To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide for an Office of Intelligence and Analysis and an Office of Infrastructure Protection, and for other purposes.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 16, 2006
Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to: (1) rename the Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection as the Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the Under Secretary for such Directorate as the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis; (2) expand the intelligence-related duties of the Under Secretary; (3) establish within the Office of Intelligence and Analysis an Internal Continuity of Operations (COOP) Plan to assure the continuation of intelligence operations during emergencies; (4) specify the responsibilities of each intelligence component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); and (5) establish an Office of Infrastructure Protection within DHS to be headed by an Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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 Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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 Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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
Bill text & related measures
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: Jul 9, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.5004 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.5004 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.5004 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.5004 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.