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 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 22, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
WMD Intelligence and Information Sharing Act of 2013 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) support homeland security-focused intelligence analysis of terrorist actors, their claims, and their plans to conduct attacks involving chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear materials against the nation and of global infectious disease, public health, food, agricultural, and veterinary issues; (2) support homeland security-focused risk analysis and risk assessments of such homeland security hazards by providing relevant quantitative and nonquantitative threat information; (3) leverage homeland security intelligence capabilities and structures to enhance prevention, protection, response, and recovery efforts with respect to a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear attack; and (4) share information and provide tailored analytical support on these threats to state, local, and tribal authorities as well as other national biosecurity and biodefense stakeholders.
Requires the Office to coordinate with other DHS components, the Intelligence Community, and federal, state, local, and tribal authorities where appropriate and enable such entities to provide recommendations on optimal information sharing mechanisms and on how they can provide information to DHS.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of DHS to report annually on: (1) intelligence and information sharing activities to counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction, and (2) DHS's activities in accordance with relevant intelligence strategies.
Requires the Secretary to ensure that homeland security information analyzed by DHS concerning terrorist threats is provided to state, local, and private entities and the public.
People & committees
Rep. Meehan, Patrick [R-PA-7] · R–PA
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 388 - 3 (Roll no. 375). (text: CR H4837-4838)
House roll call 375 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 388 - 3 (Roll no. 375).(text: CR H4837-4838)
House roll call 375 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4839-4840)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1542.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4837-4839)
Mr. Meehan moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1962)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 9, 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.1542 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.1542 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.1542 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.1542 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.