PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 7, 2004
Combating Methamphetamine Act of 2004 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to authorize the Attorney General, through the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), to make grants to States to address the manufacture, sale, and use of methamphetamine (methamphetamine use) to enhance public safety. Lists eligible programs, projects, and activities, including: (1) arresting individuals violating methamphetamine laws; (2) undertaking clandestine methamphetamine lab seizures and environmental cleanup; (3) providing community-based education, awareness, and prevention; and (4) providing Drug Court and Family Drug Court services to address methamphetamine use. Sets forth grant application requirements.
Authorizes the Attorney General, through BJA, to make grants to States, Indian tribal governments, and multijurisdictional or regional consortia thereof to develop a comprehensive, cooperative strategy to address methamphetamine use to enhance public safety. Earmarks specified sums (according to a specified formula) to each State.
Authorizes the Attorney General to: (1) collect systematic data on the effectiveness of the programs assisted under this Act in reducing methamphetamine use; (2) establish a national clearinghouse of information on effective programs to address such use that shall disseminate to State and local agencies a description of the results of research on reduction efforts and information on effective programs, best practices, and Federal resources; (3) establish a program within the Department of Justice to facilitate the sharing of knowledge in best practices among States addressing such use; and (4) provide technical assistance to State and local agencies implementing effective programs to reduce methamphetamine use.
People & committees
Sen. Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] · D–WA
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10731-10732)
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.2934 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.2934 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.2934 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.2934 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.