Dale Strong (R-AL)
Civil Preparedness for Agroterrorism Exercise Act of 2026
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- In Senate committee
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Civil Preparedness for Agroterrorism Exercise Act of 2026. It requires the Department of Homeland Security to carry out a specific exercise focused on preventing, responding to, recovering from, and mitigating agroterrorism. The exercise must include a scenario involving agroterrorists attempting to unlawfully bring a biological agent into the United States or deploying one inside the country to harm the agriculture and food critical infrastructure sector or other related economic sectors. The bill also requires participants to determine the most effective response to manage and mitigate widespread disruptions. Additionally, the Secretary of Homeland Security must submit an after-action report containing findings and recommended legislative actions to specific congressional committees within 180 days after the exercise is completed.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +7
Would farmers be better off under this?
Directly aims to protect the agriculture sector from biological threats and improves response capabilities.
- Scored +5
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Agriculture is primary in rural areas; improving its security benefits these communities.
- Scored +5
Does this make the country readier for the next outbreak?
Develops response protocols for biological agents, which overlaps with pandemic preparedness.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2(a) and Section 2(b)(1): This provision requires the Department of Homeland Security to conduct an exercise on preventing and responding to agroterrorism. This could benefit individuals by improving domestic preparedness and collective response to potential threats against the food supply and agriculture.
-
Section 2(b)(2): This part mandates coordination with various groups, including Federal, State, local, Tribal, and territorial agencies, private sector owners of food and agricultural facilities, and emergency preparedness practitioners. This is positive because it brings different levels of government and industry experts together to figure out the most effective ways to manage disruptions.
-
Section 2(c): The Secretary of Homeland Security must submit an after-action report with findings, future plans, and recommended legislative actions to congressional committees within 180 days after completing the exercise. This holds officials accountable by ensuring Congress receives clear information on lessons learned and necessary improvements.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 2(c): The bill specifies that the after-action report submitted to congressional committees must be consistent with the protection of classified information. While necessary for security, withholding certain details from the public due to classification limits complete transparency for everyday citizens who want to know the exact vulnerabilities discovered during the exercise.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would farmers be better off under this? — Directly aims to protect the agriculture sector from biological threats and improves response capabilities. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Agriculture is primary in rural areas; improving its security benefits these communities. Would business owners be better off under this? — Includes private sector owners of food and agricultural facilities in preparedness efforts.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — Tests the response, recovery, and mitigation of large-scale biological attacks. Does this invest in rural communities? — Focuses on the security and resilience of the agriculture and food critical infrastructure sector.
- Healthcare
- Does this make the country readier for the next outbreak? — Develops response protocols for biological agents, which overlaps with pandemic preparedness.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this put more money into stopping terrorism? — Mandates a comprehensive exercise to counter and deter agroterrorism.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Enhances security of the food supply chain, indirectly protecting consumers from agroterrorism. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Protects the agriculture and food sector from disruptions that could negatively impact economic stability.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires a report to Congress with findings and recommended legislative actions. Does this give the federal government more power? — Directs the Department of Homeland Security to lead a nationwide exercise.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — Exercises include scenarios for preventing the unlawful transport of biological agents into the US.
- 9/16/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5900)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 9394.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5900-5901)
- Mr. Van Epps moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 9/10/2026
- Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 119-813.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 712.
- 6/29/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/24/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 0.
- 6/23/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
- Introduced in House
Timothy KennedyDemocrat · New York