A bill to require the Attorney General to prepare an evaluation and report on potential problem officer early warning programs and to develop a model potential problem officer early warning program, and to express the sense of the Congress that the Attorney General, under existing authorities, should provide assistance to local jurisdictions in establishing procedures to identify and provide guidance to police officers who demonstrate the potentiality of having difficulty dealing with members of the public on a consistent basis.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 5, 1993
Directs the Attorney General to: (1) conduct an evaluation of potential problem officer early warning programs utilized by local governments; (2) develop a model early warning system that is effective, capable of adjusting to changing circumstances, and affordable to local governments of jurisdictions with populations of 50,000 or more; and (3) prepare and disseminate findings and recommendations to the law enforcement community for the establishment of such programs. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) reporting requirements; and (2) payment of expenses incurred in conducting the evaluation and developing a model system. Expresses thhe sense of the Congress that: (1) the Attorney General should make seed money grants of up to $25,000 to local governments for assisting in establishing such programs; and (2) local governments should be eligible if they adopt and enforce policies prohibiting unreasonable or unnecessary force by law enforcement officers and procedures for receiving and investigating citizen complaints.
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.899 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.899 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.899 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.899 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.