PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 7, 2017
Terrorism Prevention and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2017
This bill directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to:
work with critical infrastructure owners and operators and state, local, tribal, and territorial entities to manage risk and strengthen the security and resilience of the nation's critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
establish terrorism prevention policy to engage with international partners to strengthen critical infrastructure located inside or outside of the United States;
establish a task force to research the best means to address the security and resilience of critical infrastructure in an integrated, holistic manner;
establish the Strategic Research Imperatives Program to lead DHS's federal civilian agency approach to strengthen critical infrastructure; and
provide research findings to federal civilian agencies for the identification, prioritization, assessment, remediation, and security of their internal critical infrastructure.
DHS must: (1) appoint a research working group to study how to achieve national unity of effort to protect against terrorism threats and investigate the security and resilience of the nation's information assurance components that provide such protection; and (2) establish a research program to provide strategic guidance, promote a national unity of effort, and coordinate the overall federal effort.
The bill sets forth the terrorism protection responsibilities of each federal agency designated for a critical infrastructure sector.
DHS must: (1) facilitate the timely exchange of terrorism threat and vulnerability information; (2) implement an integration and analysis function for critical infrastructure; and (3) support greater terrorism cyber security information sharing by civilian federal agencies with the private sector.
A DHS Privacy Officer shall be appointed by the President.
DHS must: (1) develop a description of the functional relationships within DHS and across the federal government related to critical infrastructure security and resilience, (2) analyze the existing public-private partnership model for terrorism information exchange, (3) convene a team to identify baseline data and systems requirements for such exchange; and (4) demonstrate a near real-time situational awareness, research-based pilot project for critical infrastructure.
DHS shall provide to the President a research report that outlines the National Infrastructure Protection Plan and a National Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience Research and Development Plan.
DHS must determine which critical infrastructure sectors and agencies should be engaged in efforts to detect, deter, mitigate, and lead recovery efforts related to terrorist incidents.
People & committees
Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response and Communications.
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: Aug 11, 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.945 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.945 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.945 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.945 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.