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 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jan 31, 2017
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Department of Homeland Security Insider Threat and Mitigation Act of 2017
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish an Insider Threat Program, which shall: (1) provide training and education for DHS personnel to identify, prevent, mitigate, and respond to insider threat risks to DHS's critical assets; (2) provide investigative support regarding such threats; and (3) conduct risk mitigation activities for such threats.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DHS shall establish a Steering Committee. The Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis shall serve as the Chair and the Chief Security Officer as the Vice Chair of the Committee.
The Under Secretary and the Chief Security Officer, in coordination with the Steering Committee, shall:
develop a holistic strategy for DHS-wide efforts to identify, prevent, mitigate, and respond to insider threats to DHS's critical assets;
develop a plan to implement the strategy across DHS components and offices;
document insider threat policies and controls;
conduct a baseline risk assessment of such threats;
examine existing programmatic and technology best practices adopted by the federal government, industry, and research institutions;
develop a timeline for deploying workplace monitoring technologies, employee awareness campaigns, and education and training programs related to potential insider threats;
consult with the the Under Secretary for Science and Technology and other stakeholders to ensure that the Insider Threat Program is informed by current information regarding threats, best practices, and available technology; and
develop, collect, and report metrics on the effectiveness of DHS's insider threat mitigation efforts.
DHS must submit to specified congressional committees biennial reports over the next six years on:
how DHS and its components and offices have implemented such strategy;
the status of DHS's risk assessment of critical assets;
the types of insider threat training conducted;
the number of DHS employees who have received such training; and
information on the effectiveness of the Insider Threat Program, based on such metrics.
People & committees
Rep. King, Peter T. [R-NY-2] · R–NY
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 Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H775)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H775)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 666.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H775-776)
Mr. King (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
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: 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.666 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.666 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.666 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.666 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.