PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 1, 2012
Protecting U.S. Missile Defense Information Act of 2012 - Prohibits Department of Defense (DOD) funds for FY2012-FY2013 from being used to provide the Russian Federation with access to: (1) U.S. missile defense technology, including hit-to-kill technology; or (2) data that supports U.S. missile defense capabilities. Prohibits such funds from being used to provide the Russian Federation with access to U.S. missile defense technology or data other than that described above unless, at least 30 days in advance, the President describes to Congress the data to be provided, along with a certification relating to the use of, and third-party access to, such data.
Expresses the sense of Congress that an agreement regarding missile defense cooperation between the United States and the Russian Federation that is negotiated through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or a provision to amend the charter of the NATO-Russia Council shall not be legally or politically binding unless it is either specifically approved with the advice and consent of the Senate, or specifically authorized by an Act of Congress.
Provides that no agreement with any country or international organization or amendment to the New START Treaty concerning limitations on U.S. missile defense capabilities shall be binding on the United States unless such agreement or amendment is either approved or authorized as above. Directs the President, beginning in 2013, to provide annual notification to Congress as to whether: (1) the Russian Federation has recognized the sovereign right of the United States to pursue improvements in missile defense capabilities; and (2) any Russian Federation representative has suggested that a treaty or other international agreement include provisions restricting U.S. missile defense capabilities or reducing the number of non-strategic nuclear weapons deployed in Europe.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits DOD funds for FY2012 and thereafter from being used to implement a defense technology cooperation agreement between the United States and the Russian Federation until 60 days after the President transmits such agreement to Congress.
Prohibits the use of any FY2012-FY2013 DOD or Department of State funds for travel expenses related to missile defense matters with the Russian Federation until 30 days after the President transmits to Congress the draft agreement discussed at Deauville, France, in May 2011.
People & committees
Rep. Brooks, Mo [R-AL-5] · R–AL
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 Strategic Forces.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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 Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.4125 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.4125 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.4125 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.4125 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.