PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 24, 2001
Federalization of Crimes Uniform Standards Act of 2001 - Establishes in the legislative branch the Commission to Review the Federal Criminal Code.Specifies that it shall not be in order in either the House of Representatives or the Senate to consider any measure containing a provision that would increase the law enforcement responsibilities of the Federal Government unless that measure is accompanied by a Federal law enforcement impact statement.Directs the Commission, for each such measure that is provided to the Commission by a Member of Congress or a congressional committee, to promptly: (1) prepare a Federal law enforcement impact statement with respect to that measure; and (2) provide the statement to that Member or committee.Requires a Federal law enforcement impact statement, for each provision of that measure that would increase the law enforcement responsibility of the Government, to contain the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Commission as to the extent to which: (1) that increase in responsibilities would occur only as to core Federal responsibilities; (2) the efforts of States are inadequate to address the purposes to be served by that provision; and (3) the burdens imposed on the Federal court system with respect to that provision could be accommodated within the existing capacity, resources, and structure of that system.
People & committees
Rep. Manzullo, Donald A. [R-IL-16] · R–IL
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 Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E938-939)
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 19, 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.1998 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.1998 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.1998 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.1998 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.