PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Laid on the table. See S. 342 for further action.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 7, 2003
Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 - Amends the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act to revise requirements for: (1) national clearinghouse dissemination of information on child abuse programs, including community-based programs; (2) related research and assistance activities; (3) grants for additional demonstration projects, including enhanced linkage between child protective service agencies and public health, mental health, and developmental disabilities agencies; (4) additional discretionary grants; and (5) development and operation grants to the States.Repeals the authority for existing grants to: (1) the Community-based Family Resource programs; (2) the Family Support Center programs; (3) the Emergency Child Abuse Prevention Services grant program; and (4) programs under the Temporary Child Care for Children with Disabilities and Crisis Nurseries act of 1986.Includes parents with disabilities within the eligibility and performance guidelines governing community-based grants for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.Amends the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and Adoption Reform Act of 1978 to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide for the implementation of programs that increase the number of older foster care children placed in adoptive families, with a special emphasis on child-specific recruitment strategies, including a grants program to eliminate barriers to placing children for adoption across jurisdictional boundaries.Amends the Abandoned Infants Assistance Act of 1988 to prohibit the Secretary from making a grant unless the grantee agrees to give priority to abandoned infants and young children who: (1) are infected with, or have been perinatally exposed to, the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), or have a life-threatening illness or other special medical need; or (2) have been perinatally exposed to a dangerous drug.
People & committees
Rep. Hoekstra, Peter [R-MI-2] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Laid on the table. See S. 342 for further action.
The House took from the Speaker's table and moved to the consideration of S. 342, a similar measure to H.R. 14.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by voice vote.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
DEBATE - Pursuant to a previous sepecial order, the House proceeded with two hours of debate on H.R. 14.
Considered. (consideration: CR H2345-2364; text as reported in House: CR H2345-2352)
Consideration initiated by a previous order of the House.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 17.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 108-26.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 108-26.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E8)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 21, 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 H.R.14 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 H.R.14 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 H.R.14 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 H.R.14 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.