PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Aug 1, 2012
Federal Law Enforcement Personnel and Resources Allocation Improvement Act of 2012 - Directs the Attorney General, in allocating federal law enforcement personnel and resources, to give priority to placing and retaining those personnel and resources in states and local jurisdictions that have a high incidence of homicide or other violent crime, based on federal records of crime, including the National Uniform Crime Reports, or on the best and most current information otherwise available to the Attorney General.
Requires the Attorney General to designate an existing official within the Department of Justice (DOJ) to: (1) develop practices and procedures to carry out such requirement, and (2) monitor compliance with those practices and procedures by DOJ.
Directs the Attorney General to report annually on the implementation of such requirement. Requires such report to: (1) specify which states and local jurisdictions have a high incidence of homicide or other violent crime; (2) identify the specific steps taken by the Attorney General to implement such requirement with respect to each of those states and local jurisdictions; and (3) provide a description of the methodology used to determine the total number of authorized federal law enforcement positions, to allocate those authorized positions among states and local jurisdictions, and to assign personnel to fill those positions.
People & committees
Rescom. Pierluisi, Pedro R. [D-PR-At Large] · D–PR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 7/31/2012 H5515-5516)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 7/31/2012 H5515-5516)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5619)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Smith (TX) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1550.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5515-5518)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 194.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-293.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-293.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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.1550 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.1550 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.1550 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.1550 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.