H.R.6090 - Drug Court Reauthorization Act111th Congress (2009-2010)
|Sponsor:||Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] (Introduced 08/10/2010)|
|Committees:||House - Judiciary|
|Latest Action:||09/20/2010 Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. (All Actions)|
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
Text: H.R.6090 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)All Bill Information (Except Text)
There is one version of the bill.
Introduced in House (08/10/2010)
To reauthorize and amend part EE of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 relating to drug courts.
Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas (for herself, Mr. Pierluisi, Mr. Payne, Mr. McGovern, Mr. Rush, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Mr. Gutierrez, Mr. Carnahan, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Gonzalez, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Honda, Mr. Hastings of Florida, and Ms. Kaptur) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
To reauthorize and amend part EE of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 relating to drug courts.
(a) Short title.—This Act may be cited as the “Drug Court Reauthorization Act”.
(1) Studies have concluded that drug courts significantly reduce crime by as much as 35 percent more than other sentencing options.
(2) Nationwide, 75 percent of participants who successfully complete a drug court program remain arrest-free for at least 2 years after leaving the program, and some studies demonstrate that many graduates remain arrest-free for many more years.
(3) Drug courts are 6 times more likely than other sentencing options to keep offenders in treatment long enough to recover, and in programs with less supervision than drug courts, 70 percent of participants drop out of treatment permanently.
(4) Nationwide, for every $1 invested in drug courts, taxpayers save as much as $3.36.
(5) In 2007, for every Federal dollar invested in drug courts, $9 was leveraged in State funding.
(a) In general.—Part EE of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3797u et seq.) is amended to read as follows:
“(a) In general.—The Attorney General may make grants to States, State courts, local courts, units of local government, and Indian tribal governments, acting directly or through agreements with other public or private entities, for adult drug courts, juvenile drug courts, family drug courts, and tribal drug courts that involve—
“(1) continuing judicial supervision over offenders, and other individuals under the jurisdiction of the court, with substance abuse problems;
“(2) coordination with the appropriate State or local court, State or local substance abuse treatment authority, public defender, and prosecutor; and
“(A) mandatory periodic testing for the use of controlled substances or other addictive substances during any period of supervised release or probation for each participant;
“(B) substance abuse treatment for each participant, commensurate with the clinical needs of the participant;
“(C) diversion, probation, or other supervised release involving the possibility of prosecution, confinement, or incarceration based on noncompliance with program requirements or failure to show satisfactory progress;
“(D) offender management and aftercare services such as relapse prevention, health care, education, vocational training, job placement, housing placement, and child care or other family support services for each participant who requires such services;
“(E) payment, in whole or part, by the offender of treatment costs, to the extent the court determines that such payment is practicable, such as costs for urinalysis or counseling; and
“(F) payment, in whole or part, by the offender of restitution, to the extent the court determines that such payment is practicable, to either a victim of the offender's offense or to a restitution or similar victim support fund.
“(b) Limitation.—Economic sanctions imposed on an offender pursuant to this section shall not be at a level that would interfere with the offender's rehabilitation.
“(1) MANDATORY TESTING.—Grant amounts under this part may be used for a drug court only if such court has mandatory periodic testing as described in subsection (a)(3)(A). The Attorney General shall, by prescribing guidelines or regulations, specify standards for the timing and manner of complying with such requirements. The standards—
“(i) each participant is tested for every controlled substance that the participant has been known to abuse, and for any other controlled substance the Attorney General or the court may require; and
“(ii) such testing is accurate and practicable; and
“(B) may require approval of the drug testing regime to ensure that adequate testing occurs.
“(2) MANDATORY SANCTIONS.—The Attorney General shall, by prescribing guidelines or regulations, specify that grant amounts under this part may be used for a drug court only if such court imposes graduated sanctions that increase punitive measures, therapeutic measures, or both, whenever a participant fails a drug test. Such sanctions and measures may include one or more of the following:
“(B) Increased time in the drug court program.
“(C) Termination from such program.
“(D) Increased drug screening requirements.
“(E) Increased court appearances.
“(F) Increased supervision.
“(G) Electronic monitoring.
“(H) In-home restriction.
“(I) Community service.
“(a) Consultation.—The Attorney General shall consult with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and any other appropriate officials in carrying out this part.
“(b) Use of components.—The Attorney General may utilize any component or components of the Department of Justice in carrying out this part.
“(c) Regulatory authority.—The Attorney General may issue regulations and guidelines necessary to carry out this part.
“(a) In general.—To request funds under this part, the chief executive or the chief justice of a State or the chief executive or judge of a unit of local government or Indian tribal government, or the chief judge of a State court or the judge of a local court or Indian tribal court shall submit an application to the Attorney General in such form and containing such information as the Attorney General may require.
“(1) include a long-term strategy and detailed implementation plan for the drug court program to be carried out under such grant;
“(2) explain the applicant’s inability to fund the program adequately without Federal assistance;
“(3) certify that the Federal support provided will be used to supplement, and not supplant, State, Indian tribal, and local sources of funding that would otherwise be available;
“(4) identify related governmental or community initiatives which complement or will be coordinated with the proposal;
“(5) certify that there has been and will continue to be appropriate consultation with all affected agencies in the implementation of the program;
“(6) certify that participating offenders will be supervised by 1 or more designated judges with responsibility for the drug court program;
“(7) specify plans for obtaining necessary support and continuing the proposed program following the conclusion of Federal support;
“(8) certify that statements made by an offender during, or for admission to, a drug court program (including to judges, prosecutors, defense counsel, social service providers, and other public health and public safety professionals who work in the drug court) regarding the offender’s drug use shall not be used as evidence against the offender in any criminal proceeding other than a proceeding that is part of the drug court program, including drug court proceedings involving sanctions, program termination, and related matters such as probation violation hearings based on noncompliance with the terms of participating in the drug court program;
“(A) are broad enough to ensure access for all drug-dependent, high-risk individuals under the court’s jurisdiction who are not violent offenders;
“(B) do not discriminate based upon race, gender, religion, national origin, economic status, or immigration status; and
“(C) are established by a panel or commission with broad representation from stakeholders in the criminal justice community, including judges, prosecutors, defense counsel, and social service providers;
“(10) certify that the applicant has established a policy for the consideration and selection of offenders who are not violent offenders to participate in the program, based on the admission criteria pursuant to paragraph (9), that—
“(A) has been approved by the judge or judges with responsibility for the drug court program under paragraph (6) and any other parties responsible for such consideration and selection of offenders, including prosecutors, defense counsel, and social service providers, as appropriate;
“(B) includes a process to ensure that the individual circumstances of offenders are considered to take into account mitigating factors related to the offender, as appropriate; and
“(C) ensures that the public safety needs of the applicant’s jurisdiction are met;
“(11) demonstrate the existence of adequate protections for participating offenders’ right to competent counsel under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution;
“(12) outline ways for ensuring access to the program for offenders who are high-risk for continued substance abuse and drug-related crime, are facing the longest sentences, and are high-need based on drug dependency;
“(13) describe the methodology that will be used in evaluating the program, including demonstration of research related to alternative sentences for offenders whose illegal conduct was caused by drug dependency; and
“(14) certify that substance abuse treatment services provided to participants are licensed or accredited by the State substance abuse authority and that State standards of care are utilized.
“(1) The term ‘violent offender’ means an individual who has committed an offense that, by its nature, involves a substantial use of physical force with the specific intent to cause serious bodily injury or harm to another individual, as determined by the entity applying for or receiving a grant under this part.
“(2) The term ‘sex offender’ means an individual who has committed an act of sexual assault as such term is defined in section 40002 of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13925).
“(a) In general.—The Federal share of a grant made under this part may not exceed 75 percent of the total costs of the program described in the application submitted under section 2953 for the fiscal year for which the program receives assistance under this part, unless the Attorney General waives, wholly or in part, the requirement of a matching contribution under this section.
“(b) In-kind contributions.—In-kind contributions may constitute a portion of the non-Federal share of a grant.
“(1) all States, State courts, local courts, units of local government, and Indian tribal governments are provided with an opportunity to apply and be considered for a grant under this part; and
“(2) to the extent practicable, an equitable geographic distribution of grant awards is made.
“(b) Technical assistance and training.—Unless one or more applications submitted by any State or unit of local government within such State (other than an Indian tribe) for a grant under this part has been funded in any fiscal year, such State, together with eligible applicants within such State, shall be provided targeted technical assistance and training by the Bureau of Justice Assistance to assist such State and such eligible applicants to successfully compete for future funding under this part, and to strengthen existing State drug court systems. In providing such technical assistance and training, the Bureau of Justice Assistance shall consider and respond to the unique needs of rural States, rural areas, and rural communities.
“A State, Indian tribal government, or unit of local government that receives funds under this part during a fiscal year shall submit to the Attorney General a description and an evaluation report on a date specified by the Attorney General regarding the effectiveness of this part.
“(a) Technical assistance and training.—The Attorney General may provide technical assistance and training in furtherance of the purposes of this part.
“(b) Evaluations.—In addition to any evaluation requirements that may be prescribed for grantees (including uniform data collection standards and reporting requirements), the Attorney General shall carry out or make arrangements for evaluations of programs that receive support under this part.
“(c) Administration.—The technical assistance, training, and evaluations authorized by this section may be carried out directly by the Attorney General, in collaboration with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, or through grants, contracts, or other cooperative arrangements with other entities.”.
(b) Reauthorization.—Paragraph (25) of section 1001(a) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3793(a)) is amended to read as follows:
“(i) $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
“(ii) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
“(iii) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
“(iv) $250,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2017.
“(B) The Attorney General shall reserve not less than 1 percent and not more than 4.5 percent of the sums appropriated for this program in each fiscal year for research and evaluation of this program.”.