PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 23, 2015
Homeland Security University-based Centers Review Act
(Sec. 2) Directs the Government Accountability Office to initiate a study to assess the university-based centers for homeland security program authorized by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and provide recommendations to the Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, for appropriate improvements.
Requires the study to:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
review the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS's) efforts to identify key areas of study needed to support the homeland security mission and criteria that DHS utilized to determine those key areas for which it should maintain, establish, or eliminate university-based centers;
review the method by which university-based centers, federally funded research and development centers, and Department of Energy national laboratories receive tasking from DHS;
review and weight selection criteria for designating university-based centers;
examine best practices from other agencies' efforts to organize and use university-based research to support their missions;
review DHS's criteria and metrics to measure demonstrable progress achieved by university-based centers in fulfilling DHS taskings and mechanisms for delivering and disseminating the research results of designated university-based centers within DHS and to other agencies;
examine means by which academic institutions that are not designated or associated with the designated university-based centers can optimally contribute to the research mission of the Directorate of Science and Technology of DHS; and
assess the interrelationship between the different university-based centers and the degree to which outreach and collaboration among a diverse array of academic institutions is encouraged by DHS.
Requires the annual report from DHS on such centers to describe:
research that has been tasked and completed by each center designated during the preceding year,
funding provided by DHS for each such center for that year, and
plans for utilization of such centers in the forthcoming year.
People & committees
Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2] · D–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
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 H4574)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4574)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2390.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4574-4576)
Mr. Ratcliffe moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 123.
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology discharged.
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology discharged.
Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 114-168, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 114-168, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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.2390 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.2390 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.2390 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.2390 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.