PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
Police Corps and Law Enforcement Training and Education Act - Establishes within the Department of Justice an Office of the Police Corps and Law Enforcement Education to be headed by a Director. Requires States desiring to participate in the Police Corps to designate a lead agency and submit a plan containing assurances with respect to: (1) lead agency cooperation with other State and local agencies; (2) State advertising of assistance available; (3) State screening and selection of law enforcement personnel for participation in the program; and (4) compliance with other specified requirements. Authorizes the Director to award college scholarships (including direct payments to institutions and reimbursement of educational costs) to participants who agree to work for four years in a State or local police force after completion of a baccalaureate program and police corps training. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) scholarship assistance for dependent children of law enforcement officers; (2) the selection of participants; (3) minority recruitment; and (4) leaves of absence. Requires the Director to establish up to three training centers to provide basic law enforcement training to State Police Corps program participants. Requires participants to attend two eight-week training sessions and to meet performance standards in order to remain in the program. Requires payment of a weekly stipend during training. Requires a State to submit a plan for implementing such program to the Director for approval. Requires such plan to: (1) include assurances that participants will receive additional State or local training after completing Federal training which shall count toward the four-year service obligation; and (2) provide that program participants shall be assigned to geographic areas with the greatest need for additional law enforcement personnel. Provides for the swearing in of participants as members of the police force to which they are assigned after completing Federal training and meeting the requirements of that police force. Requires the Director to report annually on the program to the Attorney General, the President, and specified congressional officials. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Dornan, Robert K. [R-CA-46] · R–CA
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 and Criminal Justice.
Referred to the House Committee on 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 26, 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.333 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.333 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.333 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.333 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.