PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-494, Part I.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Jan 9, 2018
Terrorist Screening and Targeting Review Act of 2017
This bill directs the Government Accountability Office to submit to Congress a review of the authorization, funding, management, and operation of the National Targeting Center (NTC) established under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) established under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6.
Such review shall include: (1) identification of any weaknesses or gaps in coordination, and of any unnecessarily duplicative or overlapping efforts, between the NTC and the TSC; (2) recommendations on how the NTC and the TSC may better support and complement one another; (3) a cost-benefit analysis of congressional authorization of the TSC; and (4) an assessment of the protocols within the NTC and the TSC on how to receive and utilize information provided by federal departments and agencies.
People & committees
Rep. Garrett, Thomas A., Jr. [R-VA-5] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-494, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-494, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Homeland Security, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Homeland Security, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Homeland Security, 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: 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.4553 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.4553 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.4553 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.4553 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.