S-911-119
Received in the House.
Sponsored by Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV)
What it does
This bill would amend the Public Safety Officers' Death Benefits (PSODB) program to cover retired law enforcement officers who die or become permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of a targeted attack because of their prior service. Currently, the program covers only active-duty public safety officers. The bill applies retroactively to targeted attacks occurring on or after January 1, 2012, and would also cover any claims already pending before the Bureau of Justice Assistance at the time of enactment.
Who benefits
Retired law enforcement officers who are targeted and killed or permanently disabled because of their prior service, and their surviving families (spouses, children, and other dependents) who would receive death or disability benefit payments. This includes both compensated and uncompensated (volunteer) retired officers. Families of officers attacked as far back as January 1, 2012, who were previously ineligible may now qualify retroactively. The bill is named after Chief Herbert D. Proffitt, suggesting at least one specific family was directly affected by the current coverage gap.
Who is hurt
Federal taxpayers would bear the cost of expanded benefit payments, including retroactive claims dating to 2012. State and local governments that administer or coordinate PSODB claims may face increased administrative workload. Active-duty officer advocacy groups or claimants are not directly affected, but any finite program funding pool could face increased demand. Attackers of retired officers would face no direct impact from this bill, though it signals a federal policy interest in the status of retired officers.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that retired officers remain targets of violence specifically because of their law enforcement careers — the same risk that justifies benefits for active officers — and that denying benefits to their families creates an arbitrary and unjust coverage gap. They contend that the bill's narrow eligibility standard (requiring a "targeted attack" directly linked to prior service) ensures only genuinely service-related deaths qualify, preventing program abuse while closing a real inequity for families like Chief Proffitt's.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the PSODB program was designed to compensate for risks inherent to active, on-duty service, and that extending it to retirees blurs that line in ways that could be difficult to administer — particularly the requirement to prove an attack was "targeted" due to prior service rather than for other reasons. They contend that the retroactive application to 2012 creates an open-ended liability for the federal government and may invite difficult-to-verify claims from over a decade ago.