PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 104-38.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Sep 29, 1995
Disapproves the U.S. Sentencing Commission's amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines relating to: (1) equalization of crack and cocaine powder quantities for trafficking and possession offenses; and (2) money laundering and transactions in property derived from unlawful activity. (Sec. 2) Directs the Sentencing Commission to submit to the Congress recommendations regarding changes to the statutes and Sentencing Guidelines governing sentences for unlawful manufacturing, importing, exporting, and trafficking of cocaine and like offenses. Requires the recommendations to reflect the following considerations: (1) the sentence for trafficking in crack cocaine should generally exceed that imposed for trafficking in a like quantity of powder cocaine; (2) high-level cocaine traffickers should generally receive longer sentences than low-level traffickers; (3) a defendant who knowingly traffics in powder cocaine that will be converted into crack cocaine prior to its distribution to individuals should be treated at sentencing as though the defendant had trafficked in crack cocaine; and (4) an enhanced sentence should generally be imposed on a defendant who, in the course of an offense, murders or causes serious bodily injury to an individual, uses a dangerous weapon or possesses a firearm, involves a juvenile, a pregnant woman, or an unusually vulnerable person, engages in a continuing criminal enterprise or commits other criminal offenses in order to facilitate drug trafficking activities, restrains a victim, traffics in cocaine within 500 feet of a school, obstructs justice, has a significant prior criminal record, or is an organizer or leader of drug trafficking activities involving five or more persons. Specifies that such recommendations shall propose revision of the drug quantity ratio of crack cocaine to powder cocaine under the relevant statutes and guidelines in a manner consistent with the ratios set for other drugs. Requires: (1) the Department of Justice (DOJ) to report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on the charging and plea practices of Federal prosecutors with respect to money laundering; and (2) the Sentencing Commission to submit to such committees' comments on the DOJ report.
People & committees
Sen. Abraham, Spencer [R-MI] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 104-38.
Became Public Law No: 104-38.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
A similar measure H.R. 2259 was laid on the table without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
The previous question was ordered without objection.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2259 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Measure will be read by section. A specified amendment is in order. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of S. 1254, as passed by the Senate, shall be considered as adopted in the Committee of the Whole and in the House. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of further amendment. No further amendment shall be in order except the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, debatable for 1 hour and not subject to amendment. After passage of the bill, it shall be in order to take from the Sp eaker's table and consider the bill S. 1254. It shall be in order to move to strike all afte...
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 237. (consideration: CR H10283-10284)
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S14779-14782)
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 194.
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S13738-13740)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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 S.1254 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.1254 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.1254 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.1254 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.