In this task, you are given text for US Congressional and California state bills, your task is to generate a summary for this bill.

Q: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Tiffany Joslyn Juvenile 
Accountability Block Grant Program Reauthorization Act of 2016''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.

    Part R of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act 
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796ee et seq.) is amended--
            (1) in section 1801(b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``graduated 
                sanctions'' and inserting ``graduated sanctions and 
                incentives''; and
                    (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``hiring juvenile 
                court judges, probation officers, and court-appointed 
                defenders and special advocates, and'';
                    (C) by striking paragraphs (4) and (7), and 
                redesignating paragraphs (5) through (17) as paragraphs 
                (4) through (15), respectively; and
                    (D) in paragraph (11), as so redesignated, by 
                striking ``research-based bullying, cyberbullying, and 
                gang prevention programs'' and inserting 
                ``interventions such as researched-based anti-bullying, 
                anti-cyberbullying, and gang prevention programs, as 
                well as mental health services and trauma-informed 
                practices'';
            (2) in section 1802--
                    (A) in subsection (d)(3), by inserting after 
                ``individualized sanctions'' the following: ``, 
                incentives,'';
                    (B) in subsection (e)(1)(B), by striking 
                ``graduated sanctions'' and inserting ``graduated 
                sanctions and incentives''; and
                    (C) in subsection (f)--
                            (i) in paragraph (2)--
                                    (I) by inserting after ``A sanction 
                                may include'' the following: ``a range 
                                of court-approved interventions, such 
                                as''; and
                                    (II) by inserting after ``a fine,'' 
                                the following: ``a restorative justice 
                                program,''; and
                            (ii) by inserting after paragraph (2) the 
                        following:
            ``(3) Incentives.--The term `incentives' means 
        individualized, goal-oriented, and graduated responses to a 
        juvenile offender's compliance with court orders and case 
        disposition terms designed to reinforce or modify the skills 
        and behaviors of the juvenile offender. An incentive may 
        include a certificate of achievement, a letter of 
        recommendation, a family or program activity, a meeting or 
        special outing with a community leader, a reduction in 
        community service hours, a reduced curfew or home-restriction, 
        a decrease in required court appearances, or a decrease in the 
        term of court-ordered supervision.'';
            (3) in section 1810(a), by striking ``$350,000,000 for each 
        of fiscal years 2006 through 2009'' and inserting ``$25,000,000 
        for each of fiscal years 2018 through 2022''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 1811. GRANT ACCOUNTABILITY.

    ``(a) Definition of Applicable Committees.--In this section, the 
term `applicable committees' means--
            ``(1) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate; and
            ``(2) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
        Representatives.
    ``(b) Accountability.--All grants awarded by the Attorney General 
under this part shall be subject to the following accountability 
provisions:
            ``(1) Audit requirement.--
                    ``(A) Definition.--In this paragraph, the term 
                `unresolved audit finding' means a finding in the final 
                audit report of the Inspector General of the Department 
                of Justice that the audited grantee has utilized grant 
                funds for an unauthorized expenditure or otherwise 
                unallowable cost that is not closed or resolved within 
                12 months after the date on which the final audit 
                report is issued.
                    ``(B) Audit.--Beginning in the first fiscal year 
                beginning after the date of enactment of this section, 
                and in each fiscal year thereafter, the Inspector 
                General of the Department of Justice shall conduct 
                audits of recipients of grants awarded by the Attorney 
                General under this part to prevent waste, fraud, and 
                abuse of funds by grantees. The Inspector General shall 
                determine the appropriate number of grantees to be 
                audited each year.
                    ``(C) Mandatory exclusion.--A recipient of grant 
                funds under this part that is found to have an 
                unresolved audit finding shall not be eligible to 
                receive grant funds under this part during the first 2 
                fiscal years beginning after the end of the 12-month 
                period described in subparagraph (A).
                    ``(D) Priority.--In awarding grants under this 
                part, the Attorney General shall give priority to 
                eligible applicants that did not have an unresolved 
                audit finding during the 3 fiscal years before 
                submitting an application for a grant under this part.
                    ``(E) Reimbursement.--If an entity is awarded grant 
                funds under this part during the 2-fiscal-year period 
                during which the entity is barred from receiving grants 
                under subparagraph (C), the Attorney General shall--
                            ``(i) deposit an amount equal to the amount 
                        of the grant funds that were improperly awarded 
                        to the grantee into the General Fund of the 
                        Treasury; and
                            ``(ii) seek to recoup the costs of the 
                        repayment to the fund from the grant recipient 
                        that was erroneously awarded grant funds.
            ``(2) Annual certification.--Beginning in the first fiscal 
        year beginning after the date of enactment of this section, the 
        Attorney General shall submit to the applicable committees an 
        annual certification--
                    ``(A) indicating whether--
                            ``(i) all audits issued by the Inspector 
                        General of the Department of Justice under 
                        paragraph (1) have been completed and reviewed 
                        by the appropriate Assistant Attorney General 
                        or Director;
                            ``(ii) all mandatory exclusions required 
                        under paragraph (1)(C) have been issued; and
                            ``(iii) all reimbursements required under 
                        paragraph (1)(E) have been made; and
                    ``(B) that includes a list of any grant recipients 
                excluded under paragraph (1) from the previous year.
    ``(c) Preventing Duplicative Grants.--
            ``(1) In general.--Before the Attorney General awards a 
        grant to an applicant under this part, the Attorney General 
        shall compare potential grant awards with other grants awarded 
        under this part by the Attorney General to determine if 
        duplicate grant awards are awarded for the same purpose.
            ``(2) Report.--If the Attorney General awards duplicate 
        grants under this part to the same applicant for the same 
        purpose, the Attorney General shall submit to the applicable 
        committees a report that includes--
                    ``(A) a list of all duplicate grants awarded under 
                this part, including the total dollar amount of any 
                duplicate grants awarded; and
                    ``(B) the reason the Attorney General awarded the 
                duplicate grants.''.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

    It is the sense of the Congress that the use of best practices is 
encouraged for all activities for which grants under part R of title I 
of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 may be used.

SEC. 4. USE OF AMOUNTS MADE AVAILABLE FOR DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 
              GENERAL ADMINISTRATION TO CARRY OUT JUVENILE 
              ACCOUNTABILITY BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.

    In each of fiscal years 2018 through 2022, the Attorney General 
shall use up to $25,000,000 of the amounts made available for 
Department of Justice, General Administration, to carry out part R of 
title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 
U.S.C. 3796ee et seq.).
            Amend the title so as to read: ``A bill to amend the 
        Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
        reauthorize the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant program, 
        and for other purposes.''.

A: Tiffany Joslyn Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program Reauthorization Act of 2016  (Sec. 2) This bill amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to revise and reauthorize through FY2022 the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG) Program. It subjects JABG grants to accountability measures. The Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Office of Inspector General must conduct annual audits of selected grant recipients. DOJ must submit an annual certification to Congress and identify and report on duplicative grant awards. (Sec. 3) The bill expresses the sense of Congress that the use of best practices is encouraged for activities carried out with JABG funds. (Sec. 4) DOJ must use amounts made available for general administration to carry out the JABG Program.
****
Q: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Muhammad Ali Commemorative Coin 
Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) Muhammad Ali was an Olympic gold medalist, 3-time World 
        Heavyweight Champion boxer, and one of the most celebrated and 
        well-known athletes in American history;
            (2) Muhammad Ali showed, beyond his impressive fighting 
        prowess in the boxing ring, even greater courage and tenacity 
        as an advocate outside the ring;
            (3) Muhammad Ali was a great philanthropist and a strong 
        champion of peace, equality, and freedom;
            (4) Muhammad Ali remains an icon of freedom of conscience;
            (5) Muhammad Ali was a prominent African American of the 
        Muslim faith, and was, and continues to be, a role model to the 
        citizens of the United States of all races, ethnicities, and 
        religions;
            (6) Muhammad Ali used his fame to advocate for humanitarian 
        causes in audiences with world leaders ranging from religious 
        leaders to heads of state; and
            (7) Muhammad Ali inspired people around the globe in 
        displaying the same vibrant and larger-than-life character and 
        dedication in spite of his physical ailments.

SEC. 3. COIN SPECIFICATIONS.

    (a) Denominations.--The Secretary of the Treasury (hereafter in 
this Act referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall mint and issue the 
following coins in commemoration of Muhammad Ali:
            (1) $5 gold coins.--Not more than 100,000 $5 coins, which 
        shall--
                    (A) weigh 8.359 grams;
                    (B) have a diameter of 0.850 inches; and
                    (C) contain 90 percent gold and 10 percent alloy.
            (2) $1 silver coins.--Not more than 350,000 $1 coins, which 
        shall--
                    (A) weigh 26.73 grams;
                    (B) have a diameter of 1.500 inches; and
                    (C) contain not less than 90 percent silver.
    (b) Legal Tender.--The coins minted under this Act shall be legal 
tender, as provided in section 5103 of title 31, United States Code.
    (c) Numismatic Items.--For purposes of section 5134 and 5136 of 
title 31, United States Code, all coins minted under this Act shall be 
considered to be numismatic items.

SEC. 4. DESIGN OF COINS.

    (a) Design Requirements.--
            (1) In general.--The design of the coins minted under this 
        Act shall be emblematic of the life and legacy of Muhammad Ali.
            (2) Design and inscriptions.--On each coin minted under 
        this Act there shall be--
                    (A) a designation of the value of the coin;
                    (B) an inscription of the year 2020; and
                    (C) inscriptions of the words ``Liberty'', ``In God 
                We Trust'', ``United States of America'', and ``E 
                Pluribus Unum''.
    (b) Selection.--The design for the coins minted under this Act 
shall be--
            (1) selected by the Secretary after consultation with the 
        Muhammad Ali Center; and
            (2) reviewed by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee.

SEC. 5. ISSUANCE OF COINS.

    (a) Quality of Coins.--Coins minted under this Act shall be issued 
in uncirculated and proof qualities.
    (b) Mint Facility.--Only 1 facility of the United States Mint may 
be used to strike any particular quality of the coins minted under this 
Act.
    (c) Period for Issuance.--The Secretary may issue coins minted 
under this Act only during the 1-year period beginning on January 1, 
2020.

SEC. 6. SALE OF COINS.

    (a) Sale Price.--The coins issued under this Act shall be sold by 
the Secretary at a price equal to the sum of--
            (1) the face value of the coins;
            (2) the surcharge provided in section 7(a) with respect to 
        such coins; and
            (3) the cost of designing and issuing the coins (including 
        labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, overhead expenses, 
        marketing, and shipping).
    (b) Bulk Sales.--The Secretary shall make bulk sales of the coins 
issued under this Act at a reasonable discount.
    (c) Prepaid Orders.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary shall accept prepaid orders 
        for the coins minted under this Act before the issuance of such 
        coins.
            (2) Discount.--Sale prices with respect to prepaid orders 
        under paragraph (1) shall be at a reasonable discount.

SEC. 7. SURCHARGES.

    (a) In General.--All sales of coins issued under this Act shall 
include a surcharge of--
            (1) $35 per coin for the $5 coin; and
            (2) $10 per coin for the $1 coin.
    (b) Distribution.--Subject to section 5134(f)(1) of title 31, 
United States Code, all surcharges received by the Secretary from the 
sale of coins issued under this Act shall be promptly paid by the 
Secretary as follows:
            (1) Eighty percent of the surcharges shall be paid to the 
        Muhammad Ali Center in Louisville, Kentucky, to ensure growth 
        and innovation in museum programming to research, promote, and 
        educate on the legacy of Muhammad Ali.
            (2) Ten percent of the surcharges shall be paid to the 
        Muhammad Ali Institute for Peace and Justice at the University 
        of Louisville to advance the work, study and practice of 
        peacebuilding, social justice, and violence prevention through 
        the development of innovative educational programs, training, 
        service, and research.
            (3) Ten percent of the surcharges shall be paid to the 
        Muhammad Ali Parkinson Center (MAPC) and Movement Disorder 
        Clinic to continue serving as a resource for Parkinson's 
        disease patients and their families through the provision of 
        diagnosis, treatments, research, and education.
    (c) Audit.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall have 
the right to examine such books, records, documents, and other data of 
each of the organizations referred to in subsection (b) as may be 
related to the expenditures of amounts paid under that subsection.
    (d) Limitations.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), no surcharge may 
be included with respect to the issuance under this Act of any coin 
during a calendar year if, as of the time of such issuance, the 
issuance of such coin would result in the number of commemorative coin 
programs issued during such year to exceed the annual 2 commemorative 
coin program issuance limitation under section 5112(m)(1) of title 31, 
United States Code (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this 
Act). The Secretary of the Treasury may issue guidance to carry out 
this subsection.

A: Muhammad Ali Commemorative Coin Act This bill requires the Department of the Treasury to mint and issue commemorative coins that emblemize the life and legacy of Muhammad Ali.&nbsp; Surcharges received from the sale of these coins shall be paid to: (1) the Muhammad Ali Center in Louisville, Kentucky; (2) the Muhammad Ali Institute for Peace and Justice at the University of Louisville; and (3) the Muhammad Ali Parkinson Center and Movement Disorder Clinic.
****
Q: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Debit Interchange Fee Study Act of 
2011''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
            (1) in response to the proposed debit interchange rule of 
        the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System mandated 
        by section 1075 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
        Consumer Protection Act, the Chairman of Board, the Comptroller 
        of the Currency, the Chairperson of the Federal Deposit 
        Insurance Corporation, and the Chairman of the National Credit 
        Union Administration Board have publicly raised concerns about 
        the impact of the proposed rule;
            (2) while testifying before the Committee on Banking, 
        Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate on February 17, 2011, 
        the Chairman of the Board stated in response to questions about 
        the small bank exemption to the interchange rule, ``. . . there 
        is some risk that the exemption will not be effective and that 
        the interchange fees available through smaller institutions 
        will be reduced to the same extent we would see for larger 
        banks'';
            (3) the Acting Comptroller of the Currency, in comments to 
        the Board, cited safety and soundness concerns and stated, ``. 
        . . we believe the proposal takes an unnecessarily narrow 
        approach to recovery of costs that would be allowable under the 
        law and that are recognized and indisputably part of conducting 
        a debit card business. This has long-term safety and soundness 
        consequences--for banks of all sizes . . .'';
            (4) the chairperson of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
        Corporation stated in comments to the Board regarding the 
        proposed rule their concern that the small bank exemption would 
        not work, stating, ``. . . we are concerned that these 
        institutions may not actually receive the benefit of the 
        interchange fee limit exemption explicitly provided by 
        Congress, resulting in a loss of income for community banks and 
        ultimately higher banking costs for their customers'';
            (5) the chairman of the National Credit Union 
        Administration Board, in comments to the Board, cited concern 
        with making sure there are ``meaningful exemptions for smaller 
        card issuers''; and
            (6) all of the comments and concerns raised by the banking 
        and credit union regulatory agencies cast serious questions 
        about the practical implementation of section 1075 of the Dodd-
        Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and 
        further study and consideration are needed.

SEC. 3. RULEMAKING AND EFFECTIVE DATES.

    (a) Extension for Rulemaking Timelines and Revised Effective 
Date.--Section 920 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. 
1693o-2) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(3)(A), by striking ``9 months after 
        the date of enactment of the Consumer Financial Protection Act 
        of 2010'' and inserting ``24 months after the date of enactment 
        of the Debit Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011'';
            (2) in subsection (a)(5)(B)(i), by striking ``9 months 
        after the date of enactment of the Consumer Financial 
        Protection Act of 2010'' and inserting ``24 months after the 
        date of enactment of the Debit Interchange Fee Study Act of 
        2011'';
            (3) in subsection (a)(8)(C), by striking ``9-month period 
        beginning on the date of the enactment of the Consumer 
        Financial Protection Act of 2010'' and inserting ``24-month 
        period beginning on the date of enactment of the Debit 
        Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011'';
            (4) in subsection (a)(9), by striking ``12-month period 
        beginning on the date of the enactment of the Consumer 
        Financial Protection Act of 2010'' and inserting ``30-month 
        period beginning on the date of enactment of the Debit 
        Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011'';
            (5) in subsection (b)(1)(A), by striking ``1-year period 
        beginning on the date of the enactment of the Consumer 
        Financial Protection Act of 2010'' and inserting ``24-month 
        period beginning on the date of enactment of the Debit 
        Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011''; and
            (6) in subsection (b)(1)(B), by striking ``1-year period 
        beginning on the date of the enactment of the Consumer 
        Financial Protection Act of 2010'' and inserting ``24-month 
        period beginning on the date of enactment of the Debit 
        Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011''.
    (b) Earlier Rulemaking Voided; New Rulemaking Required.--Any 
regulation proposed or prescribed by the Board pursuant to section 920 
of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (as amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall 
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act) prior to the date that is 6 
months after the date of completion of the study required under section 
4 shall be withdrawn by the Board and shall have no legal effect.

SEC. 4. STUDY.

    (a) Study Required.--Not later than 12 months after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the study agencies shall jointly submit a report 
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate 
and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives 
regarding the impact of regulating debit interchange transaction fees 
and related issues under section 920 of the Electronic Fund Transfer 
Act.
    (b) Subjects for Review.--In conducting the study required by this 
section, the study agencies shall examine the state of the debit 
interchange payment system, including the impact of section 920 of the 
Electronic Fund Transfer Act on consumers, entities that accept debit 
cards as payment, all financial institutions that issue debit cards, 
including small issuers, and debit card networks, and shall 
specifically examine--
            (1) the costs and benefits of electronic debit card 
        transactions and alternative forms of payment, including cash, 
        check, and automated clearing house (ACH) for consumers, 
        merchants, issuers, and debit card networks, including--
                    (A) individual consumer protections, ease of 
                acceptance, payment guarantee, and security provided 
                through such forms of payments for consumers;
                    (B) costs and benefits associated with acceptance, 
                handling, and processing of different forms of 
                payments, including labor, security, verification, and 
                collection where applicable;
                    (C) the extent to which payment form impacts 
                incremental sales and ticket sizes for merchants;
                    (D) all direct and indirect costs associated with 
                fraud prevention, detection, and mitigation, including 
                data breach and identity theft, and the overall costs 
                of fraud incurred by debit card issuers and merchants, 
                and how those costs are distributed among those 
                parties; and
                    (E) financial liability and payment guarantee for 
                debit card transactions and associated risks and costs 
                incurred by debit card issuers and merchants, and how 
                those costs are distributed among those parties;
            (2) the structure of the current debit interchange system, 
        including--
                    (A) the extent to which the current structure 
                offers merchants and issuers, particularly smaller 
                merchants and issuers sufficient competitive 
                opportunities to participate and negotiate in the debit 
                interchange system;
                    (B) an examination of the benefits of allowing 
                interchange fees to be determined in bilateral 
                negotiations between merchants and issuers, including 
                small issuers directly;
                    (C) mechanisms for allowing more price discovery 
                and transparency on the part of the consumer; and
                    (D) the ability of new competitors to enter the 
                payment systems market and an examination into whether 
                structural barriers to entry exist; and
            (3) the impact of the proposed rule reducing debit card 
        interchange fees issued by the Board entitled, ``Debit Card 
        Interchange Fees and Routing'' (75 Fed. Reg. 81,722 (Dec. 28, 
        2010)), if such proposed rule were adopted without change, 
        including--
                    (A) the impact on consumers, including whether 
                consumers would benefit from reduced interchanges fees 
                through reduced retail prices;
                    (B) the impact on lower and moderate income 
                consumers and on small businesses with respect to the 
                cost and accessibility of payment accounts and 
                services, the availability of credit, and what 
                alternative forms of financing are available and the 
                cost of such financing;
                    (C) the impact on consumer protection, including 
                anti-fraud, customer identification efforts, and 
                privacy protection;
                    (D) the impact of reduced debit card interchange 
                fees on merchants, including a comparison of the impact 
                on small merchants versus large merchants;
                    (E) the potential consequences to merchants if 
                reduced debit interchange fees result in elimination of 
                the payment guarantee or other reductions in debit card 
                services to merchants or shift consumers to other forms 
                of payments;
                    (F) the impact of significantly reduced debit card 
                interchange fees on debit card issuers and the services 
                and rates they provide, if fees do not adequately 
                recoup costs and investments made by issuers and the 
                potential impact on the safety and soundness of 
                issuers;
                    (G) whether it is possible to exempt or treat 
                differently a certain class of issuers within the debit 
                interchange system, such as small issuers and the 
                impact of market forces on such treatment;
                    (H) the extent to which a transition to a fee cap 
                from an interchange fee that is proportional to the 
                overall cost of a transaction could provide a 
                reasonable rate of return for issuers and adequately 
                cover fraud and related costs;
                    (I) the impact on other entities that utilize debit 
                card transactions, including the debit card programs of 
                Federal and State entities;
                    (J) the impact of shifting debit transaction 
                routing from card issuers to merchants, including 
                resulting changes to interchange fees and costs for 
                card issuers; and
                    (K) the impact of mandating a specific number of 
                enabled networks on merchants and debit card issuers, 
                including the specific and unique impact on small 
                issuers.

SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

    For purposes of this Act, the following definitions shall apply:
            (1) Board.--The term ``Board'' means the Board of Governors 
        of the Federal Reserve System.
            (2) Study agencies.--The term ``study agencies'' means the 
        Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the 
        Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the National Credit 
        Union Administration.
            (3) Small issuers.--The term ``small issuers'' means debit 
        card issuers that are depository institutions, including 
        community banks and credit unions, with assets of less than 
        $10,000,000,000.

A:
Debit Interchange Fee Study Act of 2011 - Amends the Electronic Fund Transfer Act to extend from 9 months after the date of enactment of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to 24 months after the date of enactment of this Act the rulemaking timelines and effective dates for the proposed debit interchange (swipe) rule of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) that is required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

Declares void and without legal effect any regulation proposed or prescribed by the Board pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act before the date that is 6 months after completion of the study required by this Act.

Directs specified banking regulatory agencies (study agencies) to study jointly and report to certain congressional committees regarding the impact of regulating debit interchange transaction (swipe) fees and related issues under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. Prescribes study contents including the costs and benefits of electronic debit card transactions (EDTs) and alternative forms of payment, including cash, check, and automated clearing house (ACH) for consumers, merchants, issuers, and debit card networks.
****