PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 24, 2013
Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to authorize the Director of the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services to make grants to local governments and Indian tribes to provide for school resource and safety officers at schools. Defines a "school resource and safety officer" as a career law enforcement officer who is assigned by the employing police department to protect schools and who works in and around schools for not less than 75% of the time the officer is on duty.
Requires the Director to: (1) establish guidelines for programs that train school resource and safety officers, and (2) ensure an equitable geographic distribution of grants among regions of the United States and among urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Limits grants to: (1) $200,000 for each officer proposed to be hired or each training program proposed to be funded, subject to a waiver; and (2) three fiscal years. Authorizes the Director to make available additional funds if the funds were used in the manner required and the recipient demonstrates significant financial need.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
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 the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.148 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.148 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.148 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.148 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.