PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 14, 2025
Securing the Cities Improvement Act
This bill makes changes to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office's (CWMD's) Securing the Cities program, which seeks to detect nuclear or radiological materials to prevent terrorist attacks and other events posing a risk to cities in the United States.
Specifically, the bill requires the CWMD to establish performance metrics and milestones for the program and to track performance against them.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Also, under current law, in carrying out the Securing the Cities program, the CWMD may only partner with cities that are high-risk urban areas, which are designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency under a different program. Instead, the bill requires the CWMD to designate the jurisdictions it may partner with for the program, and the designations must be based on the capability and capacity of the jurisdiction relating to preparedness and response, as well as the relative threat to, vulnerability of, and consequences for, such jurisdiction regarding terrorist attacks and other high-consequence events utilizing nuclear or radiological materials.
Additionally, within two years of enactment of the bill, the CWMD must submit a report to Congress regarding participation in the Securing the Cities program, the establishment of metrics and milestones, performance against such metrics and milestones, and plans for any changes to the program.
People & committees
Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2] · D–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1056)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1056)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1374.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1056-1057)
Mr. Green (TN) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jul 13, 2026. 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 H.R.1374 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 H.R.1374 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 H.R.1374 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 H.R.1374 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.