PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 9, 2000
Law Enforcement Science and Technology Act of 2000 - Establishes in the Department of Justice under the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, an Office of Science and Technology (OST) to be headed by a Director. Abolishes the Office of Science and Technology of the National Institute of Justice and transfers its functions and employees to OST.(Sec. 3) Declares that the mission of OST shall be to: (1) serve as the national focal point for work on law enforcement technology; and (2) carry out programs to improve the safety and effectiveness of, and access to, technology to assist Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.Sets forth the duties of OST, including to: (1) establish advisory groups to assess the technology needs of Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies; (2) establish technical and use standards for, and test and evaluate technologies that may be used by, such agencies; (3) conduct research and development in fields that would improve the safety, effectiveness, and efficiency of technologies used by such agencies; and (4) serve as a clearinghouse for information on law enforcement technologies.Sets forth provisions regarding coordination with Federal agencies, publications, and transfer of funds by OST to other Federal agencies or provide funding to non-Federal entities.(Sec. 4) Authorizes appropriations for OST. Sets aside specified sums for: (1) regional National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers ; (2) research and development of forensic technologies and methods to improve crime laboratories; (3) development of standards and for the testing and evaluation of technologies; (4) salaries and expenses; and (5) expenditure under the provisions enacted in the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 and the Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance Program (limited to not more than five percent of funds appropriated for OST).Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) non-Federal research; and (2) reductions of funding under this Act in proportion to the amount appropriated if less than $200 million is appropriated for OST in any of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.(Sec. 5) Requires the Director of OST to submit annual reports to the President and Congress on the state of law enforcement technology.
People & committees
Rep. Boehlert, Sherwood [R-NY-23] · R–NY
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.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 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.4403 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.4403 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.4403 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.4403 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.