PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 683.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 11, 2000
Aimee's Law - Requires the Attorney General to transfer, from the Federal law enforcement assistance funds allocated but not distributed to one or more States that convicted a person of murder, rape, or a dangerous sexual offense, to a State that convicts that person of a subsequent such offense, an amount equal to the cost of incarceration, prosecution, and apprehension of such person where: (1) the State of such prior conviction has not adopted Federal truth-in-sentencing guidelines; (2) the average term of imprisonment imposed by the State for the prior offense is less than ten percent above the average term of imprisonment imposed for that offense in all States; or (3) the person had served less than 85 percent of the term of imprisonment to which that person was sentenced for the prior offense.Makes the above inapplicable if the convicted person has been released from prison upon the reversal of the conviction and has been convicted subsequently of such offense.(Sec. 4) Directs the Attorney General to collect and maintain, with respect to each State, information relating to: (1) the number of convictions during a calendar year for rape, for murder, and for any sex offense in which, at the time of the offense, the victim had not attained age 14 and the offender had attained age 18; and (2) the number of such convictions that constitute second or subsequent convictions. Directs the Attorney General to report to Congress on such information and on the percentage of cases in each State in which the individual convicted was previously convicted of another such offense in another State during the preceding calendar year.
People & committees
Rep. Salmon, Matt [R-AZ-1] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 683.
Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H5748-5749)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5748-5749)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 894.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5748-5757)
Mr. Gekas moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
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: Jan 2, 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.894 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.894 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.894 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.894 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.