Directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to transmit to the House of Representatives certain documents relating to Department of Homeland Security policies and activities related to the security of Department information and data and the recruitment and retention of its workforce.

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hres/113
Last Updated: June 6, 2025

Sponsored by

Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]

ID: T000193

Follow the money

The bill

Directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to transmit to the House of Representatives certain documents relating to Department of Homeland Security policies and activities related to the security of Department information and data and the recruitment and retention of its workforce.

HRES. 113, 119th Congress — read as touching Cybersecurity.

The sponsor

Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$67,700 raised

20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Homeland Security" section, p. 201-204 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 7.

March 4, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another brilliant example of congressional theater, where our esteemed representatives pretend to care about transparency and accountability while actually just playing a game of bureaucratic CYA.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this resolution is to give the illusion that Congress is doing something about the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) alleged mishandling of sensitive information and its workforce. The objective is to create a paper trail that will supposedly "hold DHS accountable" for its actions, while in reality, it's just a dog-and-pony show.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution demands that the Secretary of Homeland Security hand over a laundry list of documents related to DHS policies and activities concerning information security, recruitment, and retention. Oh, wow, how bold! It's like they're trying to uncover some deep, dark secret... or just going through the motions.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include the Department of Homeland Security (because they have to pretend to care), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and various other government agencies that might be implicated in this "scandal." The stakeholders are the usual suspects: politicians trying to score points, bureaucrats covering their behinds, and lobbyists who will use this as an excuse to peddle more "security solutions."

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this resolution is zilch. It's a symbolic gesture designed to placate the masses while allowing DHS to continue its questionable practices. The implications are that Congress will continue to grandstand, DHS will stonewall, and the public will remain none the wiser.

Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of "Congressional Theater-itis," a disease characterized by meaningless posturing, bureaucratic doublespeak, and a complete lack of actual substance. The symptoms include:

* Overuse of buzzwords like "transparency" and "accountability" * A laundry list of demands that will never be fulfilled * A complete disregard for the underlying issues

Treatment: None required. This bill is already DOA. Just let it wither away in committee, where it belongs.

Prognosis: The patient (i.e., the American public) will continue to suffer from a severe case of "Government-induced Frustration Syndrome" until they wake up and realize that their elected representatives are more interested in playing politics than actually governing effectively.

Related Topics

National Security & IntelligenceCongressional Rules & ProceduresGovernment Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$67,700
19 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$0
Committees
$0
Individuals
$67,700

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

1
LA, TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE
2 transactions
$8,300
2
DINKLER, AYAME MS.
1 transaction
$3,300
3
REEVES, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,300
4
WISMEIER, MOLLY
1 transaction
$3,300
5
STAFFORD, MARK MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
6
ASHY, ALTON MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
7
INDIANS, AGUA CALIENTE BAND O
1 transaction
$3,300
8
LAMPTON, WILLIAM
1 transaction
$3,300
9
WALTON, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,300
10
WALTON, LUKAS
1 transaction
$3,300
11
CARPENTER, ABRAHAM MR. JR.
1 transaction
$3,300
12
DOWNS, WILLIAMS
1 transaction
$3,300
13
COLOM, WILBUR
1 transaction
$3,300
14
KAYWOOD, TIMOTHY MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
15
JAMES, LOUIS
1 transaction
$3,300
16
INDIAN COMMUNITY, AKIN-CHIN
1 transaction
$3,300
17
HUNTER, JOHN P. MR.
1 transaction
$3,300
18
RUSSELL, RANDALL
1 transaction
$3,300
19
SMITH, FREDERICK MR.
1 transaction
$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 26 nodes and 20 connections (25 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $67,700

Top Donors - Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]

Showing top 19 donors by contribution amount

19 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped, 1 harmed.

  • +Cybersecurityconfidence 0.80

    Section (7) requires documentation related to investigating access to employee data, implying a need for cybersecurity measures

  • −Labor Unionsconfidence 0.70

    Section (8) mentions a 'freeze on the hiring of Federal civilian employees', which could negatively impact labor unions

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Homeland Security

Strong
Vector: 69%
Pages: 201-204AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 113’s focus on transparency, oversight of DHS information security, data protection, and workforce practices aligns with Project 2025’s goal of ensuring DHS operates efficiently and in line with the administration’s agenda through increased accountability and scrutiny."

Key themes:oversighttransparencyinformation securityworkforce recruitment/retentionhiring freeze

— 169 — Department of Homeland Security 19. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General, Management Directive No. 0810.1, June 10, 2004, https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/foia/mgmt_directive_0810_1_the_office_of_inspector_general. pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 20. H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-296, 107th Congress, November 25, 2002, https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/5005 (accessed January 18, 2023). — 171 — 6 DEPARTMENT OF STATE Kiron K. Skinner The U.S. Department of State’s mission is to bilaterally, multilaterally, and regionally implement the President’s foreign policy priorities; to serve U.S. citizens abroad; and to advance the economic, foreign policy, and national security interests of the United States. Since the U.S. Founding, the Department of State has been the American gov- ernment’s designated tool of engagement with foreign governments and peoples throughout the world. Country names, borders, leaders, technology, and people have changed in the more than two centuries since the Founding, but the basics of diplomacy remain the same. Although the Department has also evolved throughout the years, at least in the modern era, there is one significant problem that the next President must address to be successful. There are scores of fine diplomats who serve the President’s agenda, often helping to shape and interpret that agenda. At the same time, however, in all Administrations, there is a tug-of-war between Presidents and bureaucracies— and that resistance is much starker under conservative Presidents, due largely to the fact that large swaths of the State Department’s workforce are left-wing and predisposed to disagree with a conservative President’s policy agenda and vision. It should not and cannot be this way: The American people need and deserve a diplomatic machine fully focused on the national interest as defined through the election of a President who sets the domestic and international agenda for the nation. The next Administration must take swift and decisive steps to reforge the department into a lean and functional diplomatic machine that serves the

Department of Homeland Security

Moderate
Vector: 70%
Pages: 180-182AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 113 focuses on transparency and oversight of DHS information systems and workforce practices, which aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on DHS personnel security and leak investigations, but it does not directly address USCIS reclassification, border security statutes, or asylum reforms."

Key themes:DHS personnelinformation securityworkforce oversighthiring practicestransparency

— 147 — Department of Homeland Security Personnel USCIS should be classified as a national security–sensitive agency, and all of its employees should be classified as holding national security–sensitive posi- tions. Leaks must be investigated and punished as they would be in a national security agency, and the union should be decertified. Any employees who cannot accept that change and cannot conform their behavior to the standards required by such an agency should be separated. USCIS’s D.C. personnel presence should be skeletal, and agency employees with operational or security roles should be rotated out to offices throughout the United States. These USCIS employees should live and work in the communities that are most affected by their daily duties and decisions. NECESSARY BORDER AND IMMIGRATION STATUTORY, REGULATORY, AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES The current border security crisis was made possible by glaring loopholes in our immigration system. The result was a preventable and predictable his- toric increase in illegal and inadmissible encounters along our southern border. This pulled limited resources from the front lines of our nation’s borders and away from their national security mission, releasing a vast and complex set of threats into our country. To regain our sovereignty, integrity, and security, Congress must pass meaningful legislation to close the current loopholes and prevent future Administrations from exploiting them for political gain or per- sonal ideology. Legislative Proposals l Title 42 authority in Title 8. Create an authority akin to the Title 42 Public Health authority that has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic to expel illegal aliens across the border immediately when certain non- health conditions are met, such as loss of operational control of the border. l Mandatory appropriation for border wall system infrastructure. The monies appropriated would be used to fund the construction of additional border wall systems, technology, and personnel in strategic locations in accordance with the Border Security Improvement Plan (BSIP). l Appropriation for Port of Entry infrastructure. Border security is not addressed solely by systems in between the ports of entry. POEs require technology and physical upgrades as well as an influx of personnel to meet capacity demands and act as the literal gatekeepers for the country. This is the first line of defense against drug and human smuggling operations. — 148 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Unaccompanied minors 1. Congress should repeal Section 235 of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA),9 which provides numerous immigration benefits to unaccompanied alien children and only encourages more parents to send their children across the border illegally and unaccompanied. These children too often become trafficking victims, which means that the TVPRA has failed. 2. If an alternative to repealing Section 235 of the TVPRA is necessary, the section should be amended so that all unaccompanied children, regardless of nationality, may be returned to their home countries in a safe and efficient manner. Currently, the TVPRA allows only children from contiguous countries (Canada and Mexico) to be returned while every other unaccompanied minor must be placed into a lengthy process that usually results in the minor’s landing in the custody of an illegal alien family member. 3. Congress must end the Flores Settlement Agreement by explicitly setting nationwide terms and standards for family and unaccompanied detention and housing. Such standards should focus on meeting human needs and should allow for large-scale use of temporary facilities (for example, tents). 4. Congress should amend the Homeland Security Act and portions of the TVPRA to move detention of alien children expressly from the Department of Health and Human Services to DHS. l Asylum reform 1. The standard for a credible fear of persecution should be raised and aligned to the standard for asylum. It should also account specifically for credibility determinations that are a key element of the asylum claim. 2. Codify former asylum bars and third-country transit rules. 3. Congress should eliminate the particular social group protected ground as vague and overbroad or, in the alternative, provide a clear definition with parameters that at a minimum codify the holding in Matter of A-B- that gang violence and domestic violence are not grounds for asylum.10

Department of Homeland Security

Moderate
Vector: 69%
Pages: 168-170AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HRES 113 focuses on transparency regarding DHS hiring freezes, job offers, and information‑security practices, which aligns with Project 2025’s emphasis on restructuring career personnel, expanding political appointees, and ensuring effective workforce management within DHS."

Key themes:workforce recruitment and retentionhiring freeze oversightpersonnel restructuringpolitical personnel expansiontransparency and oversight

— 136 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Secure our coasts and economic zones; l Protect political leaders, their families, and visiting heads of state or government; and l Oversee transportation security. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SEC) In the next Administration, the Office of the Secretary should take on the fol- lowing key issues and challenges to ensure the effective operation of DHS. Expansion of Dedicated Political Personnel. The Secretary of Homeland Security is a presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed political appointee, but for budgetary reasons, he or she has historically been unable to fund a dedi- cated team of political appointees. A key first step for the Secretary to improve front-office functions is to have his or her own dedicated team of political appoin- tees selected and vetted by the Office of Presidential Personnel, which is not reliant on detailees from other parts of the department, to help ensure the completion of the next President’s agenda. An Aggressive Approach to Senate-Confirmed Leadership Positions. While Senate confirmation is a constitutionally necessary requirement for appointing agency leadership, the next Administration may need to take a novel approach to the confirmations process to ensure an adequate and rapid transition. For example, the next Administration arguably should place its nominees for key positions into similar positions as “actings” (for example, putting in a person to serve as the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner of CBP while that person is going through the confirmation process to direct ICE or become the Secretary). This approach would both guarantee implementation of the Day One agenda and equip the department for potential emergency situations while still honoring the confirmation requirement. The department should also look to remove lower-level but nevertheless important positions that currently require Senate confirmation from the confirmation requirement, although this effort would require legislation (and might also be mooted in the event of legisla- tion that closes portions of the department that currently have Senate-confirmed leadership). Clearer, More Durable, and Political-Only Line of Succession. Based on previous experience, the department needs legislation to establish a more durable but politically oriented line of succession for agency decision-making purposes. The ideal sequence for line of succession is certainly debatable, except that in cir- cumstances where a career employee holds a leadership position in the department, that position should be deemed vacant for line-of-succession purposes and the next eligible political appointee in the sequence should assume acting authority. Further, — 137 — Department of Homeland Security individuals wielding acting Secretary authority should have explicit authority to finalize agency actions, including regulations, to ensure that the department’s homeland security mission is fulfilled. Soft Closure of Unnecessary Offices. Pending a possible presidential deci- sion to shrink or eliminate DHS itself, the next Administration will still have the obligation to protect the homeland as required by law. The Secretary therefore can and should use his or her inherent, discretionary leadership authority to “soft close” ineffective and problematic corners of the department. While those corners are to be determined, the Secretary could shift personnel, funding, and opera- tional responsibility to mission-essential components of the department, including the Office of the Secretary itself. This effort not only would make the department more efficient, but also would support a legislative move to shrink or dismantle the department by showing that the agency can fulfill national security–critical functions without its current bloated bureaucracy. Restructuring and Redistribution of Career Personnel. To strengthen political decision-making and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used legally and efficiently, the Secretary should make major changes in the distribution of career personnel throughout the department. For example, personnel from parts of the department undergoing soft closure could be redistributed to what will be workload-intensive corners of the department, including national security–critical and transparency functions. All personnel with law enforcement capacity should be removed immediately from office billets and deployed to field billets to maxi- mize law enforcement capacity. Compliance for Grants and Other Federal Funding. The next Adminis- tration should take steps to restore lawfulness and integrity to the department’s massive regimen of federal grant programs, most of which are managed and dis- tributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Secretary should direct FEMA to ensure that all FEMA-issued grant funding for states, localities, and private organizations is going to recipients who are lawful actors, can demon- strate that they are in compliance with federal law, and can show that their mission and actions support the broader homeland security mission. All applicants and potential recipients of such grant funding should be required to meet certain pre- conditions for eligibility (except for receipt of post-disaster or nonhumanitarian funding) or should simply be considered ineligible for funding. Such preconditions should include at least the following: l Certification by applicants that they comply with all aspects of federal immigration laws, including the honoring of all immigration detainers. l Certification by applicants that they are both registered with E-Verify and using E-Verify in a transparent and nonevasive manner. For states

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills