Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Originating chamber has voted to pass. Sent to the other chamber.
The House voted to pass the bill. It now moves to the Senate, which repeats the committee referral and floor-vote process.
Next: Passed Both Chambers
Conference committee (if versions differ), then the President
Requires training programs for Department of Homeland Security intelligence analysts.
The problem
DHS intelligence analysts may lack consistent, standardized training in analysis methods, security protocols, and tradecraft skills necessary for effective intelligence operations.
The proposal
The bill establishes training requirements and programs for DHS Intelligence and Analysis personnel to improve professional development and analytical capabilities.
The impact
DHS intelligence analysts and the agency gain structured training; taxpayers fund program costs; national security operations may improve through better-trained personnel.
Better training helps analysts spot threats more accurately and make smarter decisions. This could improve national security by catching dangerous situations earlier.
Standardized training ensures all analysts learn the same methods and follow the same quality rules. This makes intelligence work more reliable across the agency.
Training programs help DHS workers do their jobs better and feel more confident. This can improve morale and reduce staff turnover.
Structured training keeps analysts updated on new threats, technology, and best practices. This helps the agency stay effective in a changing world.
Creating and running training programs costs taxpayer money. The bill doesn't specify a budget, so costs could be significant.
Training requires analysts to spend time in classes instead of working on current intelligence tasks. This could slow down some ongoing projects.
The bill provides limited information about what training will look like or how it will be measured for success. This makes oversight difficult.
Without specific requirements in the bill, DHS has broad freedom to design training however it wants. This could lead to inconsistent or ineffective programs.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 7683
VA Fiscal Management Modernization Act
HR 6698
Board of Veterans Appeals Annual Report Transparency Act of 2025
HR 7260
National Cemetery Administration Annual Report Act of 2026
HR 2283
Recognizing Community Organizations for Veteran Engagement and Recovery Act
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.