PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 17, 1994
Amends the Federal criminal code to provide for criminal and civil forfeiture for mail and wire fraud. Makes specified procedures relating to forfeitures under the Controlled Substances Act applicable to forfeitures under this Act. Requires the court to order the forfeiture of any other property of the defendant up to the value of the property subject to forfeiture under this Act if, as a result of conduct of the defendant, the forfeited property cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence or has been transferred or sold to, or deposited with, a third party, placed beyond the court's jurisdiction, substantially diminished in value, or commingled with other property which cannot be divided without difficulty. Directs that any such forfeited property be seized by the Attorney General or U.S. Postal Service upon process issued pursuant to the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims by a U.S. district court having jurisdiction over the property, with exceptions for innocent owners or lienholders. Authorizes the Attorney General or Postal Service to seize such property without such process under specified circumstances. Directs the: (1) Attorney General, after providing for the rights of any innocent persons and deducting costs incurred by the United States in conducting the seizure, forfeiture, and identification of victims, to deposit the property forfeited or the proceeds from its sale in the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund; and (2) the Postal Service to deposit property forfeited or the proceeds into the Postal Service Fund. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) restraint or staying of the sale or disposition of property pending appeal; and (2) rules for the disposition of such property and proceeds. Requires the deposit into the Postal Service Fund of amounts from any forfeiture conducted by the Postal Service and from any forfeiture resulting from an investigation conducted by the Postal Service. Allows the Postal Service to share such amounts with any Federal or State agency whose efforts in investigating or litigating the forfeiture contributed to the receipt of such funds.
People & committees
Rep. Collins, Barbara-Rose [D-MI-15] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Postal Operations and Services.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime and Criminal Justice.
Referred to the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service.
Referred to the House Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1450)
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: Feb 6, 2024. 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.4070 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.4070 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.4070 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.4070 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.