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 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 9, 2003
Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2006 - Authorizes appropriations for FY 2004 through 2006 to carry out the activities of the Department of Justice.
Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (Safe Streets Act) to merge the Byrne grant program and the local law enforcement block grant program into an Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.
Authorizes the presentation, on behalf of Congress, of: (1) a bronze medal to the public safety officers in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania who lost their lives as a result of responding to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; and (2) a plaque commemorating the service of such officers to their public agencies.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the USA PATRIOT Act to: (1) provide for the establishment and maintenance of a secure telecommunications system for regional information sharing between Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies; and (2) authorize grants for nonprofit neighborhood and community-based victim service organizations and coalitions to improve outreach and services to crime victims.
Amends the Safe Streets Act to establish within the Office of Justice Programs: (1) an Office of Weed and Seed Strategies to implement strategies to prevent, control, and reduce violent crime, criminal drug-related activity, and gang activity in designated communities; (2) an Office of Audit, Assessment, and Management to carry out and coordinate performance audits of, ensure compliance with, and manage information with respect to, specified Department of Justice grant programs; (3) a Community Capacity Development Office to provide training to participants in such grant programs; and (4) an Office of Applied Law Enforcement Technology to provide leadership and focus to Department grants made for using or improving law enforcement computer systems.
Requires the Attorney General to designate a senior Department official to assume primary responsibility for privacy policy.
People & committees
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-5] · R–WI
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.
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 H1666-1678)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1666-1678)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3036.
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1666-1683)
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 246.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-426.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-426.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
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.3036 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.3036 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.3036 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.3036 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.