PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 21, 1999
Providing Reliable Officers, Technology, Education, Community Prosecutors, and Training In Our Neighborhoods Act of 1999 or PROTECTION Act - Modifies provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (the Act) regarding public safety and community policing ("cops on the beat" program, COPS) to authorize the Attorney General to use funding under COPS grants to: (1) increase prosecutor presence and to enhance law enforcement access to new technologies; (2) pay overtime to existing career law enforcement officers to the extent that such overtime is devoted to community policing efforts; and (3) promote higher education among in-service State and local law enforcement officers by reimbursing them for the costs associated with seeking a college or graduate school education.Includes among permitted additional grant projects: (1) specialized integrity and ethics training; (2) innovative proactive crime control and prevention programs involving school officials and religiously-affiliated organizations; (3) school-based partnerships between local law enforcement agencies and local school systems by using school resource officers who operate in and around elementary and secondary schools (current law) to serve as a law enforcement liaison with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement and regulatory agencies and to combat gang membership and criminal activity, firearms and explosives-related incidents, illegal use and possession of alcohol, and the illegal possession, use, and distribution of drugs; and (4) innovative programs that bring together a community's sheriff, police chief, and elderly residents to address the public safety concerns of older citizens.Authorizes the Attorney General to use up to five percent of appropriated funds for technical assistance and training to States, local governments, Indian tribal governments, and other public and private entities. Requires the technical assistance provided by the Attorney General to include the establishment and operation of regional community policing institutes training centers or facilities. Permits the functions of the centers or facilities to include instruction and seminars for specified individuals, including representatives of police labor and management organizations and community residents.Repeals provisions of the Act regarding: (1) termination of grants for hiring officers; and (2) preferential consideration of applications for certain grants.Allows grants to be used to assist: (1) police departments in employing specified professional, scientific, and technological advancements; and (2) State, local, or tribal prosecutors' offices in implementation of community-based prosecution programs that build on local community policing efforts. Reserves specified funds for units of local government with a population of less than 50,000.Authorizes the Attorney General to use no more than 50 percent of grant renewal funds to award grants targeted specifically for retention of police officers to grantees in good standing, with preference to those that demonstrate financial hardship or severe budget constraint that impacts the entire local budget and may result in the termination of employment for officers.Redefines: (1) "career law enforcement officer" to include sheriffs' deputies charged with supervising offenders who are released into the community but also engaged in local community policing efforts; and (2) "school resource officer" to mean a career law enforcement officer deployed in community-oriented policing and assigned to work in collaboration with schools and community-based organizations (as under current law) to engage in specified activities, including serving as a law enforcement liaison with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement and regulatory agencies to address and document crime and disorder problems, training students in conflict resolution and crime awareness, and assisting school administrators with the preparation of an annual report on the number of students expelled per year for bringing a weapon, firearm, or explosive to school.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Biden, Joseph R., Jr. [D-DE] · D–DE
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 S13013-13014)
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.1760 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.1760 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.1760 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.1760 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.