PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 351.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Mar 29, 2012
Amends the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 to authorize appropriations for the Drug-Free Communities Support Program for FY2013-FY2017.
Requires the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, in carrying out such Program, to ensure that: (1) each recipient of an initial or renewal grant meets the grant eligibility criteria for each fiscal year, and (2) the meeting of that criteria is fully documented.
Requires the Director, upon delegating authority to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to carry out Program activities, to: (1) develop and document an approach to monitoring and overseeing the administration of the Program by SAMHSA, and (2) fully define the respective roles and responsibilities of the Office and SAMHSA in administering the Program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Director to make a grant to an eligible organization to provide for the establishment of a National Community Anti-Drug Coalition Institute to: (1) provide education, training, and technical assistance for coalition leaders and community teams, with emphasis on the development of coalitions serving economically disadvantaged areas; (2) develop and disseminate evaluation tools, mechanisms, and measures to better assess and document coalition performance measures and outcomes; and (3) bridge the gap between research and practice by translating knowledge from research into practical information.
People & committees
Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · D–VT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 351.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1424)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1423-1424)
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.2159 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.2159 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.2159 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.2159 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.