PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), and in addition to the Committee on Appropriations, 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 15, 2017
This bill amends the National Security Act of 1947 to establish within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) a National Russian Threat Response Center.
The primary missions of the center shall be:
to serve as the primary U.S. government organization for analyzing and integrating all intelligence pertaining to threats posed by the Russian Federation to the national security, political sovereignty, and economic activity of the United States and its allies;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
to synchronize the efforts of the intelligence community regarding countering efforts by Russia to undermine such security, sovereignty, and activity;
in coordination with the relevant elements of the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the intelligence community, and other U.S. agencies, to develop policy recommendations for the President to detect, deter, and respond to such threats and to monitor and assess Russian efforts to carry out such threats;
in coordination with the Global Engagement Center, to examine Russian efforts to use propaganda and information operations relating to such threats; and
to identify and close gaps across federal agencies with respect to expertise, readiness, and planning to address such threats.
The Director of the center shall be appointed by the DNI with the concurrence of the State Department. The Director shall: (1) ensure that the relevant federal agencies participate in the center's mission, and (2) have primary responsibility for establishing requirements for collecting intelligence regarding threats posed by Russia.
A Board of the center is established to conduct oversight.
The Director may convene biannual conferences to coordinate international efforts against such threats.
People & committees
Rep. Kennedy, Joseph P., III [D-MA-4] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), and in addition to the Committee on Appropriations, 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 Intelligence (Permanent Select), and in addition to the Committee on Appropriations, 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 Intelligence (Permanent Select), and in addition to the Committee on Appropriations, 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: Jan 3, 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.2924 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.2924 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.2924 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.2924 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.