HR 1374: Securing the Cities Improvement Act

HR 1374 in plain English: This bill modifies the Department of Homeland Security's Securing the Cities program, which works to detect nuclear or radiological materials to prevent terrorist attacks in U.S. cities. It requires DHS to set performance metrics, expand eligibility beyond FEMA-designated high-risk urban areas to jurisdictions selected based on threat and preparedness capacity, and submit a progress report to Congress within two years.

Stated purpose

This bill aims to improve the Department of Homeland Security's Securing the Cities program, which works to detect nuclear or radiological materials to prevent terrorist attacks in U.S. cities, by updating how partner cities are selected, adding performance tracking requirements, and increasing congressional oversight.

Key points

• Requires DHS to create performance metrics and milestones for the Securing the Cities program and track progress against them.
• Expands eligible partner jurisdictions beyond FEMA-designated high-risk urban areas to those chosen based on threat, vulnerability, and preparedness capacity.
• Mandates a report to Congress within two years on program participation, metrics, and planned changes.

Arguments supporters make

• The current system limits the program to cities already labeled high-risk by a different FEMA program, which may miss cities that face real nuclear or radiological threats — this bill lets DHS match partners to actual risk.
• Adding performance metrics and milestones makes the program more accountable, so taxpayer money can be tracked and poor results can be identified and corrected.
• A mandatory congressional report ensures elected officials can review whether the program is working and make informed decisions about its future funding and direction.

Arguments opponents make

• Removing the connection to FEMA's existing high-risk urban area designations could create inconsistency across DHS programs and lead to duplicated or conflicting assessments of which cities need federal security resources.
• Giving DHS broad authority to designate eligible jurisdictions based on its own criteria, without a clear external standard, could open the door to uneven or politically influenced decisions about which cities receive program benefits.
• The bill adds reporting and metric requirements but does not provide new funding or resources, so the added administrative burden may stretch the program's existing capacity without improving on-the-ground security outcomes.

Tradeoffs

Giving DHS more flexibility to choose partner cities based on actual threat and capacity may better target resources, but it removes a consistent external standard and concentrates more decision-making authority within the agency with less predictability for cities trying to plan ahead.

Current status in Congress: Passed House.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week