PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 6, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Gang-Related Witness Intimidation and Retaliation Title II: Witness Relocation and Safety Witness Protection and Interstate Relocation Act of 1999 - Title I: Gang-Related Witness Intimidation and Retaliation - Amends the Federal criminal code to set penalties for traveling in interstate or foreign commerce with intent to engage in witness intimidation or obstruction of justice. (Sec. 102) Subjects persons who conspire to obstruct justice involving victims, witnesses, and informants to the same penalties as those prescribed for carrying out such offense. Title II: Witness Relocation and Safety - Directs the Attorney General to: (1) survey all State and selected local witness protection and relocation programs to determine and report to the Congress on the extent, nature, and training needs of such programs; and (2) make available training to assist State and local law enforcement agencies in developing and managing witness protection and relocation programs. Authorizes appropriations. (Sec. 202) Requires the Attorney General to: (1) engage in activities which promote coordination among State and local witness interstate relocation programs; and (2) establish a model Memorandum of Understanding for States and localities that engage in interstate witness relocation. Authorizes the Attorney General to expend up to ten percent of the total amount appropriated for drug control and system improvement (Byrne program) grants under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to jurisdictions that have interstate witness relocation programs and that have substantially followed the model Memorandum of Understanding. (Sec. 203) Authorizes the use of Byrne grant funds for developing and maintaining witness security and relocation programs.
People & committees
Rep. McCollum, Bill [R-FL-8] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
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 20, 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.186 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.186 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.186 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.186 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.