afraid to volunteer to do what they want to do and do what 
they can do best, because they do not want to spend the rest of their 
lives in court.
  Pass this bill.
  Mr. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3736, 
Katrina Volunteer Protection Act. This legislation will provide much 
needed legal protection for those charitable Americans volunteering in 
the Hurricane Katrina rescue and recovery effort.
  It is imperative that when thousands of selfless volunteers respond 
to those who have incurred the wrath of a natural disaster that legal 
liability need not be hanging over their heads.
  Currently, there is vast uncertainty from state to state about what 
defines legal protections for volunteers, especially when volunteers 
from one state travel to another to help out their fellow citizens.
  Under current law volunteers who are not working with an official 
nonprofit organization are not covered by the Volunteer Protection Act. 
Therefore, there are absolutely no legal protections for the average 
American who wishes to volunteer.
  This legislation will correct that gap in the law while at the same 
time continue upholding the penalties against those who act in a 
willful, reckless or criminal manner or who violate a State or Federal 
civil rights law.
  Further if a volunteer's home State has a law on its books that 
provide greater liability protection, then this legislation would defer 
to those stronger protections.
  This legislation will clear the way for all those Good Samaritans, 
who live in our great Nation, not to have to worry about lawsuits when 
they volunteer.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support this legislation.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Foley). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3736.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________