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.)
CBRN Intelligence and Information Sharing Act of 2017
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Office of Intelligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) support homeland security-focused intelligence analysis of terrorist actors, their claims, and their plans to conduct attacks involving chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear materials against the United States and of global infectious disease, public health, food, agricultural, and veterinary issues; (2) support homeland security-focused risk analysis and risk assessments of such homeland security hazards by providing quantitative and nonquantitative threat information; (3) leverage homeland security intelligence capabilities and structures to enhance prevention, protection, response, and recovery efforts with respect to a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear attack; and (4) share information and provide tailored analytical support on these threats to state, local, and tribal authorities as well as relevant national biosecurity and biodefense stakeholders and other federal agencies.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Office shall coordinate with other DHS components, other intelligence community agencies, and federal, state, local, and tribal authorities and enable such entities to provide recommendations on optimal information sharing mechanisms and on how they can provide information to DHS.
DHS shall report annually for five years on: (1) intelligence and information sharing activities to counter the threat from attacks using chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear materials, and (2) DHS's activities in accordance with relevant intelligence strategies.
(Sec. 3) DHS shall ensure that homeland security information analyzed by it concerning terrorist threats is provided to state, local, tribal, and private entities and the public.
People & committees
Rep. McSally, Martha [R-AZ-2] · R–AZ
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 H785)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H785)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 677.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H785-786)
Ms. McSally 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.
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.677 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.677 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.677 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.677 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.