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 · Sep 28, 2016
Empowering Partners to Counter Violent Extremism Act of 2016
This bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the Office for Partnerships Against Violent Extremism (OPAVE), to be headed by an Assistant Secretary.
The Assistant Secretary shall be responsible for:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
leading DHS efforts to counter violent extremism;
developing a digital engagement strategy that expands DHS outreach efforts to counter violent extremist messaging;
serving as DHS's primary representative in coordinating countering violent extremism efforts with the CVE Task Force and with other federal agencies and nongovernmental organizations;
serving as the primary DHS-level representative in coordinating with the Department of State on international countering violent extremism issues;
providing guidance to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regarding the use of grants made under the Urban Area Security Initiative and the State Homeland Security Grant Program to state, local, and tribal governments under the allowable uses guidelines related to countering violent extremism;
developing a plan to expand philanthropic support for domestic efforts related to countering violent extremism; and
awarding grants to, or entering into cooperative agreements with, state, local, and tribal governments and institutions of higher education to support the efforts of local communities in the United States to counter violent extremism.
DHS's Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties shall conduct an annual review to ensure that OPAVE's activities that relate to countering violent extremism respect the privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties of all persons.
DHS shall submit to Congress a comprehensive DHS strategy and an implementation plan to counter violent extremism in the United States.
DHS's Under Secretary for Science and Technology, in coordination with the OPAVE, may: (1) establish one or more countering violent extremism labs, and (2) reprioritize grants to centers for homeland security to fund each lab.
DHS and the Department of State shall incorporate into their efforts to combat terrorist recruitment and communications the public testimonials of former or estranged violent extremists.
The OPAVE may implement a program that facilitates groups of students at institutions of higher education throughout the world in designing, piloting, implementing, and measuring the success of a social or digital initiative, product, or tool that counters the messaging of terrorist organizations communications and narratives.
People & committees
Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
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: Aug 12, 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.3456 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.3456 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.3456 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.3456 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.