Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Creates programs to improve police-community relationships through training and data sharing initiatives.
The problem
Police departments and communities often lack effective communication and trust-building mechanisms, potentially affecting public safety and officer effectiveness.
The proposal
Establishes SMART (Strategic, Multi-Agency, Resource-Targeted) community policing programs with federal funding for training, coordination between agencies, and data collection on policing practices.
The impact
Police departments, community members, and local governments gain resources for better communication and accountability. Citizens may experience changed policing practices.
Funded programs help officers and residents communicate better and understand each other's concerns. This can reduce tensions and build relationships that improve public safety outcomes.
Federal funding helps police departments train officers in community policing techniques. Better-trained officers can respond more effectively to community needs.
Standardized data gathering helps identify problems and measure what works in communities. This evidence-based approach can lead to smarter policing strategies.
Grants and resources help smaller police departments that lack funding for community programs. This levels the playing field across wealthy and less wealthy areas.
The bill requires federal funding and creates new programs, which increases government spending. Taxpayers bear the cost of these initiatives.
Data collection on policing practices could raise questions about surveillance and information sharing. Citizens may worry about how their data is used.
Programs may work differently across communities with varying needs and resources. Success depends on cooperation from police departments and communities who may resist change.
Without details on enforcement, departments might receive funding but not improve actual practices. Success metrics and consequences for failure are uncertain.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 4307
Enhancing Detection of Human Trafficking Act
HR 10638
Skills Against Violence Act of 2026
HR 10565
Sexual Abuse Services in Detention Act
HR 10543
PREP Act
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.