PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 1, 2012
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the best possible security and force protection for members of the Armed Forces garrisoned and housed in Afghanistan (members) should be provided, (2) better security and force protection for such members can be provided by U.S. military personnel than by private security contractors or members of the Afghan Public Protection Force, (3) the President should take action in light of the increased risk to such members during the drawdown period and the increasing number of insider attacks, and (4) the United States remains committed to mission success in Afghanistan in light of the national security interests in the region and the sacrifice and commitment of the Armed Forces over the last ten years.
Prohibits funds appropriated to the Department of Defense (DOD) from being obligated or expended for: (1) entering into a contract for the performance of security-guard functions at a military installation or facility in Afghanistan at which members deployed to Afghanistan are garrisoned or housed, (2) otherwise employing private security contractors to provide security for such members, or (3) employing the Afghan Public Protection Force to provide such security or to perform security-guard functions at such a military installation or facility. Allows the President to waive such prohibition after a certification to Congress that the Afghan Public Protection Force or private security contractors can provide protection at least equal to that provided by the Armed Forces.
Directs the President to ensure that as many appropriately trained members of the U.S. Armed Forces as necessary are available to provide: (1) the security-guard functions at the installations and facilities at which members deployed to Afghanistan are garrisoned, (2) security for all members deployed to Afghanistan, and (3) counterintelligence support for such members.
People & committees
Rep. McKeon, Howard P. "Buck" [R-CA-25] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 6, 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.4117 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.4117 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.4117 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.4117 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.