CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
Sponsor:
Summary:
All articles in House section
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
(House of Representatives - June 05, 1998)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
H4188-H4226]
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hobson). Pursuant to House Resolution
455 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration
of the concurrent resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 284.
{time} 1105
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the concurrent resolution (
H. Con. Res. 284) revising the congressional
budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 1998,
establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government
for fiscal year 1999, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003, with Mr. Hefley (Chairman
pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on the
legislative day of Thursday, June 4, 1998, all time for general debate
had expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 455, the concurrent resolution is
considered read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. The amendment in
the nature of a substitute printed in part 1 of House Report 105-565 is
considered as an original concurrent resolution for the purpose of
amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring),
SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that the concurrent resolution on the
budget for fiscal year 1998 is hereby revised and replaced
and that this is the concurrent resolution on the budget for
fiscal year 1999 and that the appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000 through 2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 2. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,292,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,318,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,331,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,358,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,407,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,600,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $0.
Fiscal year 1999: -$4,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$10,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$21,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$28,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$37,800,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,359,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,408,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,443,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,477,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,502,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,571,200,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,343,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,401,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,435,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,463,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,473,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,540,700,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $50,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $83,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $104,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $105,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $65,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $88,100,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $5,436,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $5,597,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,400,000,000.
SEC. 3. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1998 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $267,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $270,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $265,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $274,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $267,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $280,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $269,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $288,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $272,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $279,800,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $12,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,700,000,000.
[[Page
H4189]]
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,300,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $18,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $17,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$1,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,500,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $24,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $21,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,500,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $10,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $4,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $14,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $46,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $44,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $43,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,600,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $61,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $56,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $61,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $62,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $63,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $62,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $63,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $63,900,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $136,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $132,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $143,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $142,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $149,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $149,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $155,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $155,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $162,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $163,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $171,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $172,000,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $199,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $199,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $210,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $211,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $221,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $221,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $239,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $242,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $251,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $248,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $273,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,700,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $229,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $234,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $243,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $255,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $257,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $265,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $264,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $274,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $271,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $284,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $280,400,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $42,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $25,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
[[Page
H4190]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $25,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $23,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $22,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $13,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $290,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $290,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $297,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $296,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $298,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $298,500,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$14,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$14,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$2,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$2,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$38,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$38,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$45,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$45,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$35,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$35,900,000,000.
SEC. 4. RECONCILIATION.
(a) Submissions.--Not later than June 26, 1998, the House
committees named in subsection (b) shall submit their
recommendations to the House Committee on the Budget. After
receiving those recommendations, the House Committee on the
Budget shall report to the House a reconciliation bill
carrying out all such recommendations without any substantive
revision.
(b) Instructions to House Committees.--
(1) Committee on agriculture.--The House Committee on
Agriculture shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$30,400,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$157,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(2) Committee on banking and financial services.--The House
Committee on Banking and Financial Services shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct
spending such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: -$8,200,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and -$35,100,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(3) Committee on commerce.--The House Committee on Commerce
shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that
provide direct spending such that the total level of direct
spending for that committee does not exceed: $417,900,000,000
in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $2,437,900,000,000 in
outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(4) Committee on education and the workforce.--The House
Committee on Education and the Workforce shall report changes
in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending
such that the total level of direct spending for that
committee does not exceed: $18,700,000,000 in outlays for
fiscal year 1999 and $100,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003.
(5) Committee on government reform and oversight.--The
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $71,600,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $384,000,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(6) Committee on the judiciary.--The House Committee on the
Judiciary shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$5,200,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$26,500,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(7) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--The
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $16,200,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $78,900,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(8) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The House Committee on
Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$23,800,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$125,000,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(9) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The House Committee
on Ways and Means shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: $411,100,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and $2,374,800,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(B) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction such that the total
level of revenues for that committee is not less than:
$1,278,500,000,000 in revenues for fiscal year 1999 and
$6,637,700,000,000 in revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
SEC. 5. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF COMPENSATION AND PAY FOR
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
In the House, for purposes of enforcing the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974, any bill or joint resolution, or
amendment thereto or conference report thereon, establishing
on a prospective basis compensation or pay for any office or
position in the Government at a specified level, the
appropriation for which is provided through annual
discretionary appropriations, shall not be considered as
providing new entitlement authority or new budget authority.
SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SOCIAL SECURITY.
It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the
Treasury, in consultation with the trustees of the social
security trust funds, should consider issuing marketable
interest-bearing securities to the trust funds for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 1998.
SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE ACT.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) 33 percent of all American households have no or
negative financial assets and 60 percent of African-American
households have no or negative financial assets;
(2) 47 percent of all children in America live in
households with no financial assets, including 40 percent of
Caucasian children and 75 percent of African-American
children;
(3) in order to provide low-income families with more tools
for empowerment in lieu of traditional income support and to
assist them in becoming more involved in planning their
future, new public-private relationships that encourage
asset-building should be undertaken;
(4) individual development account programs are
successfully demonstrating the ability to assist low-income
families in building assets while partnering with community
organizations and States in more than 40 public and private
experiments nationwide; and
(5) Federal support for a trial demonstration program would
greatly assist the creative efforts of existing individual
development account experiments.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
legislation should be considered to encourage low-income
individuals and families to accumulate assets through
contributions to individual development accounts as a means
of achieving economic self-sufficiency.
SEC. 8. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ON
CLINICAL CANCER TRIALS.
It is the sense of Congress that legislation should be
considered that provides medicare coverage for beneficiaries'
participation in clinical cancer trials.
SEC. 9. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE INTERIM PAYMENT SYSTEM FOR
HOME HEALTH BENEFITS UNDER MEDICARE.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) there is concern that the interim payment system for
home health service has adversely affected some home health
care agencies;
(2) the Administration should ensure that the
implementation of the interim payment
[[Page
H4191]]
system does not adversely affect the availability of home
health services for medicare beneficiaries;
(3) Congress should carefully examine the Adminstration's
implementation of the home health payment system and make any
necessary changes to ensure that the needs of medicare
beneficiaries are being met; and
(4) the Health Care Financing Administration should quickly
implement the prospective payment system that was enacted
into law last year.
SEC. 10. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SPECIAL EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) Federal courts have found that children with
disabilities are guaranteed an equal opportunity to an
education under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) Congress responded to these court decisions by enacting
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to
ensure free and appropriate public education for children
with disabilities;
(3) IDEA authorizes the Federal Government to provide 40
percent of the average per pupil expenditure for children
with disabilities;
(4) the Federal Government has not fully funded IDEA at its
authorized levels; and
(5) if the Federal Government fully funds IDEA, then local
school districts will have the flexibility to invest in new
technology, hire additional teachers, and purchase books and
supplies.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Federal Government should fully fund programs authorized
under IDEA and that such funding is of the highest priority
among Federal education programs.
SEC. 11. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUDGETARY RULES AND TAX CUTS.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) in 1990, pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) requirements were
enacted to prevent Congress and the President from increasing
the deficit;
(2) under PAYGO requirements, tax legislation must be
offset by legislation increasing revenues or reducing
entitlement spending;
(3) these requirements prevent Congress from offsetting tax
cuts with discretionary savings or budget surpluses;
(4) the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 will produce the first
surplus in the unified budget in 29 years;
(5) under current trends, the Federal Government could run
an on-budget surplus (which excludes social security and the
postal service) as early as fiscal year 1999; and
(6) while these requirements were useful during a period of
chronic deficit spending, they now limit the ability of
Congress to allow taxpayers to retain more of their own
money.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the reconciliation bill to be considered pursuant to the
reconciliation instructions in section 4--
(1) should permit discretionary savings to be used to
offset tax cuts; and
(2) may make on-budget surpluses available to offset tax
cuts.
SEC. 12. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON TAX RELIEF.
It is the sense of Congress that the revenue levels set
forth in this resolution are predicated on--
(1) eliminating the marriage penalty over an appropriate
period of time; and
(2) providing tax relief targeted at relieving the tax
burden on families, estates, and wages, as well as incentives
to stimulate job creation and economic growth.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the amendment in the nature
of a substitute is in order except the amendments printed in part 2 of
that report. Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in
the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report,
shall be considered read, shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not
be subject to amendment.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
It is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part 2
of House Report 105-565.
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Neumann
Mr. NEUMANN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment in
the nature of a substitute.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Part 2 amendment No. 1 in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Neumann:
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS
SECTION 101. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that this is the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999 and that the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2000 through
2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 102. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,304,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,314,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,348,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,399,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,300,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: -$18,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$27,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$31,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$36,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$38,000,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,385,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,409,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,448,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,426,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,545,600,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,377,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,401,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,433,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,443,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,513,100,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $73,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $87,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $85,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $43,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $60,800,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $5,596,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,300,000,000.
SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $278,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $283,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $277,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $301,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $289,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $315,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $324,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $306,000,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $13,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $11,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,100,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $16,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $16,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $16,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,900,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$1,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$2,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,100,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
[[Page
H4192]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $19,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,200,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $11,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $10,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $9,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $3,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $5,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $45,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $48,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $50,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $51,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $53,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $50,100,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $60,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $58,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $60,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $60,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $61,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $64,000,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $139,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $137,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $141,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $141,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $144,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $144,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $146,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $147,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $151,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $152,400,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $209,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $210,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $220,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $219,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $237,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $248,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $246,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $270,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $270,400,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $236,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $245,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $254,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $254,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $214,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $259,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $271,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,300,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $24,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $21,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $21,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $244,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $244,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $238,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $238,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $230,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $230,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $223,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $223,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $217,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $217,400,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$3,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$4,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$4,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$9,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,000,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$54,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$54,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,300,000,000.
TITLE II--SENSE OF HOUSE PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SOCIAL SECURITY.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
[[Page
H4193]]
(1) The social security program currently collects more in
taxes than it pays out in benefits to our country's senior
citizens.
(2) Taxes collected exclusively for the social security
program should not be spent on any other program.
(3) Social security benefits are expected to consistently
exceed social security payroll taxes starting in 2013.
(4) Congress should avoid increasing taxes, increasing
borrowing, raising the retirement age, or cutting social
security cost-of-living adjustments to pay social security
benefits.
(5) Negotiable treasury bonds are safe, real assets that
can be sold for cash when income to the social security trust
funds is not sufficient to pay benefits for seniors in 2013.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the amount by which social security payroll taxes
exceed social security benefits paid shall be invested in
negotiable treasury bonds issued by the United States
Government and should not be counted as surplus dollars; and
(2) such negotiable Treasury bonds should be redeemable at
any time at the purchase price.
SEC. 202. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAX RELIEF.
(a) Findings.--The House finds that this concurrent
resolution dedicates $150,000,000,000 over 5 years to reduce
the tax burden on American families.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
these funds should be used to--
(1) provide across-the-board tax relief by expanding the 15
percent tax bracket by 15 percent for married individuals
(whether filing a joint or separate return), heads of
households, and unmarried individuals;
(2) eliminate the marriage penalty by making the joint
income threshold exactly double that of the individual income
threshold in all tax brackets and by making the standard
deduction for joint filers exactly double that of individual
filers;
(3) restore the 12-month holding period on capital gains;
and
(4) eliminate the ``death tax''.
SEC. 203. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING THE BUDGET SURPLUS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The Congressional Budget Office in its Spring
projections has underestimated the revenues collected by the
Federal Government for the last 3 years.
(2) The United States is experiencing remarkable economic
growth with no signs of an economic slowdown because the
Federal Government is borrowing less from the private sector.
(3) Revenues to the Federal Government are growing at an
annual rate far greater than projected by the Congressional
Budget Office in March 1998.
(4) The Federal Government will likely receive
significantly more revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
than projected by the Congressional Budget Office in March
1998.
(5) Revenues received above and beyond those projected by
the Congressional Budget Office in March 1998 should not be
spent to create more ineffective Washington programs.
(6) Additional revenues come from American families who are
forced to give far too much of their hard-earned income to
the Federal Government.
(7) Working Americans deserve to keep more of their income
instead of sending it to Washington, D.C., for Congress to
spend.
(8) Congress irresponsibly spent more than it received over
the last 30 years, creating $5,500,000,000,000 Federal debt.
(9) The Congress and the President have a basic moral and
ethical responsibility to future generations to repay the
Federal debt, including money borrowed from the social
security trust funds.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) any additional revenues collected by the Federal
Government above and beyond the Congressional Budget Office
March 1998 projections for fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
should be divided equally and used to reduce taxes on
American families and to pay off the $5,500,000,000,000
Federal debt, prioritizing social security;
(2) such tax reductions should be enacted in the following
order--
(A) expand education individual retirement accounts;
(B) index capital gains to the rate of inflation;
(C) immediate 100 percent deduction for health insurance
premiums for employees and self-employed;
(D) eliminate social security earnings limit;
(E) repeal 1993 tax increase on social security benefits;
(F) repeal the alternative minimum tax for individuals and
corporations; and
(G) permanently extend the research and development tax
credit; and
(3) efforts to repay the Federal debt should begin by
replacing the nonnegotiable Treasury bonds, in the social
security trust fund with marketable Treasury bills redeemable
at any time for the purchase price.
SEC. 204. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAXES AND
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) American taxpayers pay too much in taxes to support a
Federal Government which is too large.
(2) Taxpayers should benefit from any changes in law which
reduce Federal Government spending.
(3) Current law prohibits savings from reduced
discretionary spending from being passed along to the
American people through a reduction in their tax burden.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
budget laws should be changed to allow discretionary spending
reductions to be dedicated to tax relief.
SEC. 205. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PUTTING SOCIAL
SECURITY FIRST.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The President has encouraged the Congress to put social
security first by not spending expected unified budget
surpluses, though the Congressional Budget Office estimates
that the President's budget for fiscal year 1999 does spend
unified budget surpluses.
(2) The Congress currently has no method for dedicating
savings from amendments to appropriation bills for the
purpose of putting social security first.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
the Congress should establish a procedure that would allow
amendments to appropriation bills to dedicate all budget
savings to the President's plan to put social security first.
SEC. 206. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in the United States should be the best
students in the world.
(2) Quality education for our children will ensure the
United States can compete effectively in the global
marketplace.
(3) Today's students must learn the knowledge and skills
which will lead the world in the next century.
(4) Involving parents in the education of their children
increases children's success at school.
(5) Recent studies by the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development show that increased parental
involvement in children's lives leads to fewer teen
pregnancies, less drug use, lower crime rates, and improved
learning.
(6) Education is, and should remain, primarily a State and
local responsibility.
(7) It is important to let community members offer
suggestions to improve academic achievement within local
schools.
(8) The Federal role in education has failed to produce the
desired results.
(9) Federal regulations and paperwork consume too much of
teachers' and administrators' time and energy, as well as
taxpayer dollars which could be used to improve education.
(10) Creating a national testing program would increase the
Federal burden on local schools.
(11) State, local, and private schools deserve flexibility
which will allow them to meet the educational needs of
children.
(12) Increasing the role of parents, teachers, and local
community members will improve local schools.
(13) There is not a significant relationship between
Federal education spending and academic achievement.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the Department of Education, States, and local
educational agencies should spend at least 95 percent of
Federal education tax dollars in our children's classrooms;
(2) the Goals 2000 program should be terminated, and funds
should be given directly to States and local school
districts;
(3) the Congress should enact legislation to prevent the
development and administration of a national testing program;
and
(4) the Department of Education should limit its role in
education to functions which cannot be performed by State or
local school officials.
SEC. 207. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SCHOOL CHOICE FOR THE
CHILDREN OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in our Nation's capital deserve to have the
best education available.
(2) Many parents in the District of Columbia would prefer
to send their children to the school of their choice, whether
public, private, religious, or home.
(3) Allowing parents to evaluate and choose the proper
school for their children gives them an invested interest in
helping their children succeed.
(4) Giving children an opportunity to attend the school
which best meets their needs will best prepare them for the
future.
(5) Letting parents choose a school which reflects the
moral or religious beliefs of their children will enhance the
children's character and learning experience.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
there should be a Federal pilot program to provide low-income
children in the District of Columbia with the opportunity to
attend the public, private, religious, or home school of
their parents' choice.
SEC. 208. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PARTIAL-BIRTH
ABORTIONS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Partial-birth abortions allow a child to be delivered
until only its head remains in the birth canal.
(2) Partial-birth abortions involve piercing the child's
skull and removing its brain.
[[Page
H4194]]
(3) A large majority of Americans object to partially
delivering a child and then killing it.
(4) Both Houses of Congress have consistently supported
legislation to ban partial-birth abortions.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
partial-birth abortions should be banned in the United States
unless such a procedure is needed to save the life of the
mother.
SEC. 209. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT-
SPONSORED PROMOTION OF ABORTION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Title X of the Public Health Service Act was enacted to
help reduce the unplanned pregnancy rate, especially among
teenagers.
(2) Title X has not only failed to reduce the teenage
pregnancy rate, out-of-wedlock births, and sexually
transmitted diseases, it has made these problems worse.
(3) Taxpayer-funded title X family planning clinics are
currently required to counsel pregnant girls and women about
all of their ``pregnancy management options'', including
abortion.
(4) Title X clinics also require clinic staff, following
such ``counseling,'' to refer girls and women who want an
abortion to clinics that perform them.
(5) Many of these abortion clinics are operated by the same
organizations that operate title X clinics.
(6) The United States Government through title X is using
taxpayer dollars to subsidize activities destructive to human
life.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion or
organizations that promote or perform abortions.
SEC. 210. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TITLE X FUNDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The title X of the Public Health Service Act family
planning program provides contraceptives, treatment for
sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual counseling to
minors without parental consent or notification.
(2) Almost 1,500,000 American minors receive title X family
planning services each year.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
organizations or businesses which receive funds through
Federal programs should obtain parental consent or
confirmation of parental notification before contraceptives
are provided to a minor.
SEC. 211. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING INTERNATIONAL
POPULATION CONTROL PROGRAMS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) There is international consensus that under no
circumstances should abortion be promoted as a method of
family planning.
(2) The United States provides the largest percentage of
population control assistance among donor nations.
(3) The activities of private organizations supported by
United States taxpayers are a reflection of United States
priorities in developing countries, and United States funds
allow these organizations to expand their programs and
influence.
(4) The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) recently
signed a 4-year, $20,000,000 contract with the People's
Republic of China (PRC) which persists in coercing its people
to obtain abortions and undergo involuntary sterilizations.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
international family planning programs;
(2) if the Congress is unwilling to stop supporting
international family planning programs with taxpayer dollars,
the Congress should limit such support to organizations that
certify they will not perform, or lobby for the legalization
of, abortions in other countries; and
(3) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA) if it is
conducting activities in the People's Republic of China (PRC)
and the PRC's population control program continues to utilize
coercive abortion.
SEC. 212. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING HUMAN EMBRYO RESEARCH.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Human life is a precious resource which should not be
created or destroyed simply for scientific experiments.
(2) A human embryo is a human being that must be accorded
the moral status of a person from the time of fertilization.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
Congress should prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for the
creation of human embryos
Major Actions:
All articles in House section
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
(House of Representatives - June 05, 1998)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
H4188-H4226]
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hobson). Pursuant to House Resolution
455 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration
of the concurrent resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 284.
{time} 1105
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the concurrent resolution (
H. Con. Res. 284) revising the congressional
budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 1998,
establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government
for fiscal year 1999, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003, with Mr. Hefley (Chairman
pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on the
legislative day of Thursday, June 4, 1998, all time for general debate
had expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 455, the concurrent resolution is
considered read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. The amendment in
the nature of a substitute printed in part 1 of House Report 105-565 is
considered as an original concurrent resolution for the purpose of
amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring),
SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that the concurrent resolution on the
budget for fiscal year 1998 is hereby revised and replaced
and that this is the concurrent resolution on the budget for
fiscal year 1999 and that the appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000 through 2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 2. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,292,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,318,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,331,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,358,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,407,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,600,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $0.
Fiscal year 1999: -$4,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$10,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$21,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$28,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$37,800,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,359,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,408,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,443,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,477,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,502,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,571,200,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,343,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,401,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,435,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,463,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,473,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,540,700,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $50,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $83,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $104,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $105,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $65,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $88,100,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $5,436,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $5,597,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,400,000,000.
SEC. 3. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1998 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $267,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $270,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $265,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $274,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $267,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $280,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $269,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $288,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $272,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $279,800,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $12,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,700,000,000.
[[Page
H4189]]
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,300,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $18,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $17,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$1,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,500,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $24,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $21,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,500,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $10,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $4,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $14,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $46,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $44,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $43,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,600,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $61,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $56,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $61,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $62,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $63,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $62,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $63,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $63,900,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $136,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $132,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $143,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $142,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $149,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $149,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $155,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $155,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $162,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $163,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $171,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $172,000,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $199,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $199,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $210,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $211,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $221,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $221,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $239,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $242,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $251,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $248,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $273,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,700,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $229,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $234,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $243,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $255,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $257,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $265,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $264,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $274,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $271,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $284,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $280,400,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $42,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $25,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
[[Page
H4190]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $25,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $23,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $22,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $13,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $290,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $290,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $297,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $296,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $298,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $298,500,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$14,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$14,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$2,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$2,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$38,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$38,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$45,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$45,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$35,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$35,900,000,000.
SEC. 4. RECONCILIATION.
(a) Submissions.--Not later than June 26, 1998, the House
committees named in subsection (b) shall submit their
recommendations to the House Committee on the Budget. After
receiving those recommendations, the House Committee on the
Budget shall report to the House a reconciliation bill
carrying out all such recommendations without any substantive
revision.
(b) Instructions to House Committees.--
(1) Committee on agriculture.--The House Committee on
Agriculture shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$30,400,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$157,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(2) Committee on banking and financial services.--The House
Committee on Banking and Financial Services shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct
spending such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: -$8,200,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and -$35,100,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(3) Committee on commerce.--The House Committee on Commerce
shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that
provide direct spending such that the total level of direct
spending for that committee does not exceed: $417,900,000,000
in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $2,437,900,000,000 in
outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(4) Committee on education and the workforce.--The House
Committee on Education and the Workforce shall report changes
in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending
such that the total level of direct spending for that
committee does not exceed: $18,700,000,000 in outlays for
fiscal year 1999 and $100,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003.
(5) Committee on government reform and oversight.--The
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $71,600,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $384,000,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(6) Committee on the judiciary.--The House Committee on the
Judiciary shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$5,200,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$26,500,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(7) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--The
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $16,200,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $78,900,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(8) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The House Committee on
Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$23,800,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$125,000,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(9) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The House Committee
on Ways and Means shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: $411,100,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and $2,374,800,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(B) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction such that the total
level of revenues for that committee is not less than:
$1,278,500,000,000 in revenues for fiscal year 1999 and
$6,637,700,000,000 in revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
SEC. 5. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF COMPENSATION AND PAY FOR
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
In the House, for purposes of enforcing the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974, any bill or joint resolution, or
amendment thereto or conference report thereon, establishing
on a prospective basis compensation or pay for any office or
position in the Government at a specified level, the
appropriation for which is provided through annual
discretionary appropriations, shall not be considered as
providing new entitlement authority or new budget authority.
SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SOCIAL SECURITY.
It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the
Treasury, in consultation with the trustees of the social
security trust funds, should consider issuing marketable
interest-bearing securities to the trust funds for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 1998.
SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE ACT.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) 33 percent of all American households have no or
negative financial assets and 60 percent of African-American
households have no or negative financial assets;
(2) 47 percent of all children in America live in
households with no financial assets, including 40 percent of
Caucasian children and 75 percent of African-American
children;
(3) in order to provide low-income families with more tools
for empowerment in lieu of traditional income support and to
assist them in becoming more involved in planning their
future, new public-private relationships that encourage
asset-building should be undertaken;
(4) individual development account programs are
successfully demonstrating the ability to assist low-income
families in building assets while partnering with community
organizations and States in more than 40 public and private
experiments nationwide; and
(5) Federal support for a trial demonstration program would
greatly assist the creative efforts of existing individual
development account experiments.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
legislation should be considered to encourage low-income
individuals and families to accumulate assets through
contributions to individual development accounts as a means
of achieving economic self-sufficiency.
SEC. 8. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ON
CLINICAL CANCER TRIALS.
It is the sense of Congress that legislation should be
considered that provides medicare coverage for beneficiaries'
participation in clinical cancer trials.
SEC. 9. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE INTERIM PAYMENT SYSTEM FOR
HOME HEALTH BENEFITS UNDER MEDICARE.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) there is concern that the interim payment system for
home health service has adversely affected some home health
care agencies;
(2) the Administration should ensure that the
implementation of the interim payment
[[Page
H4191]]
system does not adversely affect the availability of home
health services for medicare beneficiaries;
(3) Congress should carefully examine the Adminstration's
implementation of the home health payment system and make any
necessary changes to ensure that the needs of medicare
beneficiaries are being met; and
(4) the Health Care Financing Administration should quickly
implement the prospective payment system that was enacted
into law last year.
SEC. 10. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SPECIAL EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) Federal courts have found that children with
disabilities are guaranteed an equal opportunity to an
education under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) Congress responded to these court decisions by enacting
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to
ensure free and appropriate public education for children
with disabilities;
(3) IDEA authorizes the Federal Government to provide 40
percent of the average per pupil expenditure for children
with disabilities;
(4) the Federal Government has not fully funded IDEA at its
authorized levels; and
(5) if the Federal Government fully funds IDEA, then local
school districts will have the flexibility to invest in new
technology, hire additional teachers, and purchase books and
supplies.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Federal Government should fully fund programs authorized
under IDEA and that such funding is of the highest priority
among Federal education programs.
SEC. 11. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUDGETARY RULES AND TAX CUTS.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) in 1990, pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) requirements were
enacted to prevent Congress and the President from increasing
the deficit;
(2) under PAYGO requirements, tax legislation must be
offset by legislation increasing revenues or reducing
entitlement spending;
(3) these requirements prevent Congress from offsetting tax
cuts with discretionary savings or budget surpluses;
(4) the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 will produce the first
surplus in the unified budget in 29 years;
(5) under current trends, the Federal Government could run
an on-budget surplus (which excludes social security and the
postal service) as early as fiscal year 1999; and
(6) while these requirements were useful during a period of
chronic deficit spending, they now limit the ability of
Congress to allow taxpayers to retain more of their own
money.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the reconciliation bill to be considered pursuant to the
reconciliation instructions in section 4--
(1) should permit discretionary savings to be used to
offset tax cuts; and
(2) may make on-budget surpluses available to offset tax
cuts.
SEC. 12. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON TAX RELIEF.
It is the sense of Congress that the revenue levels set
forth in this resolution are predicated on--
(1) eliminating the marriage penalty over an appropriate
period of time; and
(2) providing tax relief targeted at relieving the tax
burden on families, estates, and wages, as well as incentives
to stimulate job creation and economic growth.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the amendment in the nature
of a substitute is in order except the amendments printed in part 2 of
that report. Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in
the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report,
shall be considered read, shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not
be subject to amendment.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
It is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part 2
of House Report 105-565.
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Neumann
Mr. NEUMANN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment in
the nature of a substitute.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Part 2 amendment No. 1 in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Neumann:
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS
SECTION 101. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that this is the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999 and that the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2000 through
2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 102. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,304,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,314,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,348,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,399,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,300,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: -$18,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$27,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$31,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$36,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$38,000,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,385,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,409,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,448,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,426,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,545,600,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,377,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,401,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,433,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,443,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,513,100,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $73,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $87,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $85,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $43,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $60,800,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $5,596,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,300,000,000.
SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $278,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $283,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $277,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $301,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $289,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $315,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $324,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $306,000,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $13,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $11,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,100,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $16,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $16,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $16,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,900,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$1,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$2,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,100,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
[[Page
H4192]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $19,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,200,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $11,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $10,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $9,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $3,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $5,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $45,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $48,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $50,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $51,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $53,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $50,100,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $60,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $58,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $60,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $60,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $61,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $64,000,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $139,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $137,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $141,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $141,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $144,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $144,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $146,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $147,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $151,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $152,400,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $209,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $210,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $220,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $219,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $237,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $248,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $246,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $270,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $270,400,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $236,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $245,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $254,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $254,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $214,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $259,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $271,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,300,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $24,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $21,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $21,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $244,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $244,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $238,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $238,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $230,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $230,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $223,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $223,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $217,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $217,400,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$3,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$4,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$4,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$9,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,000,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$54,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$54,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,300,000,000.
TITLE II--SENSE OF HOUSE PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SOCIAL SECURITY.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
[[Page
H4193]]
(1) The social security program currently collects more in
taxes than it pays out in benefits to our country's senior
citizens.
(2) Taxes collected exclusively for the social security
program should not be spent on any other program.
(3) Social security benefits are expected to consistently
exceed social security payroll taxes starting in 2013.
(4) Congress should avoid increasing taxes, increasing
borrowing, raising the retirement age, or cutting social
security cost-of-living adjustments to pay social security
benefits.
(5) Negotiable treasury bonds are safe, real assets that
can be sold for cash when income to the social security trust
funds is not sufficient to pay benefits for seniors in 2013.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the amount by which social security payroll taxes
exceed social security benefits paid shall be invested in
negotiable treasury bonds issued by the United States
Government and should not be counted as surplus dollars; and
(2) such negotiable Treasury bonds should be redeemable at
any time at the purchase price.
SEC. 202. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAX RELIEF.
(a) Findings.--The House finds that this concurrent
resolution dedicates $150,000,000,000 over 5 years to reduce
the tax burden on American families.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
these funds should be used to--
(1) provide across-the-board tax relief by expanding the 15
percent tax bracket by 15 percent for married individuals
(whether filing a joint or separate return), heads of
households, and unmarried individuals;
(2) eliminate the marriage penalty by making the joint
income threshold exactly double that of the individual income
threshold in all tax brackets and by making the standard
deduction for joint filers exactly double that of individual
filers;
(3) restore the 12-month holding period on capital gains;
and
(4) eliminate the ``death tax''.
SEC. 203. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING THE BUDGET SURPLUS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The Congressional Budget Office in its Spring
projections has underestimated the revenues collected by the
Federal Government for the last 3 years.
(2) The United States is experiencing remarkable economic
growth with no signs of an economic slowdown because the
Federal Government is borrowing less from the private sector.
(3) Revenues to the Federal Government are growing at an
annual rate far greater than projected by the Congressional
Budget Office in March 1998.
(4) The Federal Government will likely receive
significantly more revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
than projected by the Congressional Budget Office in March
1998.
(5) Revenues received above and beyond those projected by
the Congressional Budget Office in March 1998 should not be
spent to create more ineffective Washington programs.
(6) Additional revenues come from American families who are
forced to give far too much of their hard-earned income to
the Federal Government.
(7) Working Americans deserve to keep more of their income
instead of sending it to Washington, D.C., for Congress to
spend.
(8) Congress irresponsibly spent more than it received over
the last 30 years, creating $5,500,000,000,000 Federal debt.
(9) The Congress and the President have a basic moral and
ethical responsibility to future generations to repay the
Federal debt, including money borrowed from the social
security trust funds.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) any additional revenues collected by the Federal
Government above and beyond the Congressional Budget Office
March 1998 projections for fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
should be divided equally and used to reduce taxes on
American families and to pay off the $5,500,000,000,000
Federal debt, prioritizing social security;
(2) such tax reductions should be enacted in the following
order--
(A) expand education individual retirement accounts;
(B) index capital gains to the rate of inflation;
(C) immediate 100 percent deduction for health insurance
premiums for employees and self-employed;
(D) eliminate social security earnings limit;
(E) repeal 1993 tax increase on social security benefits;
(F) repeal the alternative minimum tax for individuals and
corporations; and
(G) permanently extend the research and development tax
credit; and
(3) efforts to repay the Federal debt should begin by
replacing the nonnegotiable Treasury bonds, in the social
security trust fund with marketable Treasury bills redeemable
at any time for the purchase price.
SEC. 204. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAXES AND
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) American taxpayers pay too much in taxes to support a
Federal Government which is too large.
(2) Taxpayers should benefit from any changes in law which
reduce Federal Government spending.
(3) Current law prohibits savings from reduced
discretionary spending from being passed along to the
American people through a reduction in their tax burden.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
budget laws should be changed to allow discretionary spending
reductions to be dedicated to tax relief.
SEC. 205. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PUTTING SOCIAL
SECURITY FIRST.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The President has encouraged the Congress to put social
security first by not spending expected unified budget
surpluses, though the Congressional Budget Office estimates
that the President's budget for fiscal year 1999 does spend
unified budget surpluses.
(2) The Congress currently has no method for dedicating
savings from amendments to appropriation bills for the
purpose of putting social security first.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
the Congress should establish a procedure that would allow
amendments to appropriation bills to dedicate all budget
savings to the President's plan to put social security first.
SEC. 206. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in the United States should be the best
students in the world.
(2) Quality education for our children will ensure the
United States can compete effectively in the global
marketplace.
(3) Today's students must learn the knowledge and skills
which will lead the world in the next century.
(4) Involving parents in the education of their children
increases children's success at school.
(5) Recent studies by the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development show that increased parental
involvement in children's lives leads to fewer teen
pregnancies, less drug use, lower crime rates, and improved
learning.
(6) Education is, and should remain, primarily a State and
local responsibility.
(7) It is important to let community members offer
suggestions to improve academic achievement within local
schools.
(8) The Federal role in education has failed to produce the
desired results.
(9) Federal regulations and paperwork consume too much of
teachers' and administrators' time and energy, as well as
taxpayer dollars which could be used to improve education.
(10) Creating a national testing program would increase the
Federal burden on local schools.
(11) State, local, and private schools deserve flexibility
which will allow them to meet the educational needs of
children.
(12) Increasing the role of parents, teachers, and local
community members will improve local schools.
(13) There is not a significant relationship between
Federal education spending and academic achievement.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the Department of Education, States, and local
educational agencies should spend at least 95 percent of
Federal education tax dollars in our children's classrooms;
(2) the Goals 2000 program should be terminated, and funds
should be given directly to States and local school
districts;
(3) the Congress should enact legislation to prevent the
development and administration of a national testing program;
and
(4) the Department of Education should limit its role in
education to functions which cannot be performed by State or
local school officials.
SEC. 207. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SCHOOL CHOICE FOR THE
CHILDREN OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in our Nation's capital deserve to have the
best education available.
(2) Many parents in the District of Columbia would prefer
to send their children to the school of their choice, whether
public, private, religious, or home.
(3) Allowing parents to evaluate and choose the proper
school for their children gives them an invested interest in
helping their children succeed.
(4) Giving children an opportunity to attend the school
which best meets their needs will best prepare them for the
future.
(5) Letting parents choose a school which reflects the
moral or religious beliefs of their children will enhance the
children's character and learning experience.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
there should be a Federal pilot program to provide low-income
children in the District of Columbia with the opportunity to
attend the public, private, religious, or home school of
their parents' choice.
SEC. 208. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PARTIAL-BIRTH
ABORTIONS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Partial-birth abortions allow a child to be delivered
until only its head remains in the birth canal.
(2) Partial-birth abortions involve piercing the child's
skull and removing its brain.
[[Page
H4194]]
(3) A large majority of Americans object to partially
delivering a child and then killing it.
(4) Both Houses of Congress have consistently supported
legislation to ban partial-birth abortions.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
partial-birth abortions should be banned in the United States
unless such a procedure is needed to save the life of the
mother.
SEC. 209. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT-
SPONSORED PROMOTION OF ABORTION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Title X of the Public Health Service Act was enacted to
help reduce the unplanned pregnancy rate, especially among
teenagers.
(2) Title X has not only failed to reduce the teenage
pregnancy rate, out-of-wedlock births, and sexually
transmitted diseases, it has made these problems worse.
(3) Taxpayer-funded title X family planning clinics are
currently required to counsel pregnant girls and women about
all of their ``pregnancy management options'', including
abortion.
(4) Title X clinics also require clinic staff, following
such ``counseling,'' to refer girls and women who want an
abortion to clinics that perform them.
(5) Many of these abortion clinics are operated by the same
organizations that operate title X clinics.
(6) The United States Government through title X is using
taxpayer dollars to subsidize activities destructive to human
life.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion or
organizations that promote or perform abortions.
SEC. 210. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TITLE X FUNDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The title X of the Public Health Service Act family
planning program provides contraceptives, treatment for
sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual counseling to
minors without parental consent or notification.
(2) Almost 1,500,000 American minors receive title X family
planning services each year.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
organizations or businesses which receive funds through
Federal programs should obtain parental consent or
confirmation of parental notification before contraceptives
are provided to a minor.
SEC. 211. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING INTERNATIONAL
POPULATION CONTROL PROGRAMS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) There is international consensus that under no
circumstances should abortion be promoted as a method of
family planning.
(2) The United States provides the largest percentage of
population control assistance among donor nations.
(3) The activities of private organizations supported by
United States taxpayers are a reflection of United States
priorities in developing countries, and United States funds
allow these organizations to expand their programs and
influence.
(4) The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) recently
signed a 4-year, $20,000,000 contract with the People's
Republic of China (PRC) which persists in coercing its people
to obtain abortions and undergo involuntary sterilizations.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
international family planning programs;
(2) if the Congress is unwilling to stop supporting
international family planning programs with taxpayer dollars,
the Congress should limit such support to organizations that
certify they will not perform, or lobby for the legalization
of, abortions in other countries; and
(3) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA) if it is
conducting activities in the People's Republic of China (PRC)
and the PRC's population control program continues to utilize
coercive abortion.
SEC. 212. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING HUMAN EMBRYO RESEARCH.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Human life is a precious resource which should not be
created or destroyed simply for scientific experiments.
(2) A human embryo is a human being that must be accorded
the moral status of a person from the time of fertilization.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
Congress should prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for the
creation of hum
Amendments:
Cosponsors:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
Sponsor:
Summary:
All articles in House section
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
(House of Representatives - June 05, 1998)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
H4188-H4226]
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hobson). Pursuant to House Resolution
455 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration
of the concurrent resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 284.
{time} 1105
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the concurrent resolution (
H. Con. Res. 284) revising the congressional
budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 1998,
establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government
for fiscal year 1999, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003, with Mr. Hefley (Chairman
pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on the
legislative day of Thursday, June 4, 1998, all time for general debate
had expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 455, the concurrent resolution is
considered read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. The amendment in
the nature of a substitute printed in part 1 of House Report 105-565 is
considered as an original concurrent resolution for the purpose of
amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring),
SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that the concurrent resolution on the
budget for fiscal year 1998 is hereby revised and replaced
and that this is the concurrent resolution on the budget for
fiscal year 1999 and that the appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000 through 2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 2. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,292,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,318,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,331,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,358,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,407,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,600,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $0.
Fiscal year 1999: -$4,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$10,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$21,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$28,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$37,800,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,359,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,408,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,443,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,477,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,502,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,571,200,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,343,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,401,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,435,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,463,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,473,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,540,700,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $50,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $83,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $104,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $105,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $65,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $88,100,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $5,436,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $5,597,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,400,000,000.
SEC. 3. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1998 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $267,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $270,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $265,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $274,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $267,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $280,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $269,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $288,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $272,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $279,800,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $12,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,700,000,000.
[[Page
H4189]]
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,300,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $18,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $17,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$1,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,500,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $24,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $21,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,500,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $10,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $4,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $14,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $46,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $44,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $43,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,600,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $61,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $56,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $61,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $62,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $63,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $62,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $63,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $63,900,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $136,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $132,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $143,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $142,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $149,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $149,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $155,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $155,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $162,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $163,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $171,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $172,000,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $199,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $199,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $210,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $211,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $221,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $221,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $239,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $242,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $251,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $248,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $273,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,700,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $229,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $234,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $243,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $255,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $257,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $265,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $264,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $274,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $271,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $284,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $280,400,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $42,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $25,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
[[Page
H4190]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $25,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $23,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $22,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $13,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $290,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $290,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $297,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $296,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $298,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $298,500,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$14,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$14,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$2,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$2,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$38,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$38,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$45,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$45,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$35,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$35,900,000,000.
SEC. 4. RECONCILIATION.
(a) Submissions.--Not later than June 26, 1998, the House
committees named in subsection (b) shall submit their
recommendations to the House Committee on the Budget. After
receiving those recommendations, the House Committee on the
Budget shall report to the House a reconciliation bill
carrying out all such recommendations without any substantive
revision.
(b) Instructions to House Committees.--
(1) Committee on agriculture.--The House Committee on
Agriculture shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$30,400,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$157,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(2) Committee on banking and financial services.--The House
Committee on Banking and Financial Services shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct
spending such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: -$8,200,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and -$35,100,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(3) Committee on commerce.--The House Committee on Commerce
shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that
provide direct spending such that the total level of direct
spending for that committee does not exceed: $417,900,000,000
in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $2,437,900,000,000 in
outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(4) Committee on education and the workforce.--The House
Committee on Education and the Workforce shall report changes
in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending
such that the total level of direct spending for that
committee does not exceed: $18,700,000,000 in outlays for
fiscal year 1999 and $100,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003.
(5) Committee on government reform and oversight.--The
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $71,600,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $384,000,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(6) Committee on the judiciary.--The House Committee on the
Judiciary shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$5,200,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$26,500,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(7) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--The
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $16,200,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $78,900,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(8) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The House Committee on
Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$23,800,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$125,000,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(9) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The House Committee
on Ways and Means shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: $411,100,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and $2,374,800,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(B) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction such that the total
level of revenues for that committee is not less than:
$1,278,500,000,000 in revenues for fiscal year 1999 and
$6,637,700,000,000 in revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
SEC. 5. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF COMPENSATION AND PAY FOR
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
In the House, for purposes of enforcing the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974, any bill or joint resolution, or
amendment thereto or conference report thereon, establishing
on a prospective basis compensation or pay for any office or
position in the Government at a specified level, the
appropriation for which is provided through annual
discretionary appropriations, shall not be considered as
providing new entitlement authority or new budget authority.
SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SOCIAL SECURITY.
It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the
Treasury, in consultation with the trustees of the social
security trust funds, should consider issuing marketable
interest-bearing securities to the trust funds for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 1998.
SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE ACT.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) 33 percent of all American households have no or
negative financial assets and 60 percent of African-American
households have no or negative financial assets;
(2) 47 percent of all children in America live in
households with no financial assets, including 40 percent of
Caucasian children and 75 percent of African-American
children;
(3) in order to provide low-income families with more tools
for empowerment in lieu of traditional income support and to
assist them in becoming more involved in planning their
future, new public-private relationships that encourage
asset-building should be undertaken;
(4) individual development account programs are
successfully demonstrating the ability to assist low-income
families in building assets while partnering with community
organizations and States in more than 40 public and private
experiments nationwide; and
(5) Federal support for a trial demonstration program would
greatly assist the creative efforts of existing individual
development account experiments.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
legislation should be considered to encourage low-income
individuals and families to accumulate assets through
contributions to individual development accounts as a means
of achieving economic self-sufficiency.
SEC. 8. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ON
CLINICAL CANCER TRIALS.
It is the sense of Congress that legislation should be
considered that provides medicare coverage for beneficiaries'
participation in clinical cancer trials.
SEC. 9. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE INTERIM PAYMENT SYSTEM FOR
HOME HEALTH BENEFITS UNDER MEDICARE.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) there is concern that the interim payment system for
home health service has adversely affected some home health
care agencies;
(2) the Administration should ensure that the
implementation of the interim payment
[[Page
H4191]]
system does not adversely affect the availability of home
health services for medicare beneficiaries;
(3) Congress should carefully examine the Adminstration's
implementation of the home health payment system and make any
necessary changes to ensure that the needs of medicare
beneficiaries are being met; and
(4) the Health Care Financing Administration should quickly
implement the prospective payment system that was enacted
into law last year.
SEC. 10. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SPECIAL EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) Federal courts have found that children with
disabilities are guaranteed an equal opportunity to an
education under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) Congress responded to these court decisions by enacting
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to
ensure free and appropriate public education for children
with disabilities;
(3) IDEA authorizes the Federal Government to provide 40
percent of the average per pupil expenditure for children
with disabilities;
(4) the Federal Government has not fully funded IDEA at its
authorized levels; and
(5) if the Federal Government fully funds IDEA, then local
school districts will have the flexibility to invest in new
technology, hire additional teachers, and purchase books and
supplies.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Federal Government should fully fund programs authorized
under IDEA and that such funding is of the highest priority
among Federal education programs.
SEC. 11. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUDGETARY RULES AND TAX CUTS.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) in 1990, pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) requirements were
enacted to prevent Congress and the President from increasing
the deficit;
(2) under PAYGO requirements, tax legislation must be
offset by legislation increasing revenues or reducing
entitlement spending;
(3) these requirements prevent Congress from offsetting tax
cuts with discretionary savings or budget surpluses;
(4) the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 will produce the first
surplus in the unified budget in 29 years;
(5) under current trends, the Federal Government could run
an on-budget surplus (which excludes social security and the
postal service) as early as fiscal year 1999; and
(6) while these requirements were useful during a period of
chronic deficit spending, they now limit the ability of
Congress to allow taxpayers to retain more of their own
money.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the reconciliation bill to be considered pursuant to the
reconciliation instructions in section 4--
(1) should permit discretionary savings to be used to
offset tax cuts; and
(2) may make on-budget surpluses available to offset tax
cuts.
SEC. 12. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON TAX RELIEF.
It is the sense of Congress that the revenue levels set
forth in this resolution are predicated on--
(1) eliminating the marriage penalty over an appropriate
period of time; and
(2) providing tax relief targeted at relieving the tax
burden on families, estates, and wages, as well as incentives
to stimulate job creation and economic growth.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the amendment in the nature
of a substitute is in order except the amendments printed in part 2 of
that report. Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in
the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report,
shall be considered read, shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not
be subject to amendment.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
It is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part 2
of House Report 105-565.
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Neumann
Mr. NEUMANN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment in
the nature of a substitute.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Part 2 amendment No. 1 in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Neumann:
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS
SECTION 101. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that this is the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999 and that the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2000 through
2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 102. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,304,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,314,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,348,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,399,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,300,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: -$18,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$27,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$31,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$36,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$38,000,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,385,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,409,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,448,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,426,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,545,600,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,377,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,401,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,433,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,443,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,513,100,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $73,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $87,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $85,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $43,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $60,800,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $5,596,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,300,000,000.
SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $278,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $283,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $277,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $301,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $289,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $315,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $324,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $306,000,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $13,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $11,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,100,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $16,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $16,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $16,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,900,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$1,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$2,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,100,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
[[Page
H4192]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $19,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,200,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $11,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $10,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $9,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $3,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $5,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $45,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $48,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $50,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $51,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $53,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $50,100,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $60,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $58,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $60,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $60,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $61,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $64,000,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $139,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $137,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $141,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $141,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $144,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $144,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $146,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $147,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $151,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $152,400,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $209,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $210,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $220,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $219,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $237,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $248,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $246,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $270,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $270,400,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $236,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $245,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $254,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $254,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $214,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $259,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $271,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,300,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $24,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $21,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $21,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $244,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $244,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $238,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $238,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $230,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $230,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $223,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $223,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $217,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $217,400,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$3,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$4,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$4,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$9,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,000,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$54,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$54,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,300,000,000.
TITLE II--SENSE OF HOUSE PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SOCIAL SECURITY.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
[[Page
H4193]]
(1) The social security program currently collects more in
taxes than it pays out in benefits to our country's senior
citizens.
(2) Taxes collected exclusively for the social security
program should not be spent on any other program.
(3) Social security benefits are expected to consistently
exceed social security payroll taxes starting in 2013.
(4) Congress should avoid increasing taxes, increasing
borrowing, raising the retirement age, or cutting social
security cost-of-living adjustments to pay social security
benefits.
(5) Negotiable treasury bonds are safe, real assets that
can be sold for cash when income to the social security trust
funds is not sufficient to pay benefits for seniors in 2013.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the amount by which social security payroll taxes
exceed social security benefits paid shall be invested in
negotiable treasury bonds issued by the United States
Government and should not be counted as surplus dollars; and
(2) such negotiable Treasury bonds should be redeemable at
any time at the purchase price.
SEC. 202. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAX RELIEF.
(a) Findings.--The House finds that this concurrent
resolution dedicates $150,000,000,000 over 5 years to reduce
the tax burden on American families.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
these funds should be used to--
(1) provide across-the-board tax relief by expanding the 15
percent tax bracket by 15 percent for married individuals
(whether filing a joint or separate return), heads of
households, and unmarried individuals;
(2) eliminate the marriage penalty by making the joint
income threshold exactly double that of the individual income
threshold in all tax brackets and by making the standard
deduction for joint filers exactly double that of individual
filers;
(3) restore the 12-month holding period on capital gains;
and
(4) eliminate the ``death tax''.
SEC. 203. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING THE BUDGET SURPLUS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The Congressional Budget Office in its Spring
projections has underestimated the revenues collected by the
Federal Government for the last 3 years.
(2) The United States is experiencing remarkable economic
growth with no signs of an economic slowdown because the
Federal Government is borrowing less from the private sector.
(3) Revenues to the Federal Government are growing at an
annual rate far greater than projected by the Congressional
Budget Office in March 1998.
(4) The Federal Government will likely receive
significantly more revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
than projected by the Congressional Budget Office in March
1998.
(5) Revenues received above and beyond those projected by
the Congressional Budget Office in March 1998 should not be
spent to create more ineffective Washington programs.
(6) Additional revenues come from American families who are
forced to give far too much of their hard-earned income to
the Federal Government.
(7) Working Americans deserve to keep more of their income
instead of sending it to Washington, D.C., for Congress to
spend.
(8) Congress irresponsibly spent more than it received over
the last 30 years, creating $5,500,000,000,000 Federal debt.
(9) The Congress and the President have a basic moral and
ethical responsibility to future generations to repay the
Federal debt, including money borrowed from the social
security trust funds.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) any additional revenues collected by the Federal
Government above and beyond the Congressional Budget Office
March 1998 projections for fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
should be divided equally and used to reduce taxes on
American families and to pay off the $5,500,000,000,000
Federal debt, prioritizing social security;
(2) such tax reductions should be enacted in the following
order--
(A) expand education individual retirement accounts;
(B) index capital gains to the rate of inflation;
(C) immediate 100 percent deduction for health insurance
premiums for employees and self-employed;
(D) eliminate social security earnings limit;
(E) repeal 1993 tax increase on social security benefits;
(F) repeal the alternative minimum tax for individuals and
corporations; and
(G) permanently extend the research and development tax
credit; and
(3) efforts to repay the Federal debt should begin by
replacing the nonnegotiable Treasury bonds, in the social
security trust fund with marketable Treasury bills redeemable
at any time for the purchase price.
SEC. 204. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAXES AND
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) American taxpayers pay too much in taxes to support a
Federal Government which is too large.
(2) Taxpayers should benefit from any changes in law which
reduce Federal Government spending.
(3) Current law prohibits savings from reduced
discretionary spending from being passed along to the
American people through a reduction in their tax burden.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
budget laws should be changed to allow discretionary spending
reductions to be dedicated to tax relief.
SEC. 205. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PUTTING SOCIAL
SECURITY FIRST.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The President has encouraged the Congress to put social
security first by not spending expected unified budget
surpluses, though the Congressional Budget Office estimates
that the President's budget for fiscal year 1999 does spend
unified budget surpluses.
(2) The Congress currently has no method for dedicating
savings from amendments to appropriation bills for the
purpose of putting social security first.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
the Congress should establish a procedure that would allow
amendments to appropriation bills to dedicate all budget
savings to the President's plan to put social security first.
SEC. 206. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in the United States should be the best
students in the world.
(2) Quality education for our children will ensure the
United States can compete effectively in the global
marketplace.
(3) Today's students must learn the knowledge and skills
which will lead the world in the next century.
(4) Involving parents in the education of their children
increases children's success at school.
(5) Recent studies by the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development show that increased parental
involvement in children's lives leads to fewer teen
pregnancies, less drug use, lower crime rates, and improved
learning.
(6) Education is, and should remain, primarily a State and
local responsibility.
(7) It is important to let community members offer
suggestions to improve academic achievement within local
schools.
(8) The Federal role in education has failed to produce the
desired results.
(9) Federal regulations and paperwork consume too much of
teachers' and administrators' time and energy, as well as
taxpayer dollars which could be used to improve education.
(10) Creating a national testing program would increase the
Federal burden on local schools.
(11) State, local, and private schools deserve flexibility
which will allow them to meet the educational needs of
children.
(12) Increasing the role of parents, teachers, and local
community members will improve local schools.
(13) There is not a significant relationship between
Federal education spending and academic achievement.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the Department of Education, States, and local
educational agencies should spend at least 95 percent of
Federal education tax dollars in our children's classrooms;
(2) the Goals 2000 program should be terminated, and funds
should be given directly to States and local school
districts;
(3) the Congress should enact legislation to prevent the
development and administration of a national testing program;
and
(4) the Department of Education should limit its role in
education to functions which cannot be performed by State or
local school officials.
SEC. 207. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SCHOOL CHOICE FOR THE
CHILDREN OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in our Nation's capital deserve to have the
best education available.
(2) Many parents in the District of Columbia would prefer
to send their children to the school of their choice, whether
public, private, religious, or home.
(3) Allowing parents to evaluate and choose the proper
school for their children gives them an invested interest in
helping their children succeed.
(4) Giving children an opportunity to attend the school
which best meets their needs will best prepare them for the
future.
(5) Letting parents choose a school which reflects the
moral or religious beliefs of their children will enhance the
children's character and learning experience.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
there should be a Federal pilot program to provide low-income
children in the District of Columbia with the opportunity to
attend the public, private, religious, or home school of
their parents' choice.
SEC. 208. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PARTIAL-BIRTH
ABORTIONS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Partial-birth abortions allow a child to be delivered
until only its head remains in the birth canal.
(2) Partial-birth abortions involve piercing the child's
skull and removing its brain.
[[Page
H4194]]
(3) A large majority of Americans object to partially
delivering a child and then killing it.
(4) Both Houses of Congress have consistently supported
legislation to ban partial-birth abortions.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
partial-birth abortions should be banned in the United States
unless such a procedure is needed to save the life of the
mother.
SEC. 209. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT-
SPONSORED PROMOTION OF ABORTION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Title X of the Public Health Service Act was enacted to
help reduce the unplanned pregnancy rate, especially among
teenagers.
(2) Title X has not only failed to reduce the teenage
pregnancy rate, out-of-wedlock births, and sexually
transmitted diseases, it has made these problems worse.
(3) Taxpayer-funded title X family planning clinics are
currently required to counsel pregnant girls and women about
all of their ``pregnancy management options'', including
abortion.
(4) Title X clinics also require clinic staff, following
such ``counseling,'' to refer girls and women who want an
abortion to clinics that perform them.
(5) Many of these abortion clinics are operated by the same
organizations that operate title X clinics.
(6) The United States Government through title X is using
taxpayer dollars to subsidize activities destructive to human
life.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion or
organizations that promote or perform abortions.
SEC. 210. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TITLE X FUNDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The title X of the Public Health Service Act family
planning program provides contraceptives, treatment for
sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual counseling to
minors without parental consent or notification.
(2) Almost 1,500,000 American minors receive title X family
planning services each year.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
organizations or businesses which receive funds through
Federal programs should obtain parental consent or
confirmation of parental notification before contraceptives
are provided to a minor.
SEC. 211. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING INTERNATIONAL
POPULATION CONTROL PROGRAMS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) There is international consensus that under no
circumstances should abortion be promoted as a method of
family planning.
(2) The United States provides the largest percentage of
population control assistance among donor nations.
(3) The activities of private organizations supported by
United States taxpayers are a reflection of United States
priorities in developing countries, and United States funds
allow these organizations to expand their programs and
influence.
(4) The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) recently
signed a 4-year, $20,000,000 contract with the People's
Republic of China (PRC) which persists in coercing its people
to obtain abortions and undergo involuntary sterilizations.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
international family planning programs;
(2) if the Congress is unwilling to stop supporting
international family planning programs with taxpayer dollars,
the Congress should limit such support to organizations that
certify they will not perform, or lobby for the legalization
of, abortions in other countries; and
(3) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA) if it is
conducting activities in the People's Republic of China (PRC)
and the PRC's population control program continues to utilize
coercive abortion.
SEC. 212. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING HUMAN EMBRYO RESEARCH.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Human life is a precious resource which should not be
created or destroyed simply for scientific experiments.
(2) A human embryo is a human being that must be accorded
the moral status of a person from the time of fertilization.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
Congress should prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for the
creation of human embryos
Major Actions:
All articles in House section
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
(House of Representatives - June 05, 1998)
Text of this article available as:
TXT
PDF
[Pages
H4188-H4226]
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hobson). Pursuant to House Resolution
455 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration
of the concurrent resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 284.
{time} 1105
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the concurrent resolution (
H. Con. Res. 284) revising the congressional
budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 1998,
establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government
for fiscal year 1999, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003, with Mr. Hefley (Chairman
pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on the
legislative day of Thursday, June 4, 1998, all time for general debate
had expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 455, the concurrent resolution is
considered read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. The amendment in
the nature of a substitute printed in part 1 of House Report 105-565 is
considered as an original concurrent resolution for the purpose of
amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring),
SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that the concurrent resolution on the
budget for fiscal year 1998 is hereby revised and replaced
and that this is the concurrent resolution on the budget for
fiscal year 1999 and that the appropriate budgetary levels
for fiscal years 2000 through 2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 2. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,292,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,318,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,331,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,358,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,407,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,600,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $0.
Fiscal year 1999: -$4,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$10,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$21,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$28,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$37,800,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,359,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,408,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,443,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,477,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,502,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,571,200,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $1,343,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $1,401,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,435,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,463,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,473,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,540,700,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $50,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $83,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $104,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $105,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $65,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $88,100,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1998: $5,436,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999: $5,597,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,400,000,000.
SEC. 3. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1998 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $267,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $270,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $265,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $274,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $267,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $280,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $269,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $288,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $272,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $279,800,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $12,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,700,000,000.
[[Page
H4189]]
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,300,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $18,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $17,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$1,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$1,500,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $24,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $21,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $20,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,500,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $10,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $4,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $14,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $14,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $46,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $44,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $43,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,600,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $61,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $56,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $61,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $62,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $63,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $62,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $63,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $63,900,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $136,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $132,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $143,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $142,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $149,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $149,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $155,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $155,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $162,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $163,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $171,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $172,000,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $199,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $199,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $210,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $211,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $221,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $221,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $239,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $242,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $251,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $248,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $273,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,700,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $229,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $234,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $243,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $255,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $257,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $265,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $264,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $274,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $271,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $284,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $280,400,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $42,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $25,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
[[Page
H4190]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $25,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $23,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $22,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $13,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, $290,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $290,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $297,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $296,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $296,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $296,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $298,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $298,500,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$14,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$14,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$2,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$2,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$3,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$3,200,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1998:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, -$36,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$36,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, -$38,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$38,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, -$45,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$45,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, -$35,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$35,900,000,000.
SEC. 4. RECONCILIATION.
(a) Submissions.--Not later than June 26, 1998, the House
committees named in subsection (b) shall submit their
recommendations to the House Committee on the Budget. After
receiving those recommendations, the House Committee on the
Budget shall report to the House a reconciliation bill
carrying out all such recommendations without any substantive
revision.
(b) Instructions to House Committees.--
(1) Committee on agriculture.--The House Committee on
Agriculture shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$30,400,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$157,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(2) Committee on banking and financial services.--The House
Committee on Banking and Financial Services shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct
spending such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: -$8,200,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and -$35,100,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(3) Committee on commerce.--The House Committee on Commerce
shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that
provide direct spending such that the total level of direct
spending for that committee does not exceed: $417,900,000,000
in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $2,437,900,000,000 in
outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(4) Committee on education and the workforce.--The House
Committee on Education and the Workforce shall report changes
in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending
such that the total level of direct spending for that
committee does not exceed: $18,700,000,000 in outlays for
fiscal year 1999 and $100,400,000,000 in outlays in fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003.
(5) Committee on government reform and oversight.--The
House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $71,600,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $384,000,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(6) Committee on the judiciary.--The House Committee on the
Judiciary shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$5,200,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$26,500,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(7) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--The
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure shall
report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide
direct spending such that the total level of direct spending
for that committee does not exceed: $16,200,000,000 in
outlays for fiscal year 1999 and $78,900,000,000 in outlays
in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(8) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The House Committee on
Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total
level of direct spending for that committee does not exceed:
$23,800,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1999 and
$125,000,000,000 in outlays in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
(9) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The House Committee
on Ways and Means shall report changes in laws within its
jurisdiction such that the total level of direct spending for
that committee does not exceed: $411,100,000,000 in outlays
for fiscal year 1999 and $2,374,800,000,000 in outlays in
fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003.
(B) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report
changes in laws within its jurisdiction such that the total
level of revenues for that committee is not less than:
$1,278,500,000,000 in revenues for fiscal year 1999 and
$6,637,700,000,000 in revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through
2003.
SEC. 5. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF COMPENSATION AND PAY FOR
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.
In the House, for purposes of enforcing the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974, any bill or joint resolution, or
amendment thereto or conference report thereon, establishing
on a prospective basis compensation or pay for any office or
position in the Government at a specified level, the
appropriation for which is provided through annual
discretionary appropriations, shall not be considered as
providing new entitlement authority or new budget authority.
SEC. 6. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SOCIAL SECURITY.
It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the
Treasury, in consultation with the trustees of the social
security trust funds, should consider issuing marketable
interest-bearing securities to the trust funds for fiscal
years beginning after September 30, 1998.
SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE ASSETS FOR INDEPENDENCE ACT.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) 33 percent of all American households have no or
negative financial assets and 60 percent of African-American
households have no or negative financial assets;
(2) 47 percent of all children in America live in
households with no financial assets, including 40 percent of
Caucasian children and 75 percent of African-American
children;
(3) in order to provide low-income families with more tools
for empowerment in lieu of traditional income support and to
assist them in becoming more involved in planning their
future, new public-private relationships that encourage
asset-building should be undertaken;
(4) individual development account programs are
successfully demonstrating the ability to assist low-income
families in building assets while partnering with community
organizations and States in more than 40 public and private
experiments nationwide; and
(5) Federal support for a trial demonstration program would
greatly assist the creative efforts of existing individual
development account experiments.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
legislation should be considered to encourage low-income
individuals and families to accumulate assets through
contributions to individual development accounts as a means
of achieving economic self-sufficiency.
SEC. 8. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ON
CLINICAL CANCER TRIALS.
It is the sense of Congress that legislation should be
considered that provides medicare coverage for beneficiaries'
participation in clinical cancer trials.
SEC. 9. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE INTERIM PAYMENT SYSTEM FOR
HOME HEALTH BENEFITS UNDER MEDICARE.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) there is concern that the interim payment system for
home health service has adversely affected some home health
care agencies;
(2) the Administration should ensure that the
implementation of the interim payment
[[Page
H4191]]
system does not adversely affect the availability of home
health services for medicare beneficiaries;
(3) Congress should carefully examine the Adminstration's
implementation of the home health payment system and make any
necessary changes to ensure that the needs of medicare
beneficiaries are being met; and
(4) the Health Care Financing Administration should quickly
implement the prospective payment system that was enacted
into law last year.
SEC. 10. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON SPECIAL EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) Federal courts have found that children with
disabilities are guaranteed an equal opportunity to an
education under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) Congress responded to these court decisions by enacting
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to
ensure free and appropriate public education for children
with disabilities;
(3) IDEA authorizes the Federal Government to provide 40
percent of the average per pupil expenditure for children
with disabilities;
(4) the Federal Government has not fully funded IDEA at its
authorized levels; and
(5) if the Federal Government fully funds IDEA, then local
school districts will have the flexibility to invest in new
technology, hire additional teachers, and purchase books and
supplies.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Federal Government should fully fund programs authorized
under IDEA and that such funding is of the highest priority
among Federal education programs.
SEC. 11. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON BUDGETARY RULES AND TAX CUTS.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
(1) in 1990, pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) requirements were
enacted to prevent Congress and the President from increasing
the deficit;
(2) under PAYGO requirements, tax legislation must be
offset by legislation increasing revenues or reducing
entitlement spending;
(3) these requirements prevent Congress from offsetting tax
cuts with discretionary savings or budget surpluses;
(4) the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 will produce the first
surplus in the unified budget in 29 years;
(5) under current trends, the Federal Government could run
an on-budget surplus (which excludes social security and the
postal service) as early as fiscal year 1999; and
(6) while these requirements were useful during a period of
chronic deficit spending, they now limit the ability of
Congress to allow taxpayers to retain more of their own
money.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the reconciliation bill to be considered pursuant to the
reconciliation instructions in section 4--
(1) should permit discretionary savings to be used to
offset tax cuts; and
(2) may make on-budget surpluses available to offset tax
cuts.
SEC. 12. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON TAX RELIEF.
It is the sense of Congress that the revenue levels set
forth in this resolution are predicated on--
(1) eliminating the marriage penalty over an appropriate
period of time; and
(2) providing tax relief targeted at relieving the tax
burden on families, estates, and wages, as well as incentives
to stimulate job creation and economic growth.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the amendment in the nature
of a substitute is in order except the amendments printed in part 2 of
that report. Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in
the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report,
shall be considered read, shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not
be subject to amendment.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
It is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in part 2
of House Report 105-565.
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Neumann
Mr. NEUMANN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment in
the nature of a substitute.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
Part 2 amendment No. 1 in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Neumann:
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS
SECTION 101. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1999.
The Congress declares that this is the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999 and that the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2000 through
2003 are hereby set forth.
SEC. 102. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the
fiscal year
s 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,304,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,314,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,348,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,399,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,452,300,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: -$18,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: -$27,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: -$31,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: -$36,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: -$38,000,000,000.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new
budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,385,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,409,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,448,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,426,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,545,600,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget
outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $1,377,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $1,401,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $1,433,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $1,443,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $1,513,100,000,000.
(4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this
resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $73,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $87,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $85,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $43,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $60,800,000,000.
(5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt
are as follows:
Fiscal year 1999: $5,596,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000: $5,777,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001: $5,957,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002: $6,102,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003: $6,269,300,000,000.
SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal
year
s 1999 through 2003 for each major functional category
are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $278,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $273,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $283,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $277,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $301,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $289,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $315,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $297,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $324,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $306,000,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $13,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $11,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $11,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,100,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $16,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $16,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $16,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,900,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$1,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$2,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$1,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,100,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
[[Page
H4192]]
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $19,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $20,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $17,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $16,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $17,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $17,200,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $11,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $10,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $10,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $9,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $3,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $5,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $10,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,000,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $45,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $48,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $50,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $51,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $53,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $50,100,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $10,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $6,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $7,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $6,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $6,600,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $60,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $58,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $60,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $60,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $59,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $61,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $60,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $65,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $64,000,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $139,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $137,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $141,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $141,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $144,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $144,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $146,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $147,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $151,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $152,400,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $209,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $210,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $220,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $219,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $237,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $248,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $246,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $270,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $270,400,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $236,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $240,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $245,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $247,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $254,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $254,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $214,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $259,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $271,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,300,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $42,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $42,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $43,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $43,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $43,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $24,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $22,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $22,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $21,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $21,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,600,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $12,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,600,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority, $244,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $244,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority, $238,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $238,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority, $230,800,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $230,800,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority, $223,500,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $223,500,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority, $217,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $217,400,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$3,700,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$3,700,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$4,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$4,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,100,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$,100,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$9,200,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$9,200,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$6,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$6,000,000,000.
(20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 1999:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,000,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,000,000,000.
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) New budget authority,-$44,400,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$44,400,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,900,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) New budget authority,-$54,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$54,600,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) New budget authority,-$46,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays,-$46,300,000,000.
TITLE II--SENSE OF HOUSE PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SOCIAL SECURITY.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
[[Page
H4193]]
(1) The social security program currently collects more in
taxes than it pays out in benefits to our country's senior
citizens.
(2) Taxes collected exclusively for the social security
program should not be spent on any other program.
(3) Social security benefits are expected to consistently
exceed social security payroll taxes starting in 2013.
(4) Congress should avoid increasing taxes, increasing
borrowing, raising the retirement age, or cutting social
security cost-of-living adjustments to pay social security
benefits.
(5) Negotiable treasury bonds are safe, real assets that
can be sold for cash when income to the social security trust
funds is not sufficient to pay benefits for seniors in 2013.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the amount by which social security payroll taxes
exceed social security benefits paid shall be invested in
negotiable treasury bonds issued by the United States
Government and should not be counted as surplus dollars; and
(2) such negotiable Treasury bonds should be redeemable at
any time at the purchase price.
SEC. 202. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAX RELIEF.
(a) Findings.--The House finds that this concurrent
resolution dedicates $150,000,000,000 over 5 years to reduce
the tax burden on American families.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
these funds should be used to--
(1) provide across-the-board tax relief by expanding the 15
percent tax bracket by 15 percent for married individuals
(whether filing a joint or separate return), heads of
households, and unmarried individuals;
(2) eliminate the marriage penalty by making the joint
income threshold exactly double that of the individual income
threshold in all tax brackets and by making the standard
deduction for joint filers exactly double that of individual
filers;
(3) restore the 12-month holding period on capital gains;
and
(4) eliminate the ``death tax''.
SEC. 203. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING THE BUDGET SURPLUS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The Congressional Budget Office in its Spring
projections has underestimated the revenues collected by the
Federal Government for the last 3 years.
(2) The United States is experiencing remarkable economic
growth with no signs of an economic slowdown because the
Federal Government is borrowing less from the private sector.
(3) Revenues to the Federal Government are growing at an
annual rate far greater than projected by the Congressional
Budget Office in March 1998.
(4) The Federal Government will likely receive
significantly more revenues in fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
than projected by the Congressional Budget Office in March
1998.
(5) Revenues received above and beyond those projected by
the Congressional Budget Office in March 1998 should not be
spent to create more ineffective Washington programs.
(6) Additional revenues come from American families who are
forced to give far too much of their hard-earned income to
the Federal Government.
(7) Working Americans deserve to keep more of their income
instead of sending it to Washington, D.C., for Congress to
spend.
(8) Congress irresponsibly spent more than it received over
the last 30 years, creating $5,500,000,000,000 Federal debt.
(9) The Congress and the President have a basic moral and
ethical responsibility to future generations to repay the
Federal debt, including money borrowed from the social
security trust funds.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) any additional revenues collected by the Federal
Government above and beyond the Congressional Budget Office
March 1998 projections for fiscal year
s 1999 through 2003
should be divided equally and used to reduce taxes on
American families and to pay off the $5,500,000,000,000
Federal debt, prioritizing social security;
(2) such tax reductions should be enacted in the following
order--
(A) expand education individual retirement accounts;
(B) index capital gains to the rate of inflation;
(C) immediate 100 percent deduction for health insurance
premiums for employees and self-employed;
(D) eliminate social security earnings limit;
(E) repeal 1993 tax increase on social security benefits;
(F) repeal the alternative minimum tax for individuals and
corporations; and
(G) permanently extend the research and development tax
credit; and
(3) efforts to repay the Federal debt should begin by
replacing the nonnegotiable Treasury bonds, in the social
security trust fund with marketable Treasury bills redeemable
at any time for the purchase price.
SEC. 204. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TAXES AND
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) American taxpayers pay too much in taxes to support a
Federal Government which is too large.
(2) Taxpayers should benefit from any changes in law which
reduce Federal Government spending.
(3) Current law prohibits savings from reduced
discretionary spending from being passed along to the
American people through a reduction in their tax burden.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
budget laws should be changed to allow discretionary spending
reductions to be dedicated to tax relief.
SEC. 205. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PUTTING SOCIAL
SECURITY FIRST.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The President has encouraged the Congress to put social
security first by not spending expected unified budget
surpluses, though the Congressional Budget Office estimates
that the President's budget for fiscal year 1999 does spend
unified budget surpluses.
(2) The Congress currently has no method for dedicating
savings from amendments to appropriation bills for the
purpose of putting social security first.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
the Congress should establish a procedure that would allow
amendments to appropriation bills to dedicate all budget
savings to the President's plan to put social security first.
SEC. 206. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING EDUCATION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in the United States should be the best
students in the world.
(2) Quality education for our children will ensure the
United States can compete effectively in the global
marketplace.
(3) Today's students must learn the knowledge and skills
which will lead the world in the next century.
(4) Involving parents in the education of their children
increases children's success at school.
(5) Recent studies by the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development show that increased parental
involvement in children's lives leads to fewer teen
pregnancies, less drug use, lower crime rates, and improved
learning.
(6) Education is, and should remain, primarily a State and
local responsibility.
(7) It is important to let community members offer
suggestions to improve academic achievement within local
schools.
(8) The Federal role in education has failed to produce the
desired results.
(9) Federal regulations and paperwork consume too much of
teachers' and administrators' time and energy, as well as
taxpayer dollars which could be used to improve education.
(10) Creating a national testing program would increase the
Federal burden on local schools.
(11) State, local, and private schools deserve flexibility
which will allow them to meet the educational needs of
children.
(12) Increasing the role of parents, teachers, and local
community members will improve local schools.
(13) There is not a significant relationship between
Federal education spending and academic achievement.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) the Department of Education, States, and local
educational agencies should spend at least 95 percent of
Federal education tax dollars in our children's classrooms;
(2) the Goals 2000 program should be terminated, and funds
should be given directly to States and local school
districts;
(3) the Congress should enact legislation to prevent the
development and administration of a national testing program;
and
(4) the Department of Education should limit its role in
education to functions which cannot be performed by State or
local school officials.
SEC. 207. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING SCHOOL CHOICE FOR THE
CHILDREN OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Children in our Nation's capital deserve to have the
best education available.
(2) Many parents in the District of Columbia would prefer
to send their children to the school of their choice, whether
public, private, religious, or home.
(3) Allowing parents to evaluate and choose the proper
school for their children gives them an invested interest in
helping their children succeed.
(4) Giving children an opportunity to attend the school
which best meets their needs will best prepare them for the
future.
(5) Letting parents choose a school which reflects the
moral or religious beliefs of their children will enhance the
children's character and learning experience.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
there should be a Federal pilot program to provide low-income
children in the District of Columbia with the opportunity to
attend the public, private, religious, or home school of
their parents' choice.
SEC. 208. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING PARTIAL-BIRTH
ABORTIONS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Partial-birth abortions allow a child to be delivered
until only its head remains in the birth canal.
(2) Partial-birth abortions involve piercing the child's
skull and removing its brain.
[[Page
H4194]]
(3) A large majority of Americans object to partially
delivering a child and then killing it.
(4) Both Houses of Congress have consistently supported
legislation to ban partial-birth abortions.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
partial-birth abortions should be banned in the United States
unless such a procedure is needed to save the life of the
mother.
SEC. 209. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT-
SPONSORED PROMOTION OF ABORTION.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Title X of the Public Health Service Act was enacted to
help reduce the unplanned pregnancy rate, especially among
teenagers.
(2) Title X has not only failed to reduce the teenage
pregnancy rate, out-of-wedlock births, and sexually
transmitted diseases, it has made these problems worse.
(3) Taxpayer-funded title X family planning clinics are
currently required to counsel pregnant girls and women about
all of their ``pregnancy management options'', including
abortion.
(4) Title X clinics also require clinic staff, following
such ``counseling,'' to refer girls and women who want an
abortion to clinics that perform them.
(5) Many of these abortion clinics are operated by the same
organizations that operate title X clinics.
(6) The United States Government through title X is using
taxpayer dollars to subsidize activities destructive to human
life.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion or
organizations that promote or perform abortions.
SEC. 210. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING TITLE X FUNDING.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) The title X of the Public Health Service Act family
planning program provides contraceptives, treatment for
sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual counseling to
minors without parental consent or notification.
(2) Almost 1,500,000 American minors receive title X family
planning services each year.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
organizations or businesses which receive funds through
Federal programs should obtain parental consent or
confirmation of parental notification before contraceptives
are provided to a minor.
SEC. 211. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING INTERNATIONAL
POPULATION CONTROL PROGRAMS.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) There is international consensus that under no
circumstances should abortion be promoted as a method of
family planning.
(2) The United States provides the largest percentage of
population control assistance among donor nations.
(3) The activities of private organizations supported by
United States taxpayers are a reflection of United States
priorities in developing countries, and United States funds
allow these organizations to expand their programs and
influence.
(4) The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) recently
signed a 4-year, $20,000,000 contract with the People's
Republic of China (PRC) which persists in coercing its people
to obtain abortions and undergo involuntary sterilizations.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House
that--
(1) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
international family planning programs;
(2) if the Congress is unwilling to stop supporting
international family planning programs with taxpayer dollars,
the Congress should limit such support to organizations that
certify they will not perform, or lobby for the legalization
of, abortions in other countries; and
(3) United States taxpayers should not be forced to support
the United Nations Populations Fund (UNFPA) if it is
conducting activities in the People's Republic of China (PRC)
and the PRC's population control program continues to utilize
coercive abortion.
SEC. 212. SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING HUMAN EMBRYO RESEARCH.
(a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
(1) Human life is a precious resource which should not be
created or destroyed simply for scientific experiments.
(2) A human embryo is a human being that must be accorded
the moral status of a person from the time of fertilization.
(b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that
Congress should prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for the
creation of hum
Amendments:
Cosponsors:
