PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 6, 2016
Taking Responsibility Using Secured Technologies Act of 2016
This bill expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should have any security clearance she holds revoked and should be denied access to classified information unless she earns the legal right to such access, and (2) any of her colleagues who demonstrated extreme carelessness in their handling of classified information should no longer have access to that information.
The bill prohibits granting a security clearance to, and requires revocation of the security clearance of, any federal officer or employee who has exercised extreme carelessness in the handling of classified information.
The bill also amends a provision of the federal criminal code that subjects to criminal penalties anyone entrusted with, or having lawful possession or control of, national defense information who, through gross negligence, permits that information to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed. The bill explicitly states that "gross negligence," for these purposes, includes extreme or reckless carelessness.
People & committees
Sen. Gardner, Cory [R-CO] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 3, 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 S.3135 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 S.3135 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 S.3135 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 S.3135 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.