PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 18, 2010
Katie Sepich Enhanced DNA Collection Act of 2010 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to increase payments to states under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program for implementing a minimum or an enhanced DNA collection process. Increases such payments by 5% for states that implement a minimum DNA collection process and by 10% for states that implement an enhanced DNA process.
Defines "minimum DNA collection process" as a process under which the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is searched at least one time against samples of individuals who are at least 18 years of age and who are arrested for, charged with, or indicted for crimes involving murder, manslaughter, sexual assaults, and kidnapping or abduction.
Defines "enhanced DNA collection process" as a process under which states provide for the collection, for purposes of inclusion in CODIS, of DNA samples from individuals who are at least 18 years of age and who are arrested or charged with crimes involving murder, manslaughter, sexual assault, certain sexual offenses involving a minor, burglary, and aggravated assault.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Attorney General to submit to the Judiciary Committees of Congress an annual report: (1) listing states which have (and which have not) implemented a minimum or enhanced DNA collection process and which use such processes; (2) describing the increases in grant payments to states; and (3) including statistics on benefits to law enforcement resulting from the implementation of minimum and enhanced DNA collection processes.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2011-FY2015.
People & committees
Rep. Teague, Harry [D-NM-2] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 357 - 32 (Roll no. 274). (text: CR H3502-3503)
House roll call 274 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 357 - 32 (Roll no. 274).(text: CR H3502-3503)
House roll call 274 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3512-3513)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4614.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3502-3505)
Mr. Johnson (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
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 10, 2026. 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.4614 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.4614 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.4614 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.4614 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.