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 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 21, 2017
Fixing Internal Response to Misconduct Act or the DHS FIRM Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Chief Human Capital Officer of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to implement a DHS-wide policy related to discipline and adverse actions, which shall provide guidance:
to the senior human resources official overseeing discipline and adverse actions for headquarters personnel and non-component entities and relevant component heads regarding informing the public about how to report employee misconduct;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
on how DHS employees should report employee misconduct;
on the type, quantity, and frequency of data regarding discipline and adverse actions to be submitted by such official to such officer;
on how to implement any such policy in a manner that promotes greater uniformity and transparency in the administration of such policy across DHS; and
on prohibited personnel practices, employee rights, and related procedures and processes.
Such officer shall review and approve any necessary development of or changes to tables of offenses and penalties for DHS components to comply with DHS policy.
Component heads shall comply with DHS-wide policy regarding discipline and adverse actions for DHS's workforce, and such officer shall implement a process to oversee such compliance.
Such officer: (1) may establish working groups to address employee misconduct within DHS, (2) shall conduct follow-up reviews of components regarding implementation of working group recommendations, and (3) may request the DHS Inspector General to investigate any concerns identified through the oversight process that components have not addressed.
A working group shall seek to identify any trends in misconduct, review component processes for addressing misconduct, and develop possible alternate strategies to address such misconduct.
People & committees
Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3] · R–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, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5018)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5018)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2131.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5018-5020)
Mr. Higgins (LA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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: Apr 7, 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.2131 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.2131 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.2131 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.2131 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.