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 · Jul 27, 2015
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on June 17, 2015. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
State Wide Interoperable Communications Enhancement Act or the SWIC Enhancement Act
(Sec. 2) Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require a state to include in its application for State Homeland Security Grant Program funding a certification: (1) that the governor of the state has designated a Statewide Interoperability Coordinator, or (2) indicating that the state is performing the functions of such a Coordinator in another manner and identifying the primary point of contact for performance of such functions.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth as such Coordinator's functions:
coordinating the daily operations of the state's interoperability efforts;
coordinating state interoperability and communications projects and grant applications for such projects;
establishing and maintaining working groups to develop and implement key interoperability initiatives; and
coordinating and updating a Statewide Communications Interoperability Plan that specifies the current status of state efforts to enhance communications interoperability within the state, including future goals for communications interoperability among emergency response agencies in the state.
People & committees
Rep. Payne, Donald M., Jr. [D-NJ-10] · D–NJ
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 H5506)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5506)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2206.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5506-5508)
Mr. King (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 121.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 114-165.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 114-165.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote .
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response and Communications.
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.
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.2206 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.2206 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.2206 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.2206 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.