PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 28, 2017
Surface Transportation and Public Area Security Act of 2017
This bill reauthorizes for FY2018-FY2022 (1) the public transportation security grant program, (2) the law enforcement reimbursement agreement program, (3) visible intermodal prevention and response teams, (4) explosives detection canine teams, and (5) surface transportation security inspectors.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shall (1) establish a law enforcement officer reimbursement agreement program, and (2) increase by at least 200 the number of state and local law enforcement-led explosives detection canine teams trained and certified by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) dedicated to surface transportation security.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DHS shall annually develop risk-based priorities based on risk assessments that consider threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences.
The TSA may establish a task force to identify and develop an innovative technology or capability with the potential to enhance transportation security.
DHS shall (1) prioritize the assignment of officers and intelligence analysts from the TSA and DHS to locations with participating fusion centers in jurisdictions with a high-risk surface transportation asset, (2) ensure there exists a national mechanism for an individual to report suspicious activity in a transportation facility, and (3) submit an assessment of threats to the transportation sector. A "fusion center" is a collaborative effort of two or more agencies that provide resources, expertise and information to the center with the goal of maximizing their ability to detect, prevent, investigate, and respond to criminal and terrorist activity.
DHS shall (1) establish a working group to promote collaborative engagement between DHS and stakeholders to develop non-binding recommendations for enhancing security in public areas of transportation facilities, and (2) disseminate best practices to enhance security against the threat of a vehicle-based terrorist attack.
People & committees
Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12] · D–NJ
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 Transportation and Protective Security.
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: Aug 11, 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.4474 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.4474 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.4474 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.4474 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.