PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 24, 2015
Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act of 2015
Amends the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998 to authorize FY2016-FY2017 appropriations to:
the Department of Health and Human Services for grants to domestic treatment centers for the costs of services in the rehabilitation of victims of torture (including treatment of both physical and psychological effects), social and legal services, and research and training of health care providers outside of treatment centers or programs; and
the President for grants to foreign treatment centers and programs for activities designed to treat victims for the physical and psychological effects of torture.
Directs the U.S. Agency for International Development to support indigenous foreign treatment centers and programs for torture victims in order to increase their capacities to train other local health care providers.
People & committees
Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN] · D–MN
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 Foreign Relations.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.1670 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.1670 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.1670 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.1670 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.