PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 13, 2013
Second Chance Reauthorization Act of 2013 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to revise and expand requirements for the grant program for adult and juvenile offender state and local reentry demonstration projects and to extend the authorization for appropriations for such program through FY2018.
Amends the Second Chance Act of 2007 to extend through FY2018 the authorization of appropriations for grants for: (1) family-based substance abuse treatment, (2) the technology careers training demonstration program, and (3) the offender reentry substance abuse and criminal justice collaboration program. Renames the program of mentoring grants to nonprofit organizations for offender reentry as the program of community-based mentoring and transitional service grants to nonprofit organizations. Provides for enhanced services under such program to assist in the reintegration of offenders into the community. Extends the authorization of appropriations for such program through FY2018.
Requires the Inspector General of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to periodically conduct audits of not less than 5% of all recipients of specified offender reentry grants under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and the Second Chance Act of 2007.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the Second Chance Act of 2007 to: (1) modify and extend through FY2018 grant programs for reentry of federal prisoners into the community, including the program for placing elderly offenders in home detention; (2) repeal programs under such Act relating to responsible reintegration of offenders, the study of the effectiveness of Depot Naltrexone for heroin addiction, and the satellite tracking and reentry training program; and (3) establish a program for partnering faith-based or community-based nonprofit organizations with prisons to conduct recidivism reduction activities.
Directs the Attorney General, in consultation with specified federal officials and in collaboration with interested persons and entities, to establish an interagency task force on federal programs and activities for the reentry of offenders into the community. Requires such task force to: (1) evaluate and identity methods for improving such programs and activities, and (2) report to Congress on barriers faced by offenders in reentering the community and update such report annually.
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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
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: Dec 5, 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.3465 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.3465 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.3465 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.3465 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.