PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 27, 2012
DHS Accountability Act of 2012 - Establishes in the legislative branch an independent advisory panel to: (1) comprehensively assess the management structure and capabilities related to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and (2) make recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of DHS management.
Directs the panel to examine: (1) the efficiency and effectiveness of the management structure and capabilities, including the policies, practices, and procedures, of DHS and its component agencies in carrying out management functions, such as program acquisition, financial management, information technology, human capital issues, performance measurement, and risk management efforts, related to homeland security; (2) the extent to which unnecessary duplication exists in such management structure and capabilities and how any such duplication negatively affects the mission of protecting the United States; (3) the extent to which management of key homeland security missions is centralized under DHS; (4) options to reduce or eliminate harmful waste and duplication of effort in DHS; and (5) measures to evaluate DHS's progress in reducing and eliminating waste and duplication from its management structure and capabilities.
Urges the panel to consult and leverage the work performed and recommendations made by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on DHS management structure and capabilities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the panel to submit a final report on its findings and recommendations within two years of the appointment of its members. Terminates the panel 60 days after submission of such report.
People & committees
Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6434-6435)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6434-6435)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5913.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6434-6437)
Mr. McCaul moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management.
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.
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.5913 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.5913 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.5913 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.5913 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.