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 · Jun 20, 2017
Reporting Efficiently to Proper Officials in Response to Terrorism Act of 2017 or the REPORT Act
(Sec. 2) This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and, as appropriate, the National Counterterrorism Center (NCC), to submit to Congress an unclassified report on an act of terrorism in the United States within one year after the primary government agency completes an investigation of such act. Such requirement shall not apply in instances in which DHS, DOJ, the FBI, or the NCC determines that the information required to be reported could jeopardize an ongoing investigation or prosecution, in which case DHS shall notify Congress prior to the first anniversary of the completion of the investigation.
Such a report shall: (1) identify any gaps in national security that could be addressed to prevent future acts of terrorism, and (2) include any recommendations for additional measures that could be taken to improve homeland security.
People & committees
Rep. Aguilar, Pete [D-CA-31] · D–CA
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 H4976-4977)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4976-4977)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 625.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4976-4978)
Mr. Katko moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 123.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-182.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-182.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H759)
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: Jul 9, 2026. 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.625 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.625 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.625 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.625 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.