PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 9, 1999
National Forensic Sciences Improvement Act of 1999 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (the Act) to: (1) include among permissible uses of drug control and system improvement (Byrne) grants improving the quality, timeliness, and credibility of forensic science services for criminal justice purposes; and (2) require State certification that it has established a forensic science laboratory or laboratory system or a medical examiner's office that meets specified requirements, with respect to any such grant for such purpose. Amends the Act to require a State to submit to the Attorney General: (1) a certification that the State has developed a consolidated State plan that meets specified requirements and a specific description of the manner in which the grant will be used to carry out that plan; (2) a certification that any forensic science laboratory system, medical examiner's office, or coroner's office in the State that will receive any portion of the grant amount uses generally accepted laboratory practices and procedures, established by accrediting organizations; and (3) a specific description of any new facility to be constructed as part of the program, estimated costs of that facility, and a certification that the grant will not be used to fund more than 40 percent of such facility's total costs. Prohibits the use of grant funds for any general law enforcement or non-forensic investigatory function. Limits facilities and administrative costs. Sets forth provisions regarding record-keeping (and access to records and documents) and reporting requirements. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Coverdell, Paul [R-GA] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6797)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.1196 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 S.1196 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 S.1196 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 S.1196 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.