PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.For Further Action See S.2101.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 18, 1996
Federal Law Enforcement Dependents Assistance Act of 1996 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to provide educational assistance to the dependents of civilian Federal law enforcement officers who are killed or are permanently and totally disabled in the line of duty. Authorizes the Attorney General to discontinue such assistance upon finding that the recipient fails to maintain satisfactory progress. Authorizes retroactive assistance to each eligible dependent of a Federal law enforcement officer killed in the line of duty on or after May 1, 1992. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Studds, Gerry E. [D-MA-10] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
For Further Action See S.2101.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
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 21, 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.4111 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.4111 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.4111 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.4111 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.