PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 25, 2015
State Partnership Program Enhancement Act of 2015
Amends the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 to revise and extend indefinitely the authority of the Department of Defense (DOD) to establish exchange programs for members of the National Guard under the National Guard State Partnership Program (SPP). (Currently, the authority is scheduled to terminate on September 30, 2016.)
Authorizes DOD, with the concurrence of the Department of State, to establish such programs for exchanges of members of the National Guard of a state or territory and the military forces or security forces or other government organizations of a foreign country to support the national interests and security cooperation goals and objectives of the United States as defined by the current and evolving national global strategic policies of the United States. (Currently, the primary function of the SPP is disaster and emergency response.)
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs DOD, with the concurrence of the State Department, to establish procedures for SPP planning, programming, budgeting, accounting, and performance metrics.
Requires the National Guard Bureau to: (1) maintain a list of core competencies of the National Guard to support SPP activities, and (2) designate a director for each state and territory.
Requires DOD to coordinate SPP regulations with combatant commanders to ensure that program activities meet theater security cooperation objectives. Requires the State Department to coordinate such regulations with relevant chiefs of mission to meet diplomatic objectives.
Establishes the National Guard State Partnership Program Fund in the Treasury, into which appropriated amounts shall be credited and transferred for program activity uses, including payment of costs for personnel, training, operations, and equipment.
People & committees
Del. Bordallo, Madeleine Z. [D-GU-At Large] · D–GU
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E414)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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.1614 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.1614 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.1614 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.1614 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.