PSI Sci
New here? Follow the money and the votes · Not sure of your district? Find your U.S. House member · Find your state legislators

S. 964: A bill to require a comprehensive review of the adequacy of the training, qualifications, and experience of the Department of Defense personnel responsible for sexual assault prevention and response for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Before you vote › Federal bills

S. 964: A bill to require a comprehensive review of the adequacy of the training, qualifications, and experience of the Department of Defense personnel responsible for sexual assault prevention and response for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

113th Congress · introduced 2013-05-15 · Armed Forces and National Security · Latest: Committee on Armed Services. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-320.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

  1. Where it came from: introduced 2013-05-15 · official record
  2. Who proposed it: Sen. McCaskill, Claire [D-MO] · what a sponsor is
  3. What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
  4. Where it stands now: Committee on Armed Services. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-320. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
  5. If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

A bill to require a comprehensive review of the adequacy of the training, qualifications, and experience of the Department of Defense personnel responsible for sexual assault prevention and response for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Plain summary

Requires the Secretary of Defense (DOD) to review the adequacy of the training, qualifications, and experience of each member of the Armed Forces and civilian DOD employee who is currently responsible for sexual assault prevention and response within the Armed Forces. Includes in such review an assessment of the adequacy of the training and certifications required of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Victim Advocates by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. Requires the Secretary, upon a determination that any member or civilian employee responsible for sexual assault prevention and response does not have the training, qualifications, or experience required to discharge such responsibilities, to take appropriate responsive actions that include: (1) retraining or recertification, or (2) reassignment and replacement of the member or employee. Directs the Secretary, following the review required by this Act, to prescribe in regulations: (1) appropriate minimum levels of training, qualifications, and experience for such personnel; and (2) requirements for improvements in training, including of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Victim Advocates.

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

A bill to require a comprehensive review of the adequacy of the training, qualifications, and experience of the Department of Defense personnel responsible for sexual assault prevention and response for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Sen. McCaskill, Claire [D-MO] · 6 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)

Agencies named in this bill

Found automatically: the agency's full official name appears in the bill title. A bill can affect agencies it does not name, so this list may be incomplete.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (5)
Appropriation
Money a legislature sets aside by law for a specific purpose. Government agencies may spend public money only as it has been appropriated.
Authorization
A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
Bill
A proposed law. It becomes law only if it passes the legislature and is signed by the president or governor (or a veto is overridden).
Fiscal year
The 12-month period a government uses for its budget. The federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30 and is named for the calendar year in which it ends. Most states use July 1 to June 30.
Rulemaking
The process agencies use to write regulations that carry out laws passed by Congress or a legislature. Usually an agency publishes a proposed rule, takes public comments, then publishes a final rule.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Record fed-us-cong113-s964 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113