PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 28, 1993
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Technical Amendments of 1993 - Makes technical amendments to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974. Specifies that members of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention shall be appointed for a term of three years, with exceptions. Directs the Administrator of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention to make grants to develop or support model programs to strengthen and maintain the family unit in order to prevent or treat juvenile delinquency (as under current law), including: (1) self-help programs for parents; and (2) programs that work with families during the incarceration of juvenile family members and that take into consideration the special needs of families with limited English speaking ability.
People & committees
Rep. Martinez, Matthew G. [D-CA-31] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2645 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2645 proposed by Senator Breaux for Senator Simon.
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S14675-14676)
Senate Committee on Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Referred to Subcommittee on Juvenile Justice.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on 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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8674-8675)
Mr. Martinez moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 168.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Labor. H. Rept. 103-315.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Labor. H. Rept. 103-315.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended).
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
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.3160 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.3160 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.3160 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.3160 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.