PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 29, 2010
Interagency National Security Professional Education, Administration, and Development System Act of 2010 - Directs the President to establish and maintain a system for the interagency education, training, and professional development of national security professionals of executive agencies, to be known as the Interagency National Security Professional Education, Administration, and Development System. Requires the establishment or designation of an Integration Office within the Executive Office of the President to perform overall coordination of activities and policies relating to the System.
Establishes an Executive Steering Committee, which shall establish: (1) policies and procedures for governing, implementing, and executing the System; (2) criteria for determining which positions are interagency national security positions; (3) various levels of interagency qualification for national security professionals; and (4) procedures for individuals to achieve the requirements for such levels, including procedures for receiving credit for training and experiences undertaken outside of normal System procedures.
Exempts any position to which an individual is appointed by the President.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires each participating agency to: (1) identify the interagency qualification level required of employees filling interagency national security positions; (2) establish career guidelines for employees to achieve the various levels; and (3) have education and training programs that prepare national security professionals at all career levels for interagency assignments.
Designates senior-level interagency national security positions, which shall require the highest level of interagency qualification. Sets forth specified interagency professional education, training, and assignment requirements for such positions and conditions for waivers on a case-by-case basis.
Directs the Committee to: (1) establish an Interagency National Security Professional Education and Training Consortium to educate and train national security professionals from the agencies participating in the System; and (2) appoint a Board of Regents to manage and regulate the Consortium.
Establishes an Interagency National Security Professional Education, Administration, and Development System Fund. Requires the President to submit to Congress a written report containing an implementation plan for the System. Prescribes an implementation schedule. Directs the Secretary of Defense (DOD) to make System requirements applicable to commissioned officers.
People & committees
Rep. Skelton, Ike [D-MO-4] · D–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
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.6249 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.6249 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.6249 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.6249 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.