PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 5, 1999
Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act - Amends the Crime Identification Technology Act of 1998 to authorize the use of State grants for criminal justice identification, information, and communication for programs to develop, update, or upgrade the capability of the criminal justice system to deliver timely, accurate, and complete criminal history record information to child welfare agencies, organizations, and programs that are engaged in the assessment of risk and other activities related to the protection of children, including protection against child sexual abuse and placement of children in foster care.(Sec. 3) Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to authorize the use of drug control and system improvement (Byrne) grants to enforce child abuse and neglect laws and to promote programs designed to prevent child abuse and neglect.(Sec. 4) Amends the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 to provide for an increase in the set aside for child abuse victims, subject to specified limitations. Directs that any increase in funding operate notwithstanding any dollar limitation on the availability of the Crime Victims Fund.
People & committees
Rep. Pryce, Deborah [R-OH-15] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-177.
Became Public Law No: 106-177.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 410 - 2 (Roll no. 4). (consideration: CR H121-122; text: CR H121-122)
House roll call 4 · Individual votesResolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 410 - 2 (Roll no. 4).(consideration: CR H121-122; text: CR H121-122)
House roll call 4 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the Senate amendment to H.R. 764.
Mr. Jenkins moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S14944-14945)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S14944-14945)
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 356.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 425 - 2 (Roll no. 479).
House roll call 479 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 425 - 2 (Roll no. 479).
House roll call 479 · Individual votesThe House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 764.
ORDER OF PROCEEDINGS - The Chair announced that proceedings will resume on the amendments to the McCollum amendment in the nature of a substitute in the followng order: The amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas and the amendment offered by Mrs. Jones of Ohio.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business.
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 764 as unfinished business.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - The Chair put the question on agreeing to the Jones of Ohio amendment by voice vote and announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mrs. Jones of Ohio demanded a recorded vote. Pursuant to H. Res. 321, further proceedings on the amendment were postponed.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the Jones of Ohio amendment to the McCollum amendment in the nature of a substitute. (text: CR H9361)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - The Chair put the question on agreeing to the Jackson-Lee of Texas amendment by voice vote and announced that the ayes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson-Lee demanded a recorded vote. Pursuant to H. Res. 321, further proceedings on the amendment were postponed.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the Jackson-Lee amendment to the McCollum amendment in the nature of a substitute.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the amendment offered by Mr. McCollum.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 764.
The Speaker designated the Honorable James V. Hansen to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 321 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 764 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 321. (consideration: CR H9349-9364; text of measure as reported in House: CR H9375)
Rule H. Res. 321 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 321 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 764 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 203.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-360.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-360.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Crime Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
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 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.764 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.764 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.764 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.764 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.