PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 25, 1993
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: General Provisions Title II: Grants to States Title III: Family Unity Demonstration Project for Federal Prisoners Title I: General Provisions - Family Unity Demonstration Project Act of 1993 - Authorizes appropriations for State (80 percent) and Federal (20 percent) family unity demonstration projects that enable eligible prisoners to live in community correctional facilities with their children for purposes of alleviating harm to children and primary caretaker parents caused by separation due to incarceration, promoting policies to assign prisoners to correctional facilities for which they qualify closest to their family homes, reducing prison populations and recidivism rates, and reducing the cost of providing correctional services. Title II: Grants to States - Authorizes the Director of the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) to make grants to States to carry out such projects, giving preference to States providing assurances that: (1) the State corrections and health and human services agencies will participate and cooperate closely in the development and operation of the project; (2) public and nonprofit private community-based organizations will be integrally involved; (3) the State will target economically disadvantaged, incarcerated prisoners and their children for participation; (4) the State has a policy that provides for the placement of prisoners in correctional facilities for which they qualify that are located closest to their family homes; and (5) the State will follow specified guidelines in selecting prisoners to participate. Directs the NIC to make grants on a competitive basis to five eligible States geographically dispersed throughout the United States. Sets forth conditions for grant eligibility and State reporting requirements. Title III: Family Unity Demonstration Project for Federal Prisoners - Directs the Attorney General to: (1) carry out a family unity demonstration project that enables eligible prisoners to live in community correctional facilities with their children; (2) comply with preference and reporting requirements established under this Act; and (3) consult with the Secretary of Health and Human Services regarding development and operation of such project.
People & committees
Rep. Washington, Craig A. [D-TX-18] · D–TX
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 Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration.
Referred to the House Committee on 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 26, 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.569 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.569 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.569 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.569 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.