PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Feb 7, 2018
Ukraine Cybersecurity Cooperation Act of 2017
(Sec. 3) This bill states that is U.S. policy to: (1) reaffirm the United States-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership, which highlights the bilateral relationship's importance and outlines enhanced cooperation in defense, security, economics and trade, energy security, and democracy; (2) support continued cooperation between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and Ukraine; (3) support Ukraine's political and economic reforms; (4) reaffirm the commitment of the United States to the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances; (5) assist Ukraine's efforts to enhance its cybersecurity capabilities; and (6) improve Ukraine's ability to respond to Russian-supported disinformation and propaganda efforts in cyberspace, including through social media.
(Sec. 4) It is the sense of Congress that the Department of State should take the following actions, commensurate with U.S. interests, to help Ukraine improve its cybersecurity: (1) provide Ukraine necessary support to secure government computer networks from cyber intrusions, particularly networks that defend critical infrastructure; (2) provide Ukraine support to reduce reliance on Russian information and communications technology; and (3) help Ukraine build capacity, expand cybersecurity information sharing, and cooperate on international cyberspace efforts.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The State Department shall report to Congress on U.S.-Ukraine cybersecurity cooperation. Such report shall also include information on: (1) U.S. efforts to strengthen Ukraine's ability to prevent and respond to cyber incidents; (2) the potential for new areas of U.S.-Ukraine mutual assistance in addressing shared cyber challenges, including cyber crime, critical infrastructure protection, and resilience against botnets and other automated, distributed threats; and (3) NATO's efforts to help Ukraine develop technical capabilities to counter cyber threats.
People & committees
Rep. Boyle, Brendan F. [D-PA-13] · D–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 Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 404 - 3 (Roll no. 62). (text: CR 2/5/2018 H757-758)
House roll call 62 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 404 - 3 (Roll no. 62).(text: CR 2/5/2018 H757-758)
House roll call 62 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H966-967)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Royce (CA) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was considered as withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1997.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H757-760)
Mr. Royce (CA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.1997 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.1997 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.1997 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.1997 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.