[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 31, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H2681-H2706]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2023
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 456,
I call up the bill (H.R. 3746) to provide for a responsible increase to
the debt ceiling, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 456, the
amendment printed in House Report 118-81 is adopted and the bill, as
amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 3746
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Fiscal Responsibility Act of
2023''.
SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. References.
DIVISION A--LIMIT FEDERAL SPENDING
TITLE I--DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS FOR DISCRETIONARY CATEGORY
Sec. 101. Discretionary spending limits.
Sec. 102. Special adjustments for fiscal years 2024 and 2025.
Sec. 103. Budgetary treatment of previously enacted emergency
requirements.
TITLE II--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Sec. 111. Authority for Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Resolution in the House
of Representatives.
Sec. 112. Limitation on Advance Appropriations in the House of
Representatives.
Sec. 113. Exercise of rulemaking powers.
TITLE III--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE SENATE
Sec. 121. Authority for fiscal year 2024 budget resolution in the
Senate.
Sec. 122. Authority for fiscal year 2025 budget resolution in the
Senate.
Sec. 123. Limitation on advance appropriations in the Senate.
Sec. 124. Exercise of rulemaking powers.
DIVISION B--SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS
TITLE I--RESCISSION OF UNOBLIGATED FUNDS
Sec. 1. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 2. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 3. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 4. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 5. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 6. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 7. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 8. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 9. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 10. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 11. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 12. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 13. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 14. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 15. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 16. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 17. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 18. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 19. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 20. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 21. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 22. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 23. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 24. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 25. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 26. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 27. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 28. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 29. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 30. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 31. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 32. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 33. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 34. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 35. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 36. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 37. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 38. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 39. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 40. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 41. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 42. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 43. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 44. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 45. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 46. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 47. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 48. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 49. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 50. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 51. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 52. Rescission of unobligated funds.
[[Page H2682]]
Sec. 53. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 54. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 55. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 56. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 57. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 58. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 59. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 60. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 61. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 62. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 63. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 64. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 65. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 66. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 67. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 68. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 69. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 70. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 71. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 72. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 73. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 74. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 75. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 76. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 77. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 78. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 79. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 80. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 81. Rescission of unobligated funds.
TITLE II--FAMILY AND SMALL BUSINESS TAXPAYER PROTECTION
Sec. 251. Rescission of certain balances made available to the Internal
Revenue Service.
TITLE III--STATUTORY ADMINISTRATIVE PAY-AS-YOU-GO
Sec. 261. Short title.
Sec. 262. Definitions.
Sec. 263. Requirements for administrative actions that affect direct
spending.
Sec. 264. Issuance of administrative guidance.
Sec. 265. Waiver.
Sec. 266. Exemption.
Sec. 267. Judicial review.
Sec. 268. Sunset.
Sec. 269. GAO report.
Sec. 270. Congressional Review Act compliance assessment.
TITLE IV--TERMINATION OF SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL STUDENT
LOANS; RESUMPTION OF ACCRUAL OF INTEREST AND COLLECTIONS
Sec. 271. Termination of suspension of payments on Federal student
loans; resumption of accrual of interest and collections.
DIVISION C--GROW THE ECONOMY
TITLE I--TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES
Sec. 301. Recalibration of the caseload reduction credit.
Sec. 302. Pilot projects for promoting accountability by measuring work
outcomes.
Sec. 303. Elimination of small checks scheme.
Sec. 304. Reporting of work outcomes.
Sec. 305. Effective date.
TITLE II--SNAP EXEMPTIONS
Sec. 311. Modification of work requirement exemptions.
Sec. 312. Modification of general exemptions.
Sec. 313. Supplemental nutrition assistance program under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008.
Sec. 314. Waiver transparency.
TITLE III--PERMITTING REFORM
Sec. 321. Builder Act.
Sec. 322. Interregional Transfer Capability Determination Study.
Sec. 323. Permitting streamlining for energy storage.
Sec. 324. Expediting completion of the Mountain Valley Pipeline.
DIVISION D--INCREASE IN DEBT LIMIT
Sec. 401. Temporary extension of public debt limit.
SEC. 3. REFERENCES.
Except as expressly provided otherwise, any reference to
``this Act'' contained in any division of this Act shall be
treated as referring only to the provisions of that division.
DIVISION A--LIMIT FEDERAL SPENDING
TITLE I--DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS FOR DISCRETIONARY CATEGORY
SEC. 101. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.
(a) In General.--Section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(c)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (7)(B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
``(9) for fiscal year 2024--
``(A) for the revised security category, $886,349,000,000
in new budget authority; and
``(B) for the revised nonsecurity category;
$703,651,000,000 in new budget authority; and
``(10) for fiscal year 2025--
``(A) for the revised security category, $895,212,000,000
in new budget authority; and
``(B) for the revised nonsecurity category;
$710,688,000,000 in new budget authority;''.
(b) Conforming Amendments to Adjustments.--
(1) Continuing disability reviews and rederminations.--
Section 251(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended--
(A) in subclause (IX), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subclause (X), by striking the period and inserting
a semicolon; and
(C) by inserting after subclause (X) the following:
``(XI) for fiscal year 2024, $1,578,000,000 in additional
new budget authority; and
``(XII) for fiscal year 2025, $1,630,000,000 in additional
new budget authority.''.
(2) Health care fraud and abuse control.--Section
251(b)(2)(C)(i) of such Act is amended--
(A) in subclause (IX), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subclause (X), by striking the period and inserting
a semicolon; and
(C) by inserting after subclause (X) the following:
``(XI) for fiscal year 2024, $604,000,000 in additional new
budget authority; and
``(XII) for fiscal year 2025, $630,000,000 in additional
new budget authority.''.
(3) Disaster funding.--Section 251(b)(2)(D)(i) of such Act
is amended--
(A) in the matter preceding subclause (I), by striking
``for fiscal years 2012 through 2021'' and inserting ``for
fiscal years 2024 and 2025''; and
(B) by amending subclause (II) to read as follows:
``(II) notwithstanding clause (iv), five percent of the
total appropriations provided in the previous 10 years, net
of any rescissions of budget authority enacted in the same
period, with respect to amounts provided for major disasters
declared pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) and
designated by the Congress in statute as an emergency; and''.
(4) Reemployment services and eligibility assessments.--
Section 251(b)(2)(E)(i) of such Act is amended--
(A) in subclause (III), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subclause (IV), by striking the period and inserting
a semicolon; and
(C) by inserting after subclause (IV) the following:
``(V) for fiscal year 2024, $265,000,000 in additional new
budget authority; and
``(VI) for fiscal year 2025, $271,000,000 in additional new
budget authority.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments Relating to Sequestration
Reports.--Section 254 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 904) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``2021'' and
inserting ``2025''; and
(2) in subsection (f)(2)(A), by striking ``2021'' and
inserting ``2025''.
(d) Appropriation for Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund.--In
addition to amounts otherwise available for such purposes,
there are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, for investment in the delivery of
veterans' health care associated with exposure to
environmental hazards, the expenses incident to the delivery
of veterans' health care and benefits associated with
exposure to environmental hazards, and medical and other
research relating to exposure to environmental hazards, as
authorized by section 324 of title 38, United States Code--
(1) $20,268,000,000, which shall become available on
October 1, 2023, and shall remain available until September
30, 2028; and
(2) $24,455,000,000, which shall become available on
October 1, 2024, and shall remain available until September
30, 2029.
(e) Appropriation for Department of Commerce Nonrecurring
Expenses Fund.--
(1) In general.--In addition to amounts otherwise
available, there is appropriated to the Department of
Commerce Nonrecurring Expenses Fund for fiscal year 2023, out
of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated,
$22,000,000,000, to remain available until expended, of
which--
(A) $11,000,000,000 is to carry out programs related to
Government efficiencies in fiscal year 2024; and
(B) $11,000,000,000 is to carry out programs related to
Government efficiencies in fiscal year 2025.
(2) Limitation on transfer.--Funds provided by paragraph
(1) shall not be subject to any transfer authority provided
by law.
(3) Report requirements.--Reporting requirements in section
111(a) of division B of Public Law 116-93 shall apply to
funds provided by paragraph (1).
(4) Statutory paygo scorecards.--The budgetary effects of
this subsection shall not be entered on either PAYGO
scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the
Statutory Pay As-You-Go Act of 2010.
(5) Senate paygo scorecards.--The budgetary effects of this
subsection and each succeeding division shall not be entered
on any PAYGO scorecard maintained for purposes of section
4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress).
(6) Classification of budgetary effects.--Notwithstanding
Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping Guidelines set forth in the
joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference
accompanying Conference Report 105-217 and section 250(c)(7)
and (c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985, the budgetary effects of this subsection
shall be estimated for purposes of section 251 of such Act
and as appropriations for discretionary accounts for purposes
of the allocation to the Committee on Appropriations pursuant
to section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and
the concurrent resolution on the budget.
(f) Additional Spending Limits.--For purposes of section
302(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control
Act of 1974, in the following applicable fiscal years,
[[Page H2683]]
the following discretionary spending limits shall apply:
(1) Fiscal year 2026, $1,621,959,000,000.
(2) Fiscal year 2027, $1,638,179,000,000.
(3) Fiscal year 2028, $1,654,560,000,000.
(4) Fiscal year 2029, $1,671,106,000,000.
SEC. 102. SPECIAL ADJUSTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024 AND 2025.
Section 251 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Revised Discretionary Spending Limits for Fiscal Year
2024.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), if on or after
January 1, 2024, there is in effect an Act making continuing
appropriations for part of fiscal year 2024 for any
discretionary budget account, the discretionary spending
limits specified in subsection (c)(9) for fiscal year 2024
shall be adjusted in the final sequestration report, in
accordance with paragraph (2), as follows:
``(A) For the revised security category, the amount that is
equal to the total budget authority for such category for
base funding, as published in the Congressional Budget Office
cost estimate for the applicable appropriations Acts for the
preceding fiscal year (table 1-S of H.R. 2617, published on
December 21, 2022), reduced by one percent.
``(B) For the revised non-security category, the amount
that is equal to the total budget authority for such category
for base funding as published in the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate for the applicable appropriations Acts
for the preceding fiscal year (table 1-S of H.R. 2617,
published on December 21, 2022), reduced by one percent.
``(2) Final report; sequestration order.--If the conditions
specified in paragraph (1) are met during fiscal year 2024,
the final sequestration report for such fiscal year pursuant
to section 254(f)(1) and any order pursuant to section
254(f)(5) shall be issued on the earlier of--
``(A) 10 days, not including weekends and holidays, for the
Congressional Budget Office and 15 days, not including
weekends and holidays, for the Office of Management and
Budget and the President, after the enactment into law of
annual full-year appropriations for all budget accounts that
normally receive such annual appropriations (or the enactment
of the applicable full-year appropriations Acts without any
provision for such accounts); or
``(B) April 30, 2024.
``(3) Reversal.--If, after January 1, 2024, there are
enacted into law each of the full year discretionary
appropriation Acts, then the adjustment to the applicable
discretionary spending limits in paragraph (1) shall have no
force or effect, and the discretionary spending limits for
the revised security category and revised nonsecurity
category for the applicable fiscal year shall be such limits
as in effect on December 31 of the applicable fiscal year.
``(e) Revised Discretionary Spending Limits for Fiscal Year
2025.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), if on or after
January 1, 2025, there is in effect an Act making continuing
appropriations for part of fiscal year 2025 for any
discretionary budget account, the discretionary spending
limits specified in subsection (c)(10) for fiscal year 2025
shall be adjusted in the final sequestration report, in
accordance with paragraph (2), as follows:
``(A) for the revised security category, the amount
calculated for such category in section (d)(1)(A); and
``(B) for the revised non-security category, the amount
calculated for each category in section (d)(1)(B).
``(2) Final report; sequestration order.--If the conditions
specified in paragraph (1) are met during fiscal year 2025,
the final sequestration report for such fiscal year pursuant
to section 254(f)(1) and any order pursuant to section
254(f)(5) shall be issued on the earlier of--
``(A) 10 days, not including weekends and holidays, for the
Congressional Budget Office, and 15 days, not including
weekends and holidays, for the Office of Management and
Budget and the President, after the enactment into law of
annual full-year appropriations for all budget accounts that
normally receive such annual appropriations (or the enactment
of the applicable full-year appropriations Acts without any
provision for such accounts); or
``(B) April 30, 2025.
``(3) Reversal.--If, after January 1, 2025, there are
enacted into law each of the full year discretionary
appropriation Acts, then the adjustment to the applicable
discretionary spending limits in paragraph (1) shall have no
force or effect, and the discretionary spending limits for
the revised security category and revised nonsecurity
category for the applicable fiscal year shall be such limits
as in effect on December 31 of the applicable fiscal year.''.
SEC. 103. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF PREVIOUSLY ENACTED EMERGENCY
REQUIREMENTS.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 905(c) of division
J of Public Law 117-58 and section 23005(c) of division B of
Public Law 117-159, Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping
Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of
the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report
105-217, and sections 250(c)(7) and (c)(8) of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the
budgetary effects for any fiscal year for the amounts
specified in subsection (b) shall not count for purposes of
section 251 of such Act.
(b) Amounts.--The amounts specified in this subsection
are--
(1) amounts designated by the Congress as being for an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) and
section 4001(b) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022, in
division B of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (Public
Law 117-159);
(2) amounts designated by the Congress as an emergency
requirement pursuant to section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 in division J of
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-
58); and
(3) amounts designated by the Congress as being for an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) and
section 4001(b) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022, and
section 1(e) of H. Res. 1151 (117th Congress) in section
443(b) in division G of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2023 (Public Law 117-328).
TITLE II--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SEC. 111. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
(a) Fiscal Year 2024.--For the purpose of enforcing the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for fiscal year 2024, the
allocations, aggregates, and levels provided for in
subsection (b) shall apply in the House of Representatives in
the same manner as for a concurrent resolution on the budget
for fiscal year 2024 with appropriate budgetary levels for
fiscal year 2024 and for fiscal years 2025 through 2033.
(b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--In the
House of Representatives, the Chair of the Committee on the
Budget shall submit a statement for publication in the
Congressional Record as soon as practicable containing--
(1) for the Committee on Appropriations, committee
allocations for fiscal year 2024 consistent with
discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c)(9)
of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985, as added by this Act, and the outlays flowing
therefrom, and committee allocations for fiscal year 2024 for
current law mandatory budget authority and outlays, for the
purpose of enforcing section 302 of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974;
(2) for all committees of the House of Representatives
other than the Committee on Appropriations, committee
allocations for fiscal year 2024 and for the period of fiscal
years 2025 through 2033 consistent with the most recent
baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as adjusted, to
the extent practicable, for the budgetary effects of any
provision of law enacted during the period beginning on the
date such baseline is issued and ending on the date of
submission of such statement, for the purpose of enforcing
section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974;
(3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2024 in
accordance with the allocations established under paragraphs
(1) and (2), for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and
(4) aggregate revenue levels for fiscal year 2024 and for
the period of fiscal years 2025 through 2033 consistent with
the most recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office,
as adjusted, to the extent practicable, for the budgetary
effects of any provision of law enacted during the period
beginning on the date such baseline is issued and ending on
the date of submission of such statement, for the purpose of
enforcing section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974.
(c) Adjustments.--The Chair of the Committee on the Budget
of the House of Representatives may adjust the allocations,
aggregates, and other budgetary levels included in the
statement referred to in subsection (b)--
(1) to reflect changes resulting from the Congressional
Budget Office's updates to its baseline for fiscal years 2024
through 2033; or
(2) for any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report by the amounts provided in such measure if
such measure would not increase the deficit for either of the
following time periods: fiscal year 2024 to fiscal year 2028
or fiscal year 2024 to fiscal year 2033.
(d) Expiration.--Subsections (a) through (c) shall no
longer apply if a concurrent resolution on the budget for
fiscal year 2024 is agreed to by the Senate and House of
Representatives.
SEC. 112. LIMITATION ON ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES.
(a) In General.--In the House of Representatives, except as
provided in subsection (b), any general appropriation bill or
bill or joint resolution continuing appropriations, or
amendment thereto or conference report thereon, may not
provide an advance appropriation.
(b) Exceptions.--An advance appropriation may be provided
for programs, activities or accounts identified in lists
submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the
Chair of the Committee on the Budget--
(1) for fiscal year 2025, under the heading ``accounts
identified for advance appropriations'' in an aggregate
amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority;
(2) for fiscal year 2025, under the heading ``veterans
accounts identified for advance appropriations''; and
(3) for fiscal year 2025, under the heading ``indian health
accounts identified for advance appropriations'' in an
aggregate amount not to exceed the total budget authority
provided for such accounts for fiscal
[[Page H2684]]
year 2024 in bills or joint resolutions making appropriations
for fiscal year 2024.
(c) Definition.--The term ``advance appropriation'' means
any new discretionary budget authority provided in a general
appropriation bill or bill or joint resolution continuing
appropriations for fiscal year 2024, or any amendment thereto
or conference report thereon, that first becomes available
following fiscal year 2024.
(d) Expiration.--The preceding subsections of this section
shall expire if a concurrent resolution on the budget for
fiscal year 2024 is agreed to by the Senate and the House of
Representatives pursuant to section 301 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974.
SEC. 113. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.
This title is enacted by the House of Representatives--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House,
and as such shall be considered as part of the rules of the
House, and such rules shall supersede other rules only to the
extent that it is inconsistent therewith; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
the House to change such rules (so far as relating to the
House) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same
extent as in the case of any other rule of the House.
TITLE III--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE SENATE
SEC. 121. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN
THE SENATE.
(a) Fiscal Year 2024.--For the purpose of enforcing the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.) and
enforcing budgetary points of order in prior concurrent
resolutions on the budget, the allocations, aggregates, and
levels provided for in subsection (b) shall apply in the
Senate in the same manner as for a concurrent resolution on
the budget for fiscal year 2024 with appropriate budgetary
levels for fiscal year 2024 and for fiscal years 2025 through
2033.
(b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--The
Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall
submit a statement for publication in the Congressional
Record as soon as practicable after the date of enactment of
this Act that includes--
(1) for the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate,
committee allocations for fiscal year 2024 consistent with
the discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c)
of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985, as amended by this Act, and the outlays flowing
therefrom, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974;
(2) for all committees other than the Committee on
Appropriations, committee allocations for fiscal years 2024,
2024 through 2028, and 2024 through 2033, consistent with the
May 2023 baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as
adjusted for the budgetary effects of any provision of law
enacted during the period beginning on the date such baseline
was issued and ending on the date of submission of such
statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633);
(3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2024 in
accordance with the allocations established under paragraphs
(1) and (2), for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
(4) aggregate revenue levels for fiscal years 2024, 2024
through 2028, and 2024 through 2033, consistent with the May
2023 baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as adjusted
for the budgetary effects of any provision of law enacted
during the period beginning on the date such baseline was
issued and ending on the date of submission of such
statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
(5) levels of Social Security revenues and outlays for
fiscal years 2024, 2024 through 2028, and 2024 through 2033,
consistent with the May 2023 baseline of the Congressional
Budget Office, as adjusted for the budgetary effects of any
provision of law enacted during the period beginning on the
date such baseline was issued and ending on the date of
submission of such statement, for the purpose of enforcing
sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
(2 U.S.C. 633, 642); and
(6) a statement under the heading ``Accounts Identified for
Advance Appropriations'' for the purpose of enforcing section
123 of this title.
(c) Additional Matter.--The statement referred to in
subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2024 the
deficit-neutral reserve fund in section 3003 of S. Con. Res.
14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget
for fiscal year 2022, updated by 2 fiscal years.
(d) Expiration.--This section shall expire if a concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2024 is agreed to by
the Senate and the House of Representatives pursuant to
section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C.
632).
SEC. 122. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN
THE SENATE.
(a) Fiscal Year 2025.--For the purpose of enforcing the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.),
after April 15, 2024, and enforcing budgetary points of order
in prior concurrent resolutions on the budget, the
allocations, aggregates, and levels provided for in
subsection (b) shall apply in the Senate in the same manner
as for a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year
2025 with appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2025
and for fiscal years 2026 through 2034.
(b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--After
April 15, 2024, but not later than May 15, 2024, the Chairman
of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall submit a
statement for publication in the Congressional Record that
includes--
(1) for the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate,
committee allocations for fiscal year 2025 consistent with
the discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c)
of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985, as amended by this Act, and the outlays flowing
therefrom, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633);
(2) for all committees other than the Committee on
Appropriations, committee allocations for fiscal years 2025,
2025 through 2029, and 2025 through 2034 consistent with the
most recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as
adjusted for the budgetary effects of any provision of law
enacted during the period beginning on the date such baseline
is issued and ending on the date of submission of such
statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633);
(3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2025 in
accordance with the allocations established under paragraphs
(1) and (2), for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
(4) aggregate revenue levels for fiscal years 2025, 2025
through 2029, and 2025 through 2034 consistent with the most
recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as
adjusted for the budgetary effects of any provision of law
enacted during the period beginning on the date such baseline
is issued and ending on the date of submission of such
statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
(5) levels of Social Security revenues and outlays for
fiscal years 2025, 2025 through 2029, and 2025 through 2034
consistent with the most recent baseline of the Congressional
Budget Office, as adjusted for the budgetary effects of any
provision of law enacted during the period beginning on the
date such baseline is issued and ending on the date of
submission of such statement, for the purpose of enforcing
sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
(2 U.S.C. 633, 642); and
(6) a statement under the heading ``Accounts Identified for
Advance Appropriations'' for the purpose of enforcing section
123 of this title.
(c) Additional Matter.--The statement referred to in
subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2025 the
deficit-neutral reserve fund in section 3003 of S. Con. Res.
14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget
for fiscal year 2022, updated by 3 fiscal years.
(d) Expiration.--This section shall expire if a concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2025 is agreed to by
the Senate and the House of Representatives pursuant to
section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C.
632).
SEC. 123. LIMITATION ON ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SENATE.
(a) Point of Order Against Advance Appropriations in the
Senate.--
(1) In general.--
(A) Point of order.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
it shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill,
joint resolution, motion, amendment, amendment between the
Houses, or conference report that would provide an advance
appropriation for a discretionary account.
(B) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``advance
appropriation'' means any new budget authority provided in a
bill or joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal
year 2024 that first becomes available for any fiscal year
after 2024 or any new budget authority provided in a bill or
joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2025
that first becomes available for any fiscal year after 2025.
(2) Exceptions.--Advance appropriations may be provided--
(A) for fiscal years 2025 and 2026, for programs, projects,
activities, or accounts identified in a statement submitted
to the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Committee
on the Budget of the Senate under the heading ``Accounts
Identified for Advance Appropriations'' in an aggregate
amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority
in each fiscal year;
(B) for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting;
(C) for the Department of Veterans Affairs for the Medical
Services, Medical Support and Compliance, Veterans Medical
Community Care, and Medical Facilities accounts of the
Veterans Health Administration; and
(D) for the Department of Health and Human Services for the
Indian Health Services and Indian Health Facilities
accounts--
(i) for fiscal year 2025, in an amount that is not more
than the amount provided for fiscal year 2024 in a bill or
joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2023
or 2024 for programs, projects, and activities that are not
prohibited from using amounts provided for fiscal year 2024
in a bill or joint resolution making appropriations for
fiscal year 2023; and
(ii) for fiscal year 2026, in an amount that is not more
than the amount provided for fiscal year 2025 in a bill or
joint resolution
[[Page H2685]]
making appropriations for fiscal year 2024 or 2025 for
programs, projects, and activities that are not prohibited
from using amounts provided for fiscal year 2025 in a bill or
joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2024.
(3) Supermajority waiver and appeal.--
(A) Waiver.--In the Senate, paragraph (1) may be waived or
suspended only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the
Members, duly chosen and sworn.
(B) Appeal.--An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the
Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be
required to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a
point of order raised under paragraph (1).
(4) Form of point of order.--A point of order under
paragraph (1) may be raised by a Senator as provided in
section 313(e) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2
U.S.C. 644(e)).
(5) Conference reports.--When the Senate is considering a
conference report on, or an amendment between the Houses in
relation to, a bill or joint resolution, upon a point of
order being made by any Senator pursuant to this subsection,
and such point of order being sustained, such material
contained in such conference report or amendment between the
Houses shall be stricken, and the Senate shall proceed to
consider the question of whether the Senate shall recede from
its amendment and concur with a further amendment, or concur
in the House amendment with a further amendment, as the case
may be, which further amendment shall consist of only that
portion of the conference report or House amendment, as the
case may be, not so stricken. Any such motion in the Senate
shall be debatable. In any case in which such point of order
is sustained against a conference report (or Senate amendment
derived from such conference report by operation of this
paragraph), no further amendment shall be in order.
(b) Expiration.--Subsection (a) shall terminate on the date
on which a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal
year 2024 or for fiscal year 2025 is agreed to by the Senate
and House of Representatives pursuant to section 301 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 632).
SEC. 124. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.
This title is enacted by the Senate--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate,
and as such shall be considered as part of the rules of the
Senate, and such rules shall supersede other rules only to
the extent that it is inconsistent therewith; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
the Senate to change such rules (so far as relating to the
Senate) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same
extent as in the case of any other rule of the Senate.
DIVISION B--SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS
TITLE I--RESCISSION OF UNOBLIGATED FUNDS
Sec. 1. Each rescission made by this title shall be
applied to the unobligated balances for each applicable
appropriation as of the date of enactment of this title.
Sec. 2. The unobligated balances from the following
appropriations, in the following amounts and subject to the
conditions specified below, are hereby permanently rescinded:
(1) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services
Emergency Fund'' in title III of division A of Public Law
116-123, including any funds transferred from such heading
that remain unobligated, with the exception of $59,000,000.
(2) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services
Emergency Fund'' in title V of division A of Public Law 116-
127, including any funds transferred from such heading that
remain unobligated.
(3) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services
Emergency Fund'' in title VIII of division B of Public Law
116-136, including any funds transferred from such heading
that remain unobligated, with the exception of $2,127,000,000
and--
(A) any funds that were transferred and merged with the
Covered Countermeasure Process Fund authorized by section
319F-4 of the Public Health Service Act; and
(B) any funds that were transferred and merged with funds
made available under the heading ``Office of the Secretary--
Office of Inspector General'' pursuant to section 18113 of
title VIII of division B of Public Law 116-136.
(4) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
in the first paragraph under the heading ``Public Health and
Social Services Emergency Fund'' in title I of division B of
Public Law 116-139, including any funds transferred from such
heading that remain unobligated, with the exception of
$300,000,000, which shall remain available for necessary
expenses for program administration and oversight.
(5) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
in the second paragraph under the heading ``Public Health and
Social Services Emergency Fund'' in title I of division B of
Public Law 116-139, including any funds transferred from such
heading that remain unobligated, with the exception of
$243,000,000 and any funds that were transferred and merged
with funds made available under the heading ``Office of the
Secretary--Office of Inspector General'' pursuant to section
103 of title I of division B of Public Law 116-139.
(6) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services
Emergency Fund'' in title III of division M of Public Law
116-260, including any funds transferred from such heading
that remain unobligated, with the exception of $205,000,000.
(7) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention--CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support'' in
title III of division A of Public Law 116-123, including any
funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated,
with the exception of $195,000,000 and any funds that were
transferred and merged with the Infectious Diseases Rapid
Response Reserve Fund established by section 231 of division
B of Public Law 115-245.
(8) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention--CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support'' in
title VIII of division B of Public Law 116-136, including any
funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated,
with the exception of $446,000,000 and any funds that were
transferred and merged with the Infectious Diseases Rapid
Response Reserve Fund established by section 231 of division
B of Public Law 115-245.
(9) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available
under the heading ``Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention--CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support'' in
title III of division M of Public Law 116-260, including any
funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated,
with the exception of $177,000,000.
(10) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available under the heading ``National Institutes of Health--
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases'' in
title III of division A of Public Law 116-123, including any
funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated.
(11) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available to ``Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services--
Program Management'' in title VIII of division B of Public
Law 116-136.
(12) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2301 of Public Law 117-2, with the
exception of $103,000,000.
(13) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2302 of Public Law 117-2.
(14) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2303 of Public Law 117-2, with the
exception of $69,000,000.
(15) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2401 of Public Law 117-2, with the
exception of $7,323,000,000.
(16) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2402 of Public Law 117-2, with the
exception of $714,000,000.
(17) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2403 of Public Law 117-2.
(18) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2501 of Public Law 117-2.
(19) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2502 of Public Law 117-2.
(20) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2601 of Public Law 117-2.
(21) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2602 of Public Law 117-2.
(22) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2603 of Public Law 117-2.
(23) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2604 of Public Law 117-2.
(24) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2605 of Public Law 117-2.
(25) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2703 of Public Law 117-2.
(26) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2704 of Public Law 117-2.
(27) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2705 of Public Law 117-2.
(28) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2711 of Public Law 117-2.
(29) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2712 of Public Law 117-2.
(30) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 2801 of Public Law 117-2.
(31) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 3101 of Public Law 117-2, with the
exception of $793,000,000.
(32) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 511A(a) of the Social Security Act, as
added by section 9101 of Public Law 117-2.
(33) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 1150C(a) of the Social Security Act, as
added by section 9911 of Public Law 117-2.
(34) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 1947(e) of the Social Security Act, as
added by section 9813 of Public Law 117-2.
(35) All of the unobligated balances of funds made
available by section 1862(g)(2) of the Social Security Act,
as added by section 9401 of Public Law 117-2.
[[Page H2686]]
Sec. 3. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
under the heading ``Agricultural Programs--Office of the
Secretary'' in title I of division B of Public Law 116-136
are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 4. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
by section 751 in title VII of division N of Public Law 116-
260 are hereby permanently rescinded, except for funds made
available by section 601 of division HH of Public Law 117-
328.
Sec. 5. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
by section 753 in title VII of division N of Public Law 116-
260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 6. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
by section 754 in title VII of division N of Public Law 116-
260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 7. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
by section 762(i) in title VII of division N of Public Law
116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 8. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
by section 764(f) in title VII of division N of Public Law
116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 9. The unobligated balances of amounts made available
by section 1001 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 10. Of the unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 4027 of title IV of division A of Public
Law 116-136, $200,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 11. Of the unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 4120 of title IV of division A of Public
Law 116-136, $295,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 12. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 7301(c) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 13. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 104A(m) of the Community Development
Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C.
4701 et seq.), as added by section 522 of title V of division
N of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded,
with the exception of $284,500,000, which shall remain
available for necessary expenses associated with the making
of awards announced prior to the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 14. Of the unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 3301(a)(2)(A) of Public Law 117-2,
$150,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 15. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 411 in subtitle A of title IV of
division N of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 16. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by subsection (a) of section 2206 of Public Law
117-2 are hereby permanently rescinded, with the exception of
amounts allocated under paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection
(b) of such section.
Sec. 17. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2001 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 18. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2002 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 19. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2003 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 20. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Federal Highway
Administration--Highway Infrastructure Programs'' in title IV
of division M of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 21. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 7202(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 22. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by sections 5002(b) and 5006(a)(2) of Public Law
117-2, including any amounts transferred and merged with
``Small Business Administration--Disaster Loans Program
Account'' pursuant to section 90007(b)(2)(A) of Public Law
117-58 that remain unobligated, are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 23. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Independent Agencies--Small
Business Administration--Disaster Loans Program Account'' in
title II of division B of Public Law 116-139 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 24. Of the unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2118(a) of title II of division A of
Public Law 116-136, as added by section 9032 of Public Law
117-2, $1,000,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 25. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban
Development--Public and Indian Housing--Tenant-Based Rental
Assistance'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136
are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 26. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban
Development--Public and Indian Housing--Native American
Programs'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136
are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 27. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban
Development--Housing Programs--Housing for Persons with
Disabilities'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-
136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 28. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban
Development--Housing Programs--Project-Based Rental
Assistance'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136
are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 29. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban
Development--Housing Programs--Housing for the Elderly'' in
title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 30. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 3208(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 31. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Transportation--
Office of the Secretary--Salaries and Expenses'' in title XII
of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 32. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Transportation--
Office of the Secretary--Essential Air Service'' in title XII
of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 33. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Transportation--
Federal Aviation Administration--Grants-In-Aid for Airports''
in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 34. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 7101 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 35. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 7102(a)(1) of Public Law 117-2 are
hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 36. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 501(a)(1) of title V of division N of
Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 37. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 9601(d)(1) of Public Law 117-2 are
hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 38. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 4009 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 39. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Justice--General
Administration--Justice Information Sharing Technology'' in
title II of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 40. Of the unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Defense--
Procurement--Defense Production Act Purchases'' in title III
of division B of Public Law 116-136, $61,381,230 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 41. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of State--
Administration of Foreign Affairs--Diplomatic Programs'' in
title XI of division B of Public Law 116-136 and subsequently
transferred to the Department of State's ``Educational and
Cultural Exchange Programs'' account are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 42. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Bilateral Economic Assistance--
Department of State--Migration and Refugee Assistance'' in
title XI of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 43. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Bilateral Economic Assistance--
Funds Appropriated to the President--International Disaster
Assistance'' in title XI of division B of Public Law 116-136
are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 44. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of State--
Administration of Foreign Affairs--Sudan Claims'' in title IX
of division K of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 45. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Bilateral Economic Assistance--
Funds Appropriated to the President--Economic Support Fund''
in title IX of division K of Public Law 116-260 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 46. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Federal Communications
Commission--Salaries and Expenses'' in title V of division B
of Public Law 116-136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 47. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Independent Agencies--Small
Business Administration--Emergency EIDL Grants'' in title II
of division B of Public Law 116-139 are hereby permanently
rescinded.
Sec. 48. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 323(d)(1)(B) of title III of division N
of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 49. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 323(d)(1)(E)(i) of title III of division
N of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 50. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 902(c)(5) of title IX of division N of
Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
[[Page H2687]]
Sec. 51. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 905(b) of title IX of division N of
Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 52. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 5003(b)(2)(A) of Public Law 117-2 are
hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 53. The unobligated balances of amounts described in
the tenth proviso under the heading ``Administration for
Children and Families--Payments to States for the Child Care
and Development Block Grant'' in title III of division M of
Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 54. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2201(b) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 55. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2204(d)(1) of Public Law 117-2,
including any amounts made available by amendments made by
such section, are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 56. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2205 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 57. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2912(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 58. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 403(c) of the Social Security Act, as
added by section 9201 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 59. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 816(f) of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2992d(f)), as added by section 11004
of Public Law 117-2, are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 60. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Rural Development Programs--
Rural Utilities Service--Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and
Broadband Program'' in title I of division B of Public Law
116-136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 61. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 752 of title VII of division N of Public
Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 62. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 1002(c) of Public Law 117-2, are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 63. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 3207(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 64. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Energy--Energy
Programs--Science'' in title IV of division B of Public Law
116-136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 65. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 6003 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 66. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 11002(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 67. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``Department of Education--
Departmental Management--Program Administration'' in title
III of division M of Public Law 116-260 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 68. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2007 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 69. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2010 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 70. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2011 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 71. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 11006 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 72. Of the unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 6002(a) of Public Law 117-2, all but
$22,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 73. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2101(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded, with the exception of $1,892,718 for
the Office of the Solicitor within the Departmental
Management account and amounts allocated for the Office of
Inspector General under paragraph (2) of subsection (b) of
such section.
Sec. 74. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2110(g) of Public Law 116-136, as
amended, are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 75. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available under the heading ``General Services
Administration--General Activities--Federal Citizen Services
Fund'' in title V of division B of Public Law 116-136 are
hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 76. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2021 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 77. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2022 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 78. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2023 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
Sec. 79. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2(c)(2)(D)(v) of the Railroad
Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. 352(c)(2)(D)(v)), as
amended, are hereby permanently rescinded.
Sec. 80. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 2904 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded, with the exception of $500,000 for the
Railroad Retirement Board Office of Inspector General.
Sec. 81. The unobligated balances of amounts made
available by section 7404(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby
permanently rescinded.
TITLE II--FAMILY AND SMALL BUSINESS TAXPAYER PROTECTION
SEC. 251. RESCISSION OF CERTAIN BALANCES MADE AVAILABLE TO
THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.
Of the unobligated balances of amounts appropriated or
otherwise made available for activities of the Internal
Revenue Service by paragraphs (1)(A)(ii), (1)(A)(iii),
(1)(B), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of section 10301 of Public Law
117-169 (commonly known as the ``Inflation Reduction Act of
2022'') as of the date of the enactment of this Act,
$1,389,525,000 are hereby rescinded.
TITLE III--STATUTORY ADMINISTRATIVE PAY-AS-YOU-GO
SEC. 261. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Administrative Pay-As-You-
Go Act of 2023''.
SEC. 262. DEFINITIONS.
In this title--
(1) the term ``administrative action'' means a ``rule'' as
defined in section 804(3) of title 5, United States Code;
(2) the term ``agency'' means any authority of the United
States that is an ``agency'' under section 3502(1) of title
44, United States Code, other than those considered to be
independent regulatory agencies, as defined in section
3502(5) of such title;
(3) the term ``covered discretionary administrative
action'' means a discretionary administrative action that
would affect direct spending;
(4) the term ``direct spending'' has the meaning given that
term in section 250(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900(c));
(5) the term ``Director'' means the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget;
(6) the term ``discretionary administrative action''--
(A) means any administrative action that is not required by
law; and
(B) includes an administrative action required by law for
which an agency has discretion in the manner in which to
implement the administrative action; and
(7) the term ``increase direct spending'' means that the
amount of direct spending would increase relative to--
(A) the most recently submitted projection of the amount of
direct spending presented in baseline estimates as defined in
section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985, as amended, under--
(i) the budget of the President submitted under section
1105 of title 31, United States Code; or
(ii) the supplemental summary of the budget submitted under
section 1106 of title 31, United States Code;
(B) with respect to a discretionary administrative action
that is incorporated into the applicable projection described
in subparagraph (A) and for which a proposal has not been
submitted under section 263(a)(2)(A), a projection of the
amount of direct spending if no administrative action were
taken; or
(C) with respect to a discretionary administrative action
described in paragraph (6)(B), a projection of the amount of
direct spending under the least costly implementation option
reasonably identifiable by the agency that meets the
requirements under the statute.
SEC. 263. REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS THAT AFFECT
DIRECT SPENDING.
(a) Discretionary Administrative Actions.--
(1) In general.--Before an agency may finalize any covered
discretionary administrative action, the head of the agency
shall submit to the Director for review written notice
regarding the covered discretionary administrative action,
which shall include an estimate of the budgetary effects of
the covered discretionary administrative action.
(2) Increasing direct spending.--
(A) In general.--If the covered discretionary
administrative action would increase direct spending, the
written notice submitted by the head of the agency under
paragraph (1) shall include a proposal to undertake 1 or more
other administrative actions that would provide a reduction
in direct spending greater than or equal to the increase in
direct spending attributable to the covered discretionary
administrative action.
(B) Review.--
(i) In general.--The Director shall determine whether the
reduction in direct spending in a proposal in a written
notice from an agency under subparagraph (A) is greater than
or equal to the increase in direct spending attributable to
the covered discretionary administrative action to which the
written notice relates.
[[Page H2688]]
(ii) No offset.--If the written notice regarding a proposed
covered discretionary administrative action that would
increase direct spending does not include a proposal to
offset the increased direct spending as determined in clause
(i), the Director shall return the written notice to the
agency for resubmission in accordance with this title.
(b) Nondiscretionary Actions.--If an agency determines that
an administrative action that would increase direct spending
is required by law and therefore is not a covered
discretionary administrative action, before the agency
finalizes that administrative action, the head of the agency
shall--
(1) submit to the Director a written opinion by the general
counsel of the agency, or the equivalent employee of the
agency, explaining that legal conclusion;
(2) submit to the Director a projection of the amount of
direct spending under the least costly implementation option
reasonably identifiable by the agency that meets the
requirements under the statute; and
(3) consult with the Director regarding implementation of
the administrative action.
(c) Projections.--Any projection for purposes of this title
shall be conducted in accordance with Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-11, or any successor thereto.
SEC. 264. ISSUANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDANCE.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Director shall issue instructions regarding the
implementation of this title, including how covered
discretionary administrative actions that increase direct
spending and nontax receipts will be evaluated.
SEC. 265. WAIVER.
(a) In General.--The Director may waive the requirements of
section 263 if the Director concludes that the waiver--
(1) is necessary for the delivery of essential services; or
(2) is necessary for effective program delivery.
(b) Publication.--Any waiver determination under subsection
(a) shall be published in the Federal Register.
SEC. 266. EXEMPTION.
This title shall not apply to administrative actions with
direct spending cost of less than--
(1) $1,000,000,000 over the 10-year period beginning with
the current year; or
(2) $100,000,000 in any given year during such 10-year
period.
SEC. 267. JUDICIAL REVIEW.
No determination, finding, action, or omission under this
title shall be subject to judicial review.
SEC. 268. SUNSET.
This title shall expire on December 31, 2024.
SEC. 269. GAO REPORT.
Within 180 days of the date of enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General shall issue a report on the
implementation of this title.
SEC. 270. CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT.
Section 801(a)(2)(A) of title 5, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after ``compliance with procedural steps
required by paragraph (1)(B)'' the following: ``, and shall
in addition include an assessment of the agency's compliance
with such requirements of the Administrative Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2023 as may be applicable''.
TITLE IV--TERMINATION OF SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL STUDENT
LOANS; RESUMPTION OF ACCRUAL OF INTEREST AND COLLECTIONS
SEC. 271. TERMINATION OF SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL
STUDENT LOANS; RESUMPTION OF ACCRUAL OF
INTEREST AND COLLECTIONS.
(a) In General.--Sixty days after June 30, 2023, the
waivers and modifications described in subsection (c) shall
cease to be effective.
(b) Prohibition.--Except as expressly authorized by an Act
of Congress enacted after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of Education may not use any authority to
implement an extension of any executive action or rule
specified in subsection (c).
(c) Waivers and Modifications Described.--The waivers and
modifications described in this subsection are the waivers
and modifications of statutory and regulatory provisions
relating to an extension of the suspension of payments on
certain loans and waivers of interest on such loans under
section 3513 of the CARES Act (20 U.S.C. 1001 note)--
(1) described by the Department of Education in the Federal
Register on October 12, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 61513 et seq.);
and
(2) most recently extended in the announcement by the
Department of Education on November 22, 2022.
DIVISION C--GROW THE ECONOMY
TITLE I--TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES
SEC. 301. RECALIBRATION OF THE CASELOAD REDUCTION CREDIT.
Section 407(b)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
607(b)(3)) is amended in each of subparagraphs (A)(ii) and
(B), by striking ``2005'' and inserting ``2015''.
SEC. 302. PILOT PROJECTS FOR PROMOTING ACCOUNTABILITY BY
MEASURING WORK OUTCOMES.
Section 411 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 611) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Pilot Projects for Promoting Accountability by
Measuring Work Outcomes.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall carry out a pilot
program under which the Secretary may select up to 5 States
to which a grant is made under section 403(a) for a fiscal
year to negotiate performance benchmarks for work and family
outcomes for recipients of assistance under the State program
funded under this part, and programs funded with qualified
State expenditures. The Secretary shall issue guidance on how
States apply for participation in the pilot. The benchmarks
shall include--
``(A) the percentage of work-eligible individuals under the
State program funded under this part who are in unsubsidized
employment during the 2nd quarter after exiting the program;
``(B) the level of earnings of such individuals in the 2nd
and 4th quarters after exit; and
``(C) other indicators of family stability and well-being
as established by the Secretary.
``(2) Level of performance benchmark.--The Secretary and a
State selected under paragraph (1) shall agree to the
requisite level of performance on these benchmarks after
developing baseline data in the State and comparative data in
other States.
``(3) Failure of state to meet benchmark.--If a State fails
to meet a measured benchmark standard agreed to under
paragraph (2) for 2 successive fiscal years, the State, in
order to continue in the pilot shall enter into a plan with
the Secretary to achieve the required level of performance
or, if mutually agreed to, adjust the benchmark based on new
information about the feasibility of meeting such benchmark.
``(4) Duration.--The pilot under this subsection shall be
in effect for 6 fiscal years, with one year to establish
benchmark data and negotiate targets and five years to
measure performance against the targets, and shall supersede
the requirements under section 407 for such fiscal years,
notwithstanding any other provision of law.
``(5) Application of penalty for failure to reduce
assistance for recipients refusing without good cause to
work.--For purposes of section 409(a)(14), a State operating
a pilot must have a system for reducing the amount of
assistance payable to a family if an individual refuses,
without good cause (including for reasons described in
407(e)(2)), to engage in any such activities as the State has
required of such an individual. A State without such a system
shall be considered to have failed to comply with the
requirements of section 407(e) for so long as the failure to
comply continues.
``(6) Collection of performance data.--Each State selected
under paragraph (1), in consultation with the Secretary,
shall collect and submit to the Secretary data on the
performance of the State operating such a pilot program.
``(7) Reports.--
``(A) Initial report.--Not later than 12 months after the
date of the enactment of this subsection the Secretary shall
submit a report to Congress on the status of the program
under this section.
``(B) Final report.--Not later than 12 months after the
date on which the programs under this section have
terminated, the Secretary shall submit a comprehensive report
to Congress on outcomes achieved under such programs.''.
SEC. 303. ELIMINATION OF SMALL CHECKS SCHEME.
Section 407(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
607(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(6) Special rule regarding calculation of the minimum
participation rate.--The Secretary shall determine
participation rates under this section without regard to any
individual engaged in work in a family that receives no
assistance under this part and less than $35 in assistance
funded with qualified State expenditures (as defined in
section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)).''.
SEC. 304. REPORTING OF WORK OUTCOMES.
Section 411 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 611), as
amended by section 302, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Reporting Performance Indicators.--
``(1) In general.--Each State, in consultation with the
Secretary, shall collect and submit to the Secretary the
information necessary for each indicator described in
paragraph (2), for fiscal year 2025 and each fiscal year
thereafter.
``(2) Indicators of performance.--The indicators described
in this paragraph for a fiscal year are the following:
``(A) The percentage of individuals who were work-eligible
individuals as of the time of exit from the program, who are
in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after
the exit.
``(B) The percentage of individuals who were work-eligible
individuals who were in unsubsidized employment in the second
quarter after the exit, who are also in unsubsidized
employment during the fourth quarter after the exit.
``(C) The median earnings of individuals who were work-
eligible individuals as of the time of exit from the program,
who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter
after the exit.
[[Page H2689]]
``(D) The percentage of individuals who have not attained
24 years of age, are attending high school or enrolled in an
equivalency program, and are work-eligible individuals or
were work-eligible individuals as of the time of exit from
the program, who obtain a high school degree or its
recognized equivalent while receiving assistance under the
State program funded under this part or within 1 year after
the exit.
``(3) Definition of exit.--In paragraph (2), the term
`exit' means, with respect to a State program funded under
this part, ceases to receive assistance under the program
funded by this part.
``(4) Regulations.--In order to ensure nationwide
comparability of data, the Secretary, after consultation with
the Secretary of Labor and with States, shall issue
regulations governing the reporting of performance indicators
under this subsection.''.
SEC. 305. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this title shall take effect on
October 1, 2024, except for sections 301 and 303 which shall
take effect on October 1, 2025.
TITLE II--SNAP EXEMPTIONS
SEC. 311. MODIFICATION OF WORK REQUIREMENT EXEMPTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 6(o)(3) of the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(6)(o)(3)) is amended to read as
follows:
(1) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following:
``(A)(i) under 18 years of age; or
``(ii) in--
``(I) fiscal year 2023 over 51 years of age;
``(II) fiscal year 2024 over 53 years of age;
``(III) fiscal year 2025 and each fiscal year thereafter
over 55 years of age;'';
(2) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(3) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``;''; and
(4) adding at the end the following:
``(F) a homeless individual;
``(G) a veteran; or
``(H) an individual who is 24 years of age or younger and
who was in foster care under the responsibility of a State on
the date of attaining 18 years of age or such higher age as
the State has elected under section 475(8)(B)(iii) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 675(8)(B)(iii)).''.
(b) Application.--
(1) State agency.--A state agency shall apply section
6(o)(3) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended by
subsection (a), to any application for initial certification
or recertification received starting 90 days after the date
of enactment of this Act.
(2) Sunset.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
cease to have effect on October 1, 2030.
SEC. 312. MODIFICATION OF GENERAL EXEMPTIONS.
Section 6(o)(6) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2015(o)(6)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (E)--
(A) in the heading, by striking ``Subsequent fiscal years''
and inserting ``Fiscal years 2020 through 2023'';
(B) by striking ``(F) through (H)'' and inserting ``(G)
through (I)''; and
(C) by striking ``year,'' and inserting ``year through
fiscal year 2023,'';
(2) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``or (E)'' and
inserting ``, (E) or (F)'';
(3) by redesignating subparagraphs (F), (G), and (H) as
subparagraphs (G), (H), and (I), respectively;
(4) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) Subsequent fiscal years.--Subject to subparagraphs
(G) through (I), for fiscal years 2024 and each subsequent
fiscal year, a State agency may provide a number of
exemptions such that the average monthly number of exemptions
in effect during the fiscal year does not exceed 8 percent of
the number of covered individuals in the State, as estimated
by the Secretary under subparagraph (C), adjusted by the
Secretary to reflect changes in the State's caseload and the
Secretary's estimate of changes in the proportion of members
of households that receive supplemental nutrition assistance
program benefits covered by waivers granted under paragraph
(4)'';
(5) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``(H)'' and inserting
``(I)'';
(6) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``(F) and (H)'' and
inserting ``(G) and (I)'';
(7) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``(F) through (H)''
and inserting ``(G) through (I)''; and
(8) by adding at end the following:
``(J) Rule of construction for exemption adjustment.--
During fiscal year 2024 and each subsequent fiscal year,
nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to allow a
State agency to accumulate unused exemptions to be provided
beyond the subsequent fiscal year.''.
SEC. 313. SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM UNDER THE
FOOD AND NUTRITION ACT OF 2008.
Section 2 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011) is amended by adding at end the following:
``That program includes as a purpose to assist low-income
adults in obtaining employment and increasing their earnings.
Such employment and earnings, along with program benefits,
will permit low-income households to obtain a more nutritious
diet through normal channels of trade by increasing food
purchasing power for all eligible households who apply for
participation.''.
SEC. 314. WAIVER TRANSPARENCY.
Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall make public all
available State waiver requests, including all supporting
data from the State, and agency approvals of such requests,
including relevant documentation on the utilization of
waivers authorized under Section 6(o)(4)(A) of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)(4)(A)).
TITLE III--PERMITTING REFORM
SEC. 321. BUILDER ACT.
(a) Paragraph (2) of Section 102.--Section 102(2) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2))
is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``insure'' and
inserting ``ensure'';
(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``insure'' and
inserting ``ensure'';
(3) in subparagraph (C)--
(A) by inserting ``consistent with the provisions of this
Act and except where compliance would be inconsistent with
other statutory requirements,'' before ``include in every'';
(B) by striking clauses (i) through (v) and inserting the
following:
``(i) reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the
proposed agency action;
``(ii) any reasonably foreseeable adverse environmental
effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be
implemented;
``(iii) a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed
agency action, including an analysis of any negative
environmental impacts of not implementing the proposed agency
action in the case of a no action alternative, that are
technically and economically feasible, and meet the purpose
and need of the proposal;
``(iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of
man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of
long-term productivity; and
``(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of
Federal resources which would be involved in the proposed
agency action should it be implemented.''; and
(C) by striking ``the responsible Federal official'' and
inserting ``the head of the lead agency'';
(4) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``Any'' and inserting
``any'';
(5) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) through (I) as
subparagraphs (G) through (L), respectively;
(6) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
``(D) ensure the professional integrity, including
scientific integrity, of the discussion and analysis in an
environmental document;
``(E) make use of reliable data and resources in carrying
out this Act;
``(F) consistent with the provisions of this Act, study,
develop, and describe technically and economically feasible
alternatives;''; and
(7) in subparagraph (I), as amended, by inserting
``consistent with the provisions of this Act,'' before
``recognize''.
(b) New Sections.--Title I of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 106. PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF LEVEL OF REVIEW.
``(a) Threshold Determinations.--An agency is not required
to prepare an environmental document with respect to a
proposed agency action if--
``(1) the proposed agency action is not a final agency
action within the meaning of such term in chapter 5 of title
5, United States Code;
``(2) the proposed agency action is excluded pursuant to
one of the agency's categorical exclusions, another agency's
categorical exclusions consistent with section 109 of this
Act, or another provision of law;
``(3) the preparation of such document would clearly and
fundamentally conflict with the requirements of another
provision of law; or
``(4) the proposed agency action is a nondiscretionary
action with respect to which such agency does not have
authority to take environmental factors into consideration in
determining whether to take the proposed action.
``(b) Levels of Review.--
``(1) Environmental impact statement.--An agency shall
issue an environmental impact statement with respect to a
proposed agency action requiring an environmental document
that has a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the
quality of the human environment.
``(2) Environmental assessment.--An agency shall prepare an
environmental assessment with respect to a proposed agency
action that does not have a reasonably foreseeable
significant effect on the quality of the human environment,
or if the significance of such effect is unknown, unless the
agency finds that the proposed agency action is excluded
pursuant to one of the agency's categorical exclusions,
another agency's categorical exclusions consistent with
section 109 of this Act, or another provision of law. Such
environmental assessment shall be a concise public document
prepared by a Federal agency to set forth the basis of such
agency's finding of no significant impact or determination
that an environmental impact statement is necessary.
``(3) Sources of information.--In making a determination
under this subsection, an agency--
``(A) may make use of any reliable data source; and
``(B) is not required to undertake new scientific or
technical research unless the new scientific or technical
research is essential
[[Page H2690]]
to a reasoned choice among alternatives, and the overall
costs and time frame of obtaining it are not unreasonable.
``SEC. 107. TIMELY AND UNIFIED FEDERAL REVIEWS.
``(a) Lead Agency.--
``(1) Designation.--
``(A) In general.--If there are two or more participating
Federal agencies, such agencies shall determine, by letter or
memorandum, which agency shall be the lead agency based on
consideration of the--
``(i) magnitude of agency's involvement;
``(ii) project approval or disapproval authority;
``(iii) expertise concerning the action's environmental
effects;
``(iv) duration of agency's involvement; and
``(v) sequence of agency's involvement.
``(B) Joint lead agencies.--In making a determination under
subparagraph (A), the participating Federal agencies may
appoint such State, Tribal, or local agencies as joint lead
agencies as the involved Federal agencies shall determine
appropriate. Joint lead agencies shall jointly fulfill the
role described in paragraph (2).
``(2) Role.--A lead agency shall, with respect to a
proposed agency action--
``(A) supervise the preparation of an environmental
document if, with respect to such proposed agency action,
there is more than one participating Federal agency;
``(B) request the participation of each cooperating agency
at the earliest practicable time;
``(C) in preparing an environmental document, give
consideration to any analysis or proposal created by a
cooperating agency;
``(D) develop a schedule, in consultation with each
cooperating agency, the applicant, and such other entities as
the lead agency determines appropriate, for completion of any
environmental review, permit, or authorization required to
carry out the proposed agency action;
``(E) if the lead agency determines that a review, permit,
or authorization will not be completed in accordance with the
schedule developed under subparagraph (D), notify the agency
responsible for issuing such review, permit, or authorization
of the discrepancy and request that such agency take such
measures as such agency determines appropriate to comply with
such schedule; and
``(F) meet with a cooperating agency that requests such a
meeting.
``(3) Cooperating agency.--The lead agency may, with
respect to a proposed agency action, designate any Federal,
State, Tribal, or local agency that has jurisdiction by law
or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact
involved in a proposal to serve as a cooperating agency. A
cooperating agency may, not later than a date specified in
the schedule established by the lead agency, submit comments
to the lead agency.
``(4) Request for designation.--Any Federal, State, Tribal,
or local agency or person that is substantially affected by
the lack of a designation of a lead agency with respect to a
proposed agency action under paragraph (1) may submit a
written request for such a designation to a participating
Federal agency. An agency that receives a request under this
paragraph shall transmit such request to each participating
Federal agency and to the Council.
``(5) Council designation.--
``(A) Request.--If the participating Federal agencies are
unable to agree on the designation of a lead agency within 45
days of the request under paragraph (4), then the Federal,
State, Tribal or local agency or person that is substantially
affected by the lack or a designation of a lead agency may
request that the Council designate a lead agency. Such
request shall consist of--
``(i) a precise description of the nature and extent of the
proposed agency action; and
``(ii) a detailed statement with respect to each
participating Federal agency and each factor listed in
paragraph (1) regarding which agency should serve as lead
agency.
``(B) Transmission.--The Council shall transmit a request
received under subparagraph (A) to each participating Federal
agency.
``(C) Response.--A participating Federal agency may, not
later than 20 days after the date of the submission of a
request under subparagraph (A), submit to the Council a
response to such request.
``(D) Designation.--Not later than 40 days after the date
of the submission of a request under subparagraph (A), the
Council shall designate the lead agency with respect to the
relevant proposed agency action.
``(b) One Document.--To the extent practicable, if a
proposed agency action will require action by more than one
Federal agency and the lead agency has determined that it
requires preparation of an environmental document, the lead
and cooperating agencies shall evaluate the proposal in a
single environmental document.
``(c) Request for Public Comment.--Each notice of intent to
prepare an environmental impact statement under section 102
shall include a request for public comment on alternatives or
impacts and on relevant information, studies, or analyses
with respect to the proposed agency action.
``(d) Statement of Purpose and Need.--Each environmental
document shall include a statement of purpose and need that
briefly summarizes the underlying purpose and need for the
proposed agency action.
``(e) Page Limits.--
``(1) Environmental impact statements.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
an environmental impact statement shall not exceed 150 pages,
not including any citations or appendices.
``(B) Extraordinary complexity.--An environmental impact
statement for a proposed agency action of extraordinary
complexity shall not exceed 300 pages, not including any
citations or appendices.
``(2) Environmental assessments.--An environmental
assessment shall not exceed 75 pages, not including any
citations or appendices.
``(f) Sponsor Preparation.--A lead agency shall prescribe
procedures to allow a project sponsor to prepare an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement
under the supervision of the agency. Such agency may provide
such sponsor with appropriate guidance and assist in the
preparation. The lead agency shall independently evaluate the
environmental document and shall take responsibility for the
contents.
``(g) Deadlines.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
with respect to a proposed agency action, a lead agency shall
complete, as applicable--
``(A) the environmental impact statement not later than the
date that is 2 years after the sooner of, as applicable--
``(i) the date on which such agency determines that section
102(2)(C) requires the issuance of an environmental impact
statement with respect to such action;
``(ii) the date on which such agency notifies the applicant
that the application to establish a right-of-way for such
action is complete; and
``(iii) the date on which such agency issues a notice of
intent to prepare the environmental impact statement for such
action; and
``(B) the environmental assessment not later than the date
that is 1 year after the sooner of, as applicable--
``(i) the date on which such agency determines that section
106(b)(2) requires the preparation of an environmental
assessment with respect to such action;
``(ii) the date on which such agency notifies the applicant
that the application to establish a right-of-way for such
action is complete; and
``(iii) the date on which such agency issues a notice of
intent to prepare the environmental assessment for such
action.
``(2) Delay.--A lead agency that determines it is not able
to meet the deadline described in paragraph (1) may extend
such deadline, in consultation with the applicant, to
establish a new deadline that provides only so much
additional time as is necessary to complete such
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment.
``(3) Petition to court.--
``(A) Right to petition.--A project sponsor may obtain a
review of an alleged failure by an agency to act in
accordance with an applicable deadline under this section by
filing a written petition with a court of competent
jurisdiction seeking an order under subparagraph (B).
``(B) Court order.--If a court of competent jurisdiction
finds that an agency has failed to act in accordance with an
applicable deadline, the court shall set a schedule and
deadline for the agency to act as soon as practicable, which
shall not exceed 90 days from the date on which the order of
the court is issued, unless the court determines a longer
time period is necessary to comply with applicable law.
``(h) Report.--
``(1) In general.--The head of each lead agency shall
annually submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and
Public Works of the Senate a report that--
``(A) identifies any environmental assessment and
environmental impact statement that such lead agency did not
complete by the deadline described in subsection (g); and
``(B) provides an explanation for any failure to meet such
deadline.
``(2) Inclusions.--Each report submitted under paragraph
(1) shall identify, as applicable--
``(A) the office, bureau, division, unit, or other entity
within the Federal agency responsible for each such
environmental assessment and environmental impact statement;
``(B) the date on which--
``(i) such lead agency notified the applicant that the
application to establish a right-of-way for the major Federal
action is complete;
``(ii) such lead agency began the scoping for the major
Federal action; or
``(iii) such lead agency issued a notice of intent to
prepare the environmental assessment or environmental impact
statement for the major Federal action; and
``(C) when such environmental assessment and environmental
impact statement is expected to be complete.
``SEC. 108. PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT.
``When an agency prepares a programmatic environmental
document for which judicial review was available, the agency
may rely on the analysis included in the programmatic
environmental document in a subsequent environmental document
for related actions as follows:
``(1) Within 5 years and without additional review of the
analysis in the programmatic environmental document, unless
there are
[[Page H2691]]
substantial new circumstances or information about the
significance of adverse effects that bear on the analysis.
``(2) After 5 years, so long as the agency reevaluates the
analysis in the programmatic environmental document and any
underlying assumption to ensure reliance on the analysis
remains valid.
``SEC. 109. ADOPTION OF CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS.
``An agency may adopt a categorical exclusion listed in
another agency's NEPA procedures for a category of proposed
agency actions for which the categorical exclusion was
established consistent with this paragraph. The agency
shall--
``(1) identify the categorical exclusion listed in another
agency's NEPA procedures that covers a category of proposed
actions or related actions;
``(2) consult with the agency that established the
categorical exclusion to ensure that the proposed adoption of
the categorical exclusion to a category of actions is
appropriate;
``(3) identify to the public the categorical exclusion that
the agency plans to use for its proposed actions; and
``(4) document adoption of the categorical exclusion.
``SEC. 110. E-NEPA.
``(a) Permitting Portal Study.--The Council on
Environmental Quality shall conduct a study and submit a
report to Congress within 1 year of the enactment of this Act
on the potential for online and digital technologies to
address delays in reviews and improve public accessibility
and transparency under section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C))
including, but not limited to, a unified permitting portal
that would--
``(1) allow applicants to--
``(A) submit required documents or materials for their
project in one unified portal;
``(B) upload and collaborate with the applicable agencies
to edit documents in real-time, as required;
``(C) upload and display visual features such as video,
animation, geographic information system displays, and three-
dimensional renderings; and
``(D) track the progress of individual applications;
``(2) include a cloud based, digital tool for more complex
reviews that would enhance interagency coordination in
consultation by--
``(A) centralizing, across all necessary agencies, the
data, visuals, and documents, including but not limited to
geographic information system displays, other visual
renderings, and completed reports and analyses necessary for
reviews;
``(B) streamlining communications between all necessary
agencies and the applicant;
``(C) allowing for comments and responses by and to all
necessary agencies in one unified portal;
``(D) generating analytical reports to aid in organizing
and cataloguing public comments; and
``(E) be accessible on mobile devices;
``(3) boost transparency in agency processes and present
information suitable for a lay audience, including but not
limited to--
``(A) scientific data and analysis; and
``(B) anticipated agency process and timeline; and
``(4) include examples describing how at least five permits
would be reviewed and processed through this portal.
``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated $500,000 for the Council on Environmental
Quality to carry out the study directed by this section.
``SEC. 111. DEFINITIONS.
``In this title:
``(1) Categorical exclusion.--The term `categorical
exclusion' means a category of actions that a Federal agency
has determined normally does not significantly affect the
quality of the human environment within the meaning of
section 102(2)(C).
``(2) Cooperating agency.--The term `cooperating agency'
means any Federal, State, Tribal, or local agency that has
been designated as a cooperating agency under section
107(a)(3).
``(3) Council.--The term `Council' means the Council on
Environmental Quality established in title II.
``(4) Environmental assessment.--The term `environmental
assessment' means an environmental assessment prepared under
section 106(b)(2).
``(5) Environmental document.--The term `environmental
document' means an environmental impact statement, an
environmental assessment, or a finding of no significant
impact.
``(6) Environmental impact statement.--The term
`environmental impact statement' means a detailed written
statement that is required by section 102(2)(C).
``(7) Finding of no significant impact.--The term `finding
of no significant impact' means a determination by a Federal
agency that a proposed agency action does not require the
issuance of an environmental impact statement.
``(8) Participating federal agency.--The term
`participating Federal agency' means a Federal agency
participating in an environmental review or authorization of
an action.
``(9) Lead agency.--The term `lead agency' means, with
respect to a proposed agency action--
``(A) the agency that proposed such action; or
``(B) if there are 2 or more involved Federal agencies with
respect to such action, the agency designated under section
107(a)(1).
``(10) Major federal action.--
``(A) In general.--The term `major Federal action' means an
action that the agency carrying out such action determines is
subject to substantial Federal control and responsibility.
``(B) Exclusion.--The term `major Federal action' does not
include--
``(i) a non-Federal action--
``(I) with no or minimal Federal funding; or
``(II) with no or minimal Federal involvement where a
Federal agency cannot control the outcome of the project;
``(ii) funding assistance solely in the form of general
revenue sharing funds which do not provide Federal agency
compliance or enforcement responsibility over the subsequent
use of such funds;
``(iii) loans, loan guarantees, or other forms of financial
assistance where a Federal agency does not exercise
sufficient control and responsibility over the subsequent use
of such financial assistance or the effect of the action;
``(iv) business loan guarantees provided by the Small
Business Administration pursuant to section 7(a) or (b) and
of the Small Business Act ( U.S.C. 636(a)), or title V of the
Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 695 et
seq.);
``(v) bringing judicial or administrative civil or criminal
enforcement actions;
``(vi) extraterritorial activities or decisions, which
means agency activities or decisions with effects located
entirely outside of the jurisdiction of the United States; or
``(vii) activities or decisions that are non-discretionary
and made in accordance with the agency's statutory authority.
``(11) Programmatic environmental document.--The term
`programmatic environmental document' means an environmental
impact statement or environmental assessment analyzing all or
some of the environmental effects of a policy, program, plan,
or group of related actions.
``(12) Proposal.--The term `proposal' means a proposed
action at a stage when an agency has a goal, is actively
preparing to make a decision on one or more alternative means
of accomplishing that goal, and can meaningfully evaluate its
effects.
``(13) Special expertise.--The term `special expertise'
means statutory responsibility, agency mission, or related
program experience.''.
SEC. 322. INTERREGIONAL TRANSFER CAPABILITY DETERMINATION
STUDY.
(a) In General.--The Electric Reliability Organization (as
that term is defined in section 215(a)(2) of the Federal
Power Act), in consultation with each regional entity (as
that term is defined in section 215(a)(7) of such Act) and
each transmitting utility (as that term is defined in section
3(23) of such Act) that has facilities interconnected with a
transmitting utility in a neighboring transmission planning
region, shall conduct a study of total transfer capability as
defined in section 37.6(b)(1)(vi) of title 18, Code of
Federal Regulations, between transmission planning regions
that contains the following:
(1) Current total transfer capability, between each pair of
neighboring transmission planning regions.
(2) A recommendation of prudent additions to total transfer
capability between each pair of neighboring transmission
planning regions that would demonstrably strengthen
reliability within and among such neighboring transmission
planning regions.
(3) Recommendations to meet and maintain total transfer
capability together with such recommended prudent additions
to total transfer capability between each pair of neighboring
transmission planning regions.
(b) Publication.--Not later than 18 months after the date
of enactment of this Act, the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation shall deliver a study to Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, which shall publish the study
required in subsection (a) in the Federal Register and seek
public comments.
(c) Report.--Not later than 12 months after the end of the
public comment period in subsection (b), the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission shall submit a report on its
conclusions to Congress and include recommendations, if any,
for statutory changes.
SEC. 323. PERMITTING STREAMLINING FOR ENERGY STORAGE.
Section 41001(6)(A) of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A))
is amended by inserting ``energy storage,'' before ``or any
other sector''.
SEC. 324. EXPEDITING COMPLETION OF THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY
PIPELINE.
(a) Definition of Mountain Valley Pipeline.--In this
section, the term ``Mountain Valley Pipeline'' means the
Mountain Valley Pipeline project, as generally described and
approved in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Docket Nos.
CP16-10, CP19-477, and CP21-57.
(b) Congressional Findings and Declaration.--The Congress
hereby finds and declares that the timely completion of
construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline is
required in the national interest. The Mountain Valley
Pipeline will serve demonstrated natural gas demand in the
Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast regions, will increase
the reliability of natural gas supplies and the availability
of natural gas at reasonable prices, will allow natural gas
producers to access additional markets
[[Page H2692]]
for their product, and will reduce carbon emissions and
facilitate the energy transition.
(c) Approval and Ratification and Maintenance of Existing
Authorizations.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
(1) Congress hereby ratifies and approves all
authorizations, permits, verifications, extensions,
biological opinions, incidental take statements, and any
other approvals or orders issued pursuant to Federal law
necessary for the construction and initial operation at full
capacity of the Mountain Valley Pipeline; and
(2) Congress hereby directs the Secretary of the Army, the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Secretary of
Agriculture, and the Secretary of the Interior, and other
agencies as applicable, as the case may be, to continue to
maintain such authorizations, permits, verifications,
extensions, biological opinions, incidental take statements,
and any other approvals or orders issued pursuant to Federal
law necessary for the construction and initial operation at
full capacity of the Mountain Valley Pipeline.
(d) Expedited Approval.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, not later than 21 days after the date of
enactment of this Act and for the purpose of facilitating the
completion of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, the Secretary of
the Army shall issue all permits or verifications necessary--
(1) to complete the construction of the Mountain Valley
Pipeline across the waters of the United States; and
(2) to allow for the operation and maintenance of the
Mountain Valley Pipeline.
(e) Judicial Review.--
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court
shall have jurisdiction to review any action taken by the
Secretary of the Army, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of
the Interior, or a State administrative agency acting
pursuant to Federal law that grants an authorization, permit,
verification, biological opinion, incidental take statement,
or any other approval necessary for the construction and
initial operation at full capacity of the Mountain Valley
Pipeline, including the issuance of any authorization,
permit, extension, verification, biological opinion,
incidental take statement, or other approval described in
subsection (c) or (d) of this section for the Mountain Valley
Pipeline, whether issued prior to, on, or subsequent to the
date of enactment of this section, and including any lawsuit
pending in a court as of the date of enactment of this
section.
(2) The United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit shall have original and exclusive
jurisdiction over any claim alleging the invalidity of this
section or that an action is beyond the scope of authority
conferred by this section.
(f) Effect.--This section supersedes any other provision of
law (including any other section of this Act or other
statute, any regulation, any judicial decision, or any agency
guidance) that is inconsistent with the issuance of any
authorization, permit, verification, biological opinion,
incidental take statement, or other approval for the Mountain
Valley Pipeline.
DIVISION D--INCREASE IN DEBT LIMIT
SEC. 401. TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PUBLIC DEBT LIMIT.
(a) In General.--Section 3101(b) of title 31, United States
Code, shall not apply for the period beginning on the date of
the enactment of this Act and ending on January 1, 2025.
(b) Special Rule Relating to Obligations Issued During
Extension Period.--Effective on January 2, 2025, the
limitation in effect under section 3101(b) of title 31,
United States Code, shall be increased to the extent that--
(1) the face amount of obligations issued under chapter 31
of such title and the face amount of obligations whose
principal and interest are guaranteed by the United States
Government (except guaranteed obligations held by the
Secretary of the Treasury) outstanding on January 2, 2025,
exceeds
(2) the face amount of such obligations outstanding on the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Restoring Congressional Authority Over the National
Debt.--
(1) Extension limited to necessary obligations.--An
obligation shall not be taken into account under subsection
(b)(1) unless the issuance of such obligation was necessary
to fund a commitment incurred pursuant to law by the Federal
Government that required payment before January 2, 2025.
(2) Prohibition on creation of cash reserve during
extension period.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall not
issue obligations during the period specified in subsection
(a) for the purpose of increasing the cash balance above
normal operating balances in anticipation of the expiration
of such period.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective
designees.
The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
General Leave
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
submit extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, this debate was a long time coming, not because it is
complicated, but because Democrats couldn't accept the solution.
We are here at the eleventh hour, finally dealing with a debt limit
on a bipartisan basis, because President Biden apparently needed 100
days to pick up the phone to talk to Republicans.
During those 100 days, the case for cutting spending as part of a
debt ceiling increase has only grown stronger. We have seen the worst
inflation crisis in a generation--the direct result of reckless
spending--continue to rob the pocketbooks of working families. We have
seen interest rates continue to rise, driving up the cost of purchasing
a car, a home, or a small business loan.
Interest payments on our national debt are $110 billion higher over
the first 7 months of this fiscal year than they were over the same
time last fiscal year. In other words, runaway spending is adding to
our debt crisis on the front end and the back end.
Something else occurred during those 100 days. House Republicans took
action. While the White House was saying they would only accept a blank
check debt ceiling increase, an idea that did not and does not have the
votes even in a Senate controlled by the President's own party, House
Republicans passed a responsible plan to address the debt ceiling while
cutting spending and supporting American workers.
We acted on behalf of working families who are tired of paying more
to put gas in their cars, clothes on their backs, and food on their
tables.
We acted on behalf of the small business owners who are desperate to
remove the ``help wanted'' signs in their storefront windows.
We acted on behalf of the families trapped on government assistance
to help provide them with a path to a more prosperous future.
One has to wonder, what was President Biden waiting for? A massive
slowdown in the economy? We got that, too. In the first quarter of this
year, economic growth slowed significantly to just over 1 percent.
However, these data points do not tell the full story. To get that,
Mr. Speaker, you have to go into the communities across this country
and listen to those on the front lines of the economy.
At the Ways and Means Committee, we have done just that. From West
Virginia to Oklahoma, Georgia to New York, we have listened to American
workers, families, farmers, and small business owners who have shared
their concerns and their solutions.
At the heart of so much of what we have heard is the simple message:
Stop spending money we do not have on policies that do not work.
According to a recent survey, 60 percent of the American people say
that an increase in the Nation's debt limit ought to be accompanied by
a reduction in the Nation's spending.
The Fiscal Responsibility Act is a step in responding to that
request. It does much of what Republicans said we would do: put a check
on Washington spending, claw back the pandemic-era funding that
everyone should agree is no longer needed, take a bite out of the IRS'
recent $80 billion pay raise, severely dampen the regulatory
administrative state, and lift more Americans out of poverty through
commonsense work requirements for those who can work.
Does this bill do everything folks might want? No. However, I am
reminded of a quote by Thomas Jefferson, where he said, in part: ``The
ground of liberty is to be gained by inches. We must be contented to
secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward
for what is yet to get.''
This bill keeps alive the precedent that was set decades ago that has
been
[[Page H2693]]
upheld by Republicans and Democrats alike--even by President Biden when
he was a Senator and when he was Vice President. That is, when it comes
to addressing the Nation's debt limit, Congress and the White House
need to come to the table to also help address the Nation's debt
crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me point out that, as the chairman noted, he didn't
have the whole story, so we intend to spend the next hour filling in
the rest of the story.
We are here tonight because of a reckless position that was adopted
by the majority that was prepared to take this Nation to the precipice
of default. Thank goodness for Joe Biden's legislative skills, so we
will not go over the edge. We will preserve the full faith and credit
of the United States.
Mr. Speaker, just think of what was being proposed here. At risk was
the dollar as the international currency.
Do people have any idea what role treasuries play in terms of
international transactions? The American dollar drives the world's
economy, and they were prepared to take us over the edge with the
reckless spending plan that they have.
Thanks to Leader Jeffries and the measured tone that he took, we find
ourselves tonight with an agreement that we might not love--because it
is not about perfection. I stopped telling people that I was perfect 46
years ago when I ran for the Springfield City Council. After one
legislative session, I never professed to being perfect again.
There is give-and-take to negotiation, and it means precisely that
you give and you take. That is what we are acknowledging here this
evening.
That old sage of political thought got it right. Mick Jagger said:
``You get what you need.''
Democrats can proudly say tonight that, with the help of Joe Biden,
we protected Social Security, protected Medicare, protected Medicaid,
and protected veterans benefits, all of which we have profoundly
embraced over these years.
How did we get here? This is about the CARES Act that saved the
American economy--22 million jobs gone, now 22 million jobs returned,
and 9\1/2\ million jobs going unanswered. This was a manufactured
crisis that brings us to this evening.
The President's experienced leadership in the face of divided
government in this body is one-half of one-third of the Federal
Government. We still have a ways to go.
Let's talk about why the bill ran up. It is on the CARES Act.
Republicans voted for more defense spending. Some Republicans voted for
the CHIPS Act, and some voted for the infrastructure bill.
Let me point out something, and I hope everybody is paying attention
to this: In December 2017, Republicans borrowed $2.3 trillion to
provide a tax cut to the wealthiest among us.
Mr. Speaker, do you know what the great irony of that is? Even the
wealthy wouldn't say they were asking for that tax cut. That is how we
got here.
Their default on America act, in an effort to balance the budget on
hardworking Americans' backs, tonight will be compromised. They
targeted food security and healthcare while ignoring tax loopholes.
Mr. Speaker, do you think around here we might someday close one tax
loophole?
The tax bill that we put out was well received everywhere, and it was
progrowth in nature.
Let me also point out something else by historical record this
evening. Republicans are always in favor, Mr. Speaker, of balancing the
budget when there is a Democratic President. That is the reality of it.
Let's not forget who put us in this situation.
In the last 25 years, Republicans have voted for $10 trillion worth
of tax cuts to the top 1 percent: 2001, $1.3 trillion; 2003, $1
trillion; and then their tax plan in December 2017, $2.3 trillion of
borrowed money.
They wanted to take the American economy hostage, and Joe Biden,
Leader Jeffries, and the Democratic Caucus pushed back to make sure
that the position that we have tonight, which we overwhelmingly intend
to support, is reasonable policy achieved because of the hard-nosed
negotiating of President Biden and Leader Jeffries.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry), who spent hours, days, and
weeks in the negotiation process to help get us where we are today.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Smith for yielding the
time.
Mr. Speaker, for the first time in debt limit negotiations, the U.S.
Government will spend less money next year than it did this year.
This rates as one of the largest deficit reduction bills in American
history, and it will fundamentally change the spending trajectory here
in Washington with more work to do and more work ahead.
The bill contains spending cuts that take a step in the right
direction toward restoring fiscal sanity in Washington. This agreement
will return discretionary spending to 2022 levels.
Additionally, we set top-line spending at 1 percent annual growth
over the next 6 years.
We also cut spending through the largest funding rescissions in
American history, clawing back billions of dollars in unspent COVID
money.
We institute the first-ever statutory paygo to hold President Biden
accountable for his administrative actions. If this rule had been in
place over the last 2 years, it would have checked regulatory overreach
that has cost the economy at least $1.5 trillion during Biden's
Presidency.
This agreement will also change the way Washington operates by
compelling a workable appropriations process.
Simply put, this legislation ends the Democrats' spending spree and
fights inflation.
This deal will also help grow our economy and lift Americans out of
poverty by instituting the strongest work requirements in a generation
in some of our social safety net programs. These reforms will combat
the labor shortages crippling small businesses by encouraging
individuals to contribute to our society and economy while preserving
these programs for those who need them most.
Another progrowth solution in this bill is the transformational
reforms to the permitting process and the environmental review process.
Cutting this red tape will boost domestic energy production, lower
costs for struggling American families, and set us on a path toward
energy independence. Furthermore, it will be faster, cheaper, and
easier to build things in America, large and small. Whether that is
infrastructure, roads, bridges, new homes, new factories, so be it.
This legislation, though, is a product of divided government.
Republicans only control the House of Representatives, not the Senate
and not the White House. Throughout this process--which was long,
laborious, and tough--it has been Speaker McCarthy's leadership and
House Republicans leading. We passed a plan, and it was that plan and
the Speaker's leadership that enabled these negotiations and this
agreement.
Mr. Speaker, this is the most conservative spending package during my
time in Congress. I am proud to support it, and I encourage my
colleagues to vote ``yes.''
{time} 1930
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Jeffries).
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for yielding, and I thank Mr. Neal
for his tremendous, steadfast leadership in this moment of crisis that
was manufactured by extreme MAGA Republicans on the other side of the
aisle.
I thank the distinguished members of the Ways and Means Committee. I
thank House Democrats for your steady hand, for your unity of purpose,
for your efforts to make sure that we push back the extreme MAGA
Republican efforts to jam rightwing cuts down the throats of the
American people that would have undermined the health, the safety, and
the economic well-being of everyday Americans.
From the very beginning, House Democrats were clear that we would not
allow extreme MAGA Republicans to default on our debt, crash the
economy, or trigger a job-killing recession.
[[Page H2694]]
Under the leadership of President Joe Biden, Democrats kept our
promise. We will continue to do what is necessary to put people over
politics.
The question that remains right now is what will the House Republican
majority do?
It appears that you may have lost control of the floor of the House
of Representatives.
Earlier today, 29 House Republicans voted to default on our Nation's
debt and against an agreement that you negotiated.
It is an extraordinary act that indicates just the nature of the
extremism that is out of control on the other side of the aisle.
Extreme MAGA Republicans attempted to take control of the House
floor. Democrats took it back for the American people.
We will continue to do what is necessary under the leadership of
President Joe Biden to build an economy that works for everyday
Americans and push back against the extremism on the other side of the
aisle.
Under the Trump administration, Democrats helped the former President
avoid a default, raised the debt ceiling three times without
gamesmanship, partisanship, or brinkmanship because Democrats put
people over politics, even though we strongly disagreed with your
reckless policies, as Chairman Neal eloquently outlined.
In 2017, you passed the GOP tax scam where 83 percent of the benefits
went to the wealthiest 1 percent here in America and caused our Nation
to go $2 trillion in debt to subsidize the lifestyles of the wealthy,
the well-off, and the well-connected. It did nothing to lift up the
economy for everyday Americans.
That was the case with your so-called tax cuts under Ronald Reagan,
and that was the case under George W. Bush: failed policy; and trickle-
down economics that has come to mean only one thing for everyday
Americans. You may get a trickle, but you are guaranteed to stay down.
Your policies have failed.
Yet despite that failure, despite the fact that you went $2 trillion
into debt to pass your GOP tax scam, House Democrats were there to make
sure that America did not default. We were there then, and we are here
today, to put people over politics.
I am thankful for my colleagues, for their work, for their
commitment, for their patriotism, for their dedication, for their
willingness to find the common ground necessary under the leadership of
President Joe Biden, who did an extraordinary job under very difficult
circumstances to protect values of importance to the American people,
notwithstanding your threats to crash the economy, trigger a recession,
and default on our debt.
President Biden understood, despite the hostage-taking situation that
you unnecessarily thrust the country into, that we had an obligation, a
responsibility to avoid a catastrophic default. That is exactly what
President Biden and Democrats have been able to do.
We also made clear that America would not find ourselves back in this
hostage-taking situation. You passed the default on America act about a
month ago that had extreme rightwing cuts.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members, including leadership, are reminded
to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I did not mention any single Member by
name or any single individual on the other side of the aisle.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated on this floor, House
Democrats will continue to put people over politics and push back
against the extremism on the other side of the aisle.
I am thankful for the leadership of President Joe Biden in avoiding a
catastrophic default. I am thankful for the leadership of President Joe
Biden in finding a way to an agreement that will avoid a hostage-taking
situation for the balance of the 118th Congress.
I am thankful for the leadership of President Joe Biden and House
Democrats who protected Social Security, protected Medicare, protected
Medicaid, protected veterans' benefits, protected education, protected
public safety, and protected the American people from the draconian 22
percent across-the-board cuts that House Republicans were trying to
visit on everyday Americans.
As a result of that effort, that leadership of President Joe Biden,
we are going to be able to get through this hostage-taking situation
and ensure that we can continue to build an economy that works for
everyday Americans.
I thank House Democrats for their leadership. I thank House Democrats
for their work. We will continue to show up and stand up and speak up
without fear for everyday Americans to ensure that we can continue
America's long, necessary, and majestic march toward a more perfect
Union.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), who has worked for days and
weeks to get us to where we are today.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for
yielding.
Let me explain why we are in the situation that we are in today. We
have watched over the last year as my friends across the aisle have
pushed through legislation called the IIJA, called the IRA, the CHIPS
Act, the ARP, all these acronyms.
What does it mean to you?
What it means to the American people, Mr. Speaker, is it means that
$10 trillion in extra funds have been spent--$10 trillion.
Let me tell you what that means. Today, a child born in America is
going to inherit about $4\1/2\ million in debt at their birth--$4\1/2\
million--the amount of money they are going to pay over their lifetime,
according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Right now, we have hit our credit card limit as a Nation. We don't
have the ability to pay the monthly payment, and so we are in a
quandary.
We have to figure out how we are going to raise that credit card
limit. Just like you would do with your own family, you would have a
conversation, Mr. Speaker, with your child. You would say, hey, how did
you get yourself in this situation? We have to fix it.
The situation we are in right now, we have four options in front of
us. There are four.
Number one, we can default on the debt. You cannot pay your credit
card bill which means late payment penalties, interest rates going up,
and you cause havoc on the American family.
The second option is you can say, hey, we are going to use this 14th
Amendment thing that doesn't really exist, and the President can just
do it on his own.
The third option is you can get all the moderates together, and they
can do a relatively clean debt ceiling that just keeps that debt going
up and up and up from $32 trillion today to $52 trillion over the next
20 years or so.
Mr. Speaker, 17\1/2\ cents of every tax dollar paid over the next 10
years is going to go towards interest on the debt--17\1/2\ cents.
The third option we have is, again, a clean debt ceiling, just
running it up.
The fourth option we have, the one that is before us today, is the
Fiscal Responsibility Act.
It is absolutely historic. For the first time ever, as a result of
the strategic nature of this Speaker, we are in a situation where we
have legislation before us that will result in the greatest savings in
American history that will result in the greatest rescission, or taking
back of funds, in our Nation's history.
We have legislation before us today that will strengthen and instill
work requirements for welfare.
We have legislation before us today that will rescind funds for
additional IRS agents because I have never had a constituent say, gosh,
I wish I could have more audits.
We have legislation before us today that, for the first time in 40
years, streamlines the environmental process.
Mr. Speaker, here it is: Historic efforts to raise the deficit, $6.5
trillion is how much this will result in. This one, $2 trillion in
savings. This is the option.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. There is not an imaginary fifth option, Mr.
Speaker. It doesn't exist. Let's be honest with the American people.
Support this legislation.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the previous gentleman left out infrastructure
[[Page H2695]]
spending, the CARES Act, defense spending, the CHIPS Act, and the PACT
Act, all of which had Republican support in terms of the expenditures.
Bill Clinton balanced the budget four straight times during his
Presidency, and the money was given away with big tax cuts in 2001 and
2003.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, protecting our country's full faith and
credit requires accepting some unacceptable Republican demands.
As one cartoonist aptly described them, Republicans suffer from a
form of deficit attention disorder. You see, when Republicans are in
charge, they are absolutely obsessed with deficits.
Give them a little power, and their attention--poof. It just
magically vanishes as they begin to deplete the Treasury with tax gifts
for the well connected.
Like their multitrillion-dollar Trump tax giveaway, they are already
planning in coming days to soon borrow more to reward those at the top.
Their boundless affection for tax cheats and for tax expenditures may
increase the debt by even more than the cuts that they make today in
education, healthcare, and environmental protection, which are so
wrong.
As climate deniers, these Republicans sought to repeal our climate
law but were held to one pipeline and a weakening of environmental
review laws, a troubling setback that we can overcome.
We should be leaping forward instead of moving slowly. Ransom paid;
America protected.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Murphy).
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act.
Over 100 days ago, President Biden said he would not negotiate.
Republicans, acting on behalf of this country, forced him to negotiate.
The bill alters our fiscal trajectory and helps remedy the Federal
Government's insatiable spending problem.
This landmark legislation lowers nondefense discretionary spending
and forces Congress to employ a functioning appropriations process.
More importantly, the measure doesn't result in new taxes and doesn't
touch Social Security, Medicare, or veterans' benefits.
Is the bill perfect? Absolutely not.
Is it a step in the right direction? Absolutely. CBO scores a
decrease in spending of $1.9 trillion.
Let's not forget, Rome was not built in a day. It is now up to
Republicans to make the necessary cuts to rein in our terrible spending
and our terrible debt of $31 trillion.
I urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation.
{time} 1945
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thompson), who spent 6 hours in front of the Rules
Committee.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, the American people can't
afford a default. Default on our debt would be catastrophic, an
economic disaster with consequences for every one of our constituents.
Congress can't let that happen.
This bill is not perfect, but thanks to President Biden's leadership,
the bill before us achieves two key points: One, it prevents default,
averting an economic disaster; and, two, it preserves not only key
programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, but also
maintains virtually all House Democrats' achievements from the last 2
years, including the climate provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act,
which I was proud to author with my colleagues on the Ways and Means
Committee.
Despite where Republicans started, the President has negotiated
legislation that protects Medicaid and the Inflation Reduction Act, the
CHIPS Act, and the PACT Act, which provides for veterans' healthcare.
Now, I share some of my colleagues' concerns with the bill. I am
particularly opposed to the Republicans' demand to cut mental health
care. After climate change, mental health is the single biggest crisis
in our country. There is no reason to cut critical funding for mental
health.
Their cuts to the IRS will not decrease the deficit. It will increase
the deficit. A fully funded IRS is in everyone's best interests.
Overall, this legislation is a compromise, which is what the American
people expect and deserve from a divided government. Most important, it
averts the catastrophe of a default.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Utah (Mr. Moore).
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, when I ran for Congress, I ran on the
promise that I would use my position to reverse Washington's debt
culture.
In my first term, I was in the minority party, and after 2 years of
voting against Democrats' spending proposals, I finally today get the
opportunity to vote ``yes'' on a comprehensive and thoughtful piece of
legislation that will serve as the most significant spending cut in
American history.
Does this bill achieve everything that I want? No, of course not.
That is the reality. However, my support is a significant step forward,
reversing our ballooning national debt.
The Fiscal Responsibility Act allows us to cut spending by $2.1
trillion over the next decade. It is the largest deficit reduction
ever. For the first time in 40 years, we will be able to address our
permitting process, to be able to address our energy sector and
transportation projects from crippling regulations.
This act represents the beginning of what is to come as Republicans
govern in a responsible, productive manner. We fought hard to get this
agreement and blew through Democrats' red lines over and over again.
This isn't over. We can responsibly govern, and success today will
bring more success in the future. I look forward to casting my vote
``yes.''
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson), my neighbor.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, three times President Biden
has had to deal with the Republican-manufactured default crisis around
raising the debt ceiling.
Since 1960, Congress has dealt with the debt ceiling 78 times. During
the Trump administration alone, it raised the debt ceiling three times
without holding the American economy and its people hostage.
President Biden is to be commended for being the adult in the room
and providing the leadership to prevent a catastrophic default that
hurts the U.S. standing in the global economy and Americans here at
home.
That does not excuse the behavior of the Republican majority in the
House, who seek to normalize hostage taking in an effort to hurt
programs that serve our people the most.
Mr. Speaker, I thank President Biden for protecting Social Security,
Medicare, and veterans' benefits. The trust the American people placed
in you has been validated again.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this
legislation.
The debt ceiling is one of the best pathways to address debt and
deficits. In addition to immediate spending cuts and future spending
caps, this bill includes provisions to prevent IRS from auditing
families and small businesses and helps get Americans back to work.
My bill with Representative Steel to rescind IRS funding was
partially put into this bill. Even though we passed the entire bill by
our majority in January, parts of it are in this bill, and House
Republicans continue to work to protect every family and small business
from IRS overreach.
This bill also modernizes TANF work requirements and ends the scheme
of States sending small-dollar checks to people who are already working
to artificially raise their TANF work rates. These changes will focus
TANF dollars on those who need it the most and will push States to do
more to connect work-capable adults with the 9.6 million job openings
we have across our economy right now.
We have more to do to get our work done and our fiscal house in
order. We need to ensure our economy always rewards hard work, and this
bill is a great start.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), one of the most accomplished Speakers of the
House in the history of America.
[[Page H2696]]
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for
his leadership. I also thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Boyle), the ranking member of the Budget Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I associate myself with the great remarks of our
distinguished leader, Mr. Hakeem Jeffries, who spoke earlier and
captured so much of what is so important here today.
Mr. Speaker, our Constitution makes perfectly clear the validity of
the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned. In the
bipartisan budget agreement, we honor our sworn oaths as lawmakers to
uphold this constitutional duty.
While I find this legislation objectionable, it will avert an
unprecedented default, which would bring devastation to America's
families: millions of jobs eliminated, trillions in savings erased,
higher costs on loans, mortgages, car payments, credit card bills, and
more.
Let us commend President Biden for his responsible leadership to
prevent this unconscionable outcome while protecting Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid; protecting healthcare for our veterans as our
Commander in Chief; protecting our progress on climate and
infrastructure; and protecting our economy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill, reaffirming to
Americans that the full faith and credit of the United States shall not
be questioned.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from California (Mr. McCarthy). He has worked numerous hours, days--in
fact, he has been working since January--to get to where we are today.
Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, let me first say how grateful I am to
Congressmen Graves and McHenry. They have given their time and talents
to this effort for more than a month. Our entire Conference and country
owes them a debt of gratitude.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my Conference. They worked hard. When I went to
see the President on February 1, I sat in the Oval Office right in the
chair across from him. I said, Mr. President, the debt limit is coming.
At that time, Janet Yellen said it would be into maybe July, August.
I said that we should work together. I said that there are only two
things, Mr. President: Never raise taxes, and we have to spend less
than we spent this year.
He said that we would meet, but for 97 days we would never meet. It
wasn't until this House took action to pass a bill. I sit back and I
think for one moment, what if that bill didn't pass, because nothing
passed in the Senate? If that bill had not passed, the only other
option was sitting over here in a discharge petition. It just needs a
few more signatures, and it would be: Just raise the debt. Just raise
the debt.
But tonight is going to be different. Tonight, we are going to do
something we haven't done before. Tonight, we are going to give America
hope. Tonight, we are going to vote for the largest savings in American
history: over $2.1 trillion. That is what we will vote on.
Mr. Speaker, every great nation that has overextended itself has
collapsed. Mindful of this truth, George Washington said in his
Farewell Address that a healthy public credit is a source of strength
and security for a nation.
By that same token, an unhealthy debt burden is a source of weakness
and insecurity.
President Washington's words ring true today. We are seeing the
negative effects of runaway spending in real time: record inflation,
rising interest rates, broken supply chains, and economic uncertainty.
Runaway spending is also making America more dependent on foreign
debt holders. The total debt we owe to other countries is $7.4
trillion. Countries like China are buying more of our farmland, more of
our businesses, and more of our debt. This is unsustainable; but what
is even worse, it is dangerous.
However, runaway spending is more than a national and economic
security problem. My belief, Mr. Speaker, is that it is a moral
problem.
Mr. Speaker, this is Halle. Halle was born at 9:58 a.m. on April 11
of this year. She weighed 6 pounds, 7 ounces. Her blue eyes, she got
that from her dad. That button nose, she got that from her mom. The
$95,000 bill, she got that from Washington. Not a very good gift for a
newborn. That is Halle's portion of the national debt.
Sadly, Halle is not alone. Every child who is born today owes $95,000
in debt. Mr. Speaker, that is $10,000 more in debt for every child
since this President took office.
It reminds me of what Ronald Reagan once said: ``When a business or
an individual spends more than it makes, it goes bankrupt. When
government does it, it sends you the bill.''
Mr. Speaker, to continue Washington's spending addiction is both
irresponsible and just wrong, so let's stop it. I will be honest,
tonight's bill doesn't stop it, but for the first time, we begin to
turn the ship. This shouldn't be our last. It shouldn't even be a
debate. We should challenge each other for how could we put ourselves
on a fiscal path even better.
For months, President Biden and Senator Schumer were adamant that
they would not negotiate spending cuts. Mr. Speaker, I remember
watching Senator Schumer on George Stephanopoulos one Sunday. He said:
Just watch, we are going to break them. The Republicans can't get
together. They can't pass a bill, and it is going to be a clean debt
ceiling. You just watch.
The only person that didn't pass the bill was the person that made
that quote. They demanded a clean debt limit, which really means they
spend more, and you just pay more in taxes.
House Republicans said no. Over the past 4 months, we fought hard to
change how Washington works. We stopped the Democrats from writing a
blank check for more spending after the largest spending binge in
American history that brought us some of the worst inflation our Nation
has ever known.
We used the power we had to force the President to negotiate. You
watched me day after day requesting to negotiate with the President. We
produced a bill that in a divided government takes a step toward
smaller government, less regulation, more economic growth, and more
take-home pay.
Unlike previous Speakers, Members didn't have to pass the bill to
find out what is in it. They had 72 hours to read it, and it is only 99
pages. Fifteen of those pages were just rescissions, just money that we
had spent that sat there.
Here is the bottom line, Mr. Speaker: The Fiscal Responsibility Act
is the biggest spending cut in American history.
I, for one, Mr. Speaker, don't want to be on the wrong side of
history. Yes, I could say I am going to vote ``no'' because there is
something not in the bill. If I took that philosophy, I would never
vote ``yes.''
I simply read the bills in front of me and decide: Is this good for
the country? I would say that answer is easily yes.
{time} 2000
Taxpayers will save an additional $2.1 trillion. For the first time
in more than a decade, Congress will spend less next year than this
year.
In fact, the Fiscal Responsibility Act is the only bill that reduces
overall spending, reduces nondefense spending, and reduces the deficit,
unlike any other debt limit increase in recent history.
We are finally bending the curve on discretionary spending because of
this bill. We are doing it while at the same time raising our national
defense, with our veterans fully funded, with Social Security and
Medicare preserved, and without raising a penny in new taxes.
That is a major victory.
Mr. Speaker, it is only part of the story. Tens of billions of
dollars in unspent COVID funds will be clawed back for taxpayers
because of this bill's spending rescissions, the largest in American
history. If you add up all the rescissions in American history, this is
larger than that. I think it is only common sense that if the pandemic
is over, but billions of dollars have not been spent, why would you
spend them now if the pandemic is over? Why don't we provide them back
to the hardworking taxpayer that has to pay it, like Halle.
Mr. Speaker, just listen to some of the programs we are slashing:
$400 million from the CDC's global health fund. Don't get worried
because
[[Page H2697]]
that is not going to help you. That is your hardworking taxpayer money
being sent to countries like China. I guess that is to help China be
able to buy our bonds, and we will pay for their healthcare. I would
rather focus on America.
What about work-capable adults without dependents? They are going to
get a job. They are going to learn new skills, and they are going to
earn a paycheck because of this bill's new welfare reforms. These
reforms are going to change people's lives. When we vote on this bill
today, somebody is going to have a better job tomorrow because of your
vote. Families will be stronger and more self-sufficient. People will
be lifted out of poverty.
Don't believe anyone who says our plan hurts America's social safety
net. We are such a generous Nation, and when people fall on tough
times, we help them. That will not change.
This is important: Assistance programs are supposed to be temporary,
not permanent--a hand up, not a handout; a bridge to independence, not
a barrier.
If you also vote for this bill tonight, new roads, bridges, highways,
and pipelines are going to be built sooner and faster because of this
bill's permitting reform.
Mr. Speaker, I know that is a bipartisan view. We talk about it all
the time. We see it in our homes. We get frustrated that you will vote
for a transportation bill, you will serve 10 years in the Congress, and
once you leave, the person who follows you 6 years later will be at the
groundbreaking because we spent all that time studying.
I think America wants to compete. They want to cut the red tape. They
just want a fair process.
This is going to save families money and make America less dependent
on China, changing America for the better for decades to come.
Finally, taxpayers will be more protected from harassment and costly
new burdens. We rejected every single one of President Biden's demands
for new tax hikes and new government mandates. Believe me, from the
person sitting in the room with the President, he asked every single
time.
Instead, this bill eliminates the funding that would have been spent
this year to hire Biden's army of new IRS agents. Overall, we have cut
more than $20 billion from Biden's IRS slush fund. To date, they
haven't been able to hire a single one of Biden's 87,000 new IRS
agents. I will come back year after year to keep it that way because
the government should work for you, not go after you.
Mr. Speaker, passing the Fiscal Responsibility Act is a crucial first
step for putting America back on track. It does what is responsible for
our children, what is possible in a divided government, and what is
required by our principles and promises. Yes, it may not include
everything we need to do, but it is absolutely what we need to do right
now.
Moving forward, House Republicans will build on its structural
reforms. As we do, the American people can be confident in this: I am
never giving up. I heard the detractors.
I am an optimist. I have to be. I sat there 15 rounds.
I am an optimist. I waited 97 days and listened to the President tell
me he will never meet with me, but I woke up every morning thinking
this might be the day.
I am an optimist. I watched division in this House, but tonight, we
might come together and do something very big for this Nation.
Don't mistake that it is the solution. It is the beginning. We should
wake up the next morning on how we can do even better tomorrow. You
see, I will never give up on the American people, and I will never give
up on keeping our Commitment to America.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. Blumenauer), a champion of the Inflation Reduction Act and the tax
credits that were included.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is amazing how the Republicans can
make political drama appear smaller than life: major questions with
extremists are reduced to parody and political theater.
We may have averted catastrophe, but it doesn't mean there was not a
real cost to America. We should commit to never again allow such
political hostage taking. Instead, lay the foundation for using the
clear language of the 14th Amendment to avoid the debt ceiling
altogether.
We should collect billions of dollars already payable from some of
the wealthiest individuals and corporations. It would be a strong
signal about the fairness of our tax system.
It is ironic that Republicans are worried about pressing rich people
for taxes they already owe, but would subject poor people to more
harassment and meaningless paperwork.
We should instead concentrate on changing policies to reduce the
deficit. If there will be time limits on benefits, maybe we could start
with 20,000 rich farmers who got a million dollars a year or more for
37 consecutive years.
If we act in good faith, it shouldn't be so hard, and America will be
the better.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the majority leader.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Missouri for
yielding and for his leadership on this bill.
Mr. Speaker, for the first time in years, this Congress is actually
debating a bill that will reduce spending from one year to the next.
Let me repeat that: reduce spending from one year to the next. That is
not something you hear around this town often.
Usually, the debate is: How much more money will Washington spend?
In fact, if Republicans were not in the majority in this House, that
is exactly the debate that would be going on, how much more to spend,
how many more taxes to raise because that is what President Biden
wanted at the outset of this debate on the debt ceiling.
Just for a little background, let's be clear what the debt ceiling
is. The debt ceiling is the Nation's credit card. For the last 2 years,
you saw out-of-control, reckless spending to the tune of trillions of
dollars where President Biden and his allies racked up so much debt
that they maxed out the Nation's credit card.
We are at this point to address that problem.
Mr. Speaker, wouldn't it make sense at the same time that we are
addressing the problem that President Biden created with years of
spending money that we don't have that we also have an honest
discussion and start solving the problem that caused the Nation to max
out the credit card? That is what this debate has been about for the
last few months. Frankly, I think it is a debate that has been a long
time coming in this Nation.
Over months of debate, while no one gets everything they want, I
think it is important that we talk about the things that we got, that
we talk about the things that the American people will get out of this
bill that will help start turning the trajectory of our Nation's
spending in Washington, finally putting our country back on a path
where we can keep this debate going.
This is the first step. Let's make no mistake about it, this bill
doesn't solve all the problems that have been created over years and
decades, but it starts to finally turn the ship of state in the right
direction. It starts with real savings, over $2 trillion in actual
spending cuts. That is in the bill.
Again, this is a very historic first step. It doesn't mean that is
where we stop. It means that is where we start. You don't get the next
round of trillions in spending cuts if you don't lock in the first $2.1
trillion that is in this bill.
Now, something else we do is we actually go and reclaim for the
taxpayers of America what has been identified as $28 billion in slush
funds floating around Washington, all under the name of COVID.
President Biden himself actually said COVID is over.
We passed legislation here in this House under this Republican
majority to end the pandemic so we can get our country and our economy
back going again. Yet, there is $28 billion out there still unspent
that liberals in Washington want to spend. If we don't pass this bill,
they will spend that money in the name of COVID, even though COVID is
over.
There is $28 billion that should go back in savings to the taxpayer.
Well, guess what is in this bill, Mr. Speaker? Those $28 billion are
reclaimed so the taxpayers get that money back. That is in this bill.
[[Page H2698]]
Let's talk about the IRS. In my years in public service on the State
level or in Congress, I have never gotten a single call from a
constituent going: Do you know what? The thing we really want you to do
is go add more people to the IRS.
Yet, President Biden, for some reason, decided he wanted to more than
double the size of the IRS. He wanted to go from about 80,000 people--
to add not up to 87,000, but to add an additional 87,000 people.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, they confirmed that it
would break President Biden's promise.
You heard it over and over again that if you make less than $400,000
a year, don't worry, you won't pay any more in new taxes. Well, maybe
they are redefining what lower income means because if you are making
less than $100,000, according to the CBO, those new IRS agents will be
going after lower income family workers and the single mom that is
working two jobs at a restaurant. That is who they will be going after.
We step in and say no, we have to end that madness--over a billion
dollars in cuts to the IRS to stop them from doing just that.
Let's talk about another big area of savings. A lot of people take
out loans--a loan to buy their first home. I know that is harder to do
under the Biden economy because interest rates are so high because of
the out-of-control spending in Washington. This bill finally starts to
address that so, hopefully, interest rates can go down. Hopefully,
families can afford to buy their first home again.
There is something else that people do. Usually, a first loan a lot
of people take out is a student loan. I know I did when I was a
student. I signed the document, and it helped me get through college. I
also worked my way through college.
When I graduated, there was never a day where I thought somebody
else, some single mom working two jobs, ought to pay that loan back
instead of me. I paid those loans back, and most Americans have done
that. About 13 percent of the American people take out student loans.
Yet, for some reason, the President decided that he thinks all
Americans, 100 percent of American taxpayers, should pay the student
loans of the 13 percent that don't want to pay them back. Is that fair?
Does anybody think that is fair to all of those people who are working
hard and barely getting by in a tough economy?
What we do is we actually start those loan payments back. That is $60
billion in savings just this year, in the first year, so that people
don't have to carry the burden for something that somebody else said
they would do.
{time} 2015
This is America. We make our choices. If you want to take out a loan,
you should have that ability, but you shouldn't expect somebody else to
go pay it for you. Let's get back to the values that made this country
so great.
We put real permitting reforms in place, something we haven't seen in
decades. Anybody that is trying to build anything in America, if you
are trying to build a factory, if you are trying to maybe add on to
your farm, if you have got a barn and you want to add on to it, they
find a puddle in the back and under Waters of the U.S., next thing you
know, you have got five different Federal agencies where groups are
suing to stop you from getting that permit, even though you have done
everything right. You followed all the rules.
We finally fixed that. We created a one-stop-shop so that if you are
trying to get a permit, if you are playing by the rules, somebody else
can't go game the system to try to kill your project by going to one
agency and you spend 2 years fighting that lawsuit, you win that one.
The next day they file another lawsuit with another agency and another
and another, and next thing you know, it is 10 years later, and you
just give up and walk away. It happens all the time in America.
We will have a one-stop-shop, but we also put shot clocks on the
unelected bureaucrats because, you know what, Mr. Speaker, if a Federal
agency tells you that you have to get them some information back, they
don't say, hey, get it to us whenever you want to. They give you a
deadline and it is usually pretty soon, and if you don't meet that
deadline, you don't get your permit.
But if you get them all the information, you might wait 6 months, a
year, or longer to hear back from the Federal agency. These are people
that work for the taxpayers of America. Shouldn't they have the same
requirements and a shot clock on them that they put on you, the
American people paying their salaries? That is in this bill.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, real work requirements. I don't think there has
ever been a time in America where there are more jobs that are open,
people looking for workers. You can go to a restaurant, if you want to
take your family out for a nice dinner, and you will see a third of the
tables empty, yet they are not seating anybody because they don't have
enough workers.
Why is that? Because the Federal Government is paying millions of
people right now not to work. Think about that.
In America, where everybody is looking for workers, the Federal
Government is borrowing money from countries like China to pay people
not to work. This is insanity.
For all the people out there that are working, they are paying that
freight. Why don't we say, for people who are able-bodied, who are able
to get back into the workforce--there is a social safety net for people
who run on hard times. If you just choose to sit at home and turn down
jobs, that is your prerogative as an American. Just don't ask someone
who is working two jobs to pay for you to sit at home and turn down
work.
By putting work requirements back in place, something Joe Biden
himself voted for as a Senator, you also strengthen Social Security and
Medicare, two programs that are going bust under President Biden's
runaway spending that we shored up in this bill, actually strengthening
those programs that are so important to the people who paid into it.
There is more work to be done, absolutely, and we will get to work
tomorrow working on the next round of things we need to do to keep
getting this country back on track, but we never get there if we don't
start with the first step.
That is what we are doing here tonight. That is why we need to get
this bill passed, and then go to work on the next reforms we have got
to do to continue strengthening this great Nation, the United States of
America. I urge passage.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished majority leader failed to
mention that we raised the national debt three times during Donald
Trump's Presidency. He failed to point out that $8.7 trillion was added
to the national debt during Donald Trump's Presidency.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a productive member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, the only problem is our tax system is
broken, and you don't want to talk about it. We made strides to fix
this problem with a historic IRS investment.
The IRS is coming after you. I saw those commercials. You are better
than that, guys and gals. You are better than that. No one's putting an
army together, but we want to make sure everybody pays their fair
share.
What in God's name is wrong with that?
That is what we are talking about. If you look at the IRS estimates
of those people who are getting away with murder, that is what the
average American knows about, thinks about, but does little talking
about because he figures he can't do anything about it. You can.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. PASCRELL. So, Article I is ignored many times by both parties,
both sides of the aisle. It is the Congress that has the power to put a
budget together. It is pretty simple.
All Americans must understand what is happening here. President Biden
put forward a budget to boost opportunity for working Americans,
increase access to healthcare, and improve tax fairness.
[[Page H2699]]
Mr. Speaker, in the greatest country in the world, if we don't fix
our tax system, we have not done our job as Congress, folks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, Democrats often say that the new
IRS funding will only be used to go after the wealthy. This is simply
not the case.
I include in the Record a CBO blog post from 2021 examining the Biden
administration's $80 billion proposal and stating that it would return
the audit rates to the levels of about 10 years ago, and that that rate
would rise for all taxpayers. Our calculations show that this would
mean 600,000 more audits per year for taxpayers making less than
$75,000 a year.
[From CBO Blog, Sept. 2, 2021]
The Effects of Increased Funding for the IRS
(By Phill Swagel)
Last month, the Congressional Budget Office published An
Analysis of Certain Proposals in the President's 2022 Budget.
Since then, CBO has completed its analysis of another
proposal in the President's budget, an increase in spending
for the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS's) enforcement
activities. CBO estimates that portions of the
Administration's proposal to increase funding for the IRS by
$80 billion over the 2022-2031 period would increase revenues
by approximately $200 billion over those 10 years. That
estimate does not include changes in revenues resulting from
portions of the proposal that involve new information-
reporting requirements and other changes to the tax code;
those changes are estimated by the staff of the Joint
Committee on Taxation (JCT).
The Proposal
The Administration proposes funding for the IRS that is $80
billion greater over 10 years than the amounts in CBO's July
2021 baseline projections (which reflect the assumption that
current laws generally do not change). Two types of funding
would be provided: discretionary appropriations, which would
mainly be used for enforcement activities; and mandatory
funding, which would be used for a variety of activities (not
only enforcement but also operations support, business-
systems modernization, and taxpayer services).
Spending would increase in each year between 2021 and 2031,
though the highest growth would occur in the first few years.
By 2031, CBO projects, the proposal would make the IRS's
budget more than 90 percent larger than it is in CBO's July
2021 baseline projections and would more than double the
IRS's staffing. Of the $80 billion, CBO estimates, about $60
billion would be for enforcement and related operations
support.
The Administration also proposes that financial
institutions increase their reporting about account inflows
and outflows. Part of the increased funding would support the
implementation of a new information-reporting system to be
used by those institutions. The resulting effects on revenues
are estimated by JCT and are not included in CBO's estimate
of an approximately $200 billion increase.
How CBO Estimates the Effect on Revenues of Increased IRS Funding
CBO's estimate of revenues is based on the IRS's projected
returns on investment (ROIs) for spending on new enforcement
initiatives. The IRS estimates those ROIs by calculating the
expected revenues that would be raised from taxes, interest,
and penalties as a result of the new initiatives and dividing
them by their additional cost. (The agency has provided ROIs
over the past five years as part of its budget
justification.) The IRS's ROIs ramp up over three years as
staff become trained and fully productive, arrive at the peak
level, and then stay there. In recent years, peak ROIs have
ranged from 5 to 9. That is, a $1 increase in spending on the
IRS's enforcement activities results in $5 to $9 of increased
revenues.
CBO adjusts the ROIs so that they better reflect the
marginal return on additional spending. First, CBO expects
the IRS to prioritize the enforcement activities that it
thinks will have the highest average return; additional
enforcement spending would therefore have lower returns than
previous spending. Second, CBO expects taxpayers to adapt to
the IRS's enforcement activities and adopt new ways of
evading detection, so an enforcement activity may have a
lower return in later years. Finally, the productivity of the
IRS's enforcement activities will also depend on the IRS's
other capabilities. For example, modernized information
technology that stored all of a taxpayer's information in
digital form could increase the productivity of examiners
(the employees who detect taxpayers' noncompliance).
CBO's estimate of revenues also accounts for the timing of
collections resulting from enforcement activity by new hires.
Taxes are assessed at the end of an audit; if taxpayers
disagree with the assessment, they can appeal and continue to
litigate. The length of each step depends on the complexity
of the case. CBO estimates that an audit of medium complexity
would take 24 months to complete. That time, combined with
the expected training time for an experienced new hire,
suggests that the IRS would begin to collect revenues 30
months after the new hire joined the agency. (The timing
would be longer when cases were more complex or when the
taxpayer did not agree to the assessment and appealed.)
What is Incorporated Into CBO's Estimate. CBO's estimate of
the change in revenues is relative to the amount of revenues
collected under current law (which is reflected in CBO's
baseline budget projections). Under guidelines agreed to by
the legislative and executive branches, this change in
revenues typically would not be included in a cost
estimate for legislation that brought about the change,
but it would be reflected in CBO's baseline budget
projections once the legislation was enacted.
CBO's estimate reflects the assumption that the proposed
increase in funding would follow the proposed expansion of
information reporting. Expanded information reporting might
allow the IRS to better target potentially noncompliant
taxpayers; it might also prompt taxpayers to file more
accurate tax returns. It might have a positive effect on
revenues collected, but it might also reduce the ROIs from
enforcement activities, because if returns are more accurate,
there will be less noncompliance to audit. In CBO's and JCT's
judgment, those effects roughly offset each other, on net,
resulting in a small positive effect on ROIs.
CBO's estimate includes ``direct revenues'' and ``protected
revenues.'' Direct revenues are generated from the IRS's
auditing and collection efforts. Protected revenues result
when the IRS prevents a taxpayer from recouping previously
assessed and paid taxes--for example, when the IRS prevents
fraudulent refunds or disallows claims in taxpayers' amended
returns.
The estimate reflects CBO's expectation that the increased
enforcement activities would change the voluntary compliance
rate--that is, the share of taxes owed that are paid
voluntarily and on time--only modestly. The magnitude of that
effect is highly uncertain, however, and the empirical
evidence about the effects of audits on taxpayers' behavior
is inconclusive. Research about such deterrence finds varying
responses, depending on the type of taxpayer. People
generally increase their reported income in the years
following an audit, but people with higher income generally
do not, and neither do corporations. (For more discussion,
see Box 1 in CBO's July 2020 report Trends in the Internal
Revenue Service's Funding and Enforcement.)
How the Current Analysis Differs From Previous Analyses. In
that July 2020 report, CBO estimated that a $40 billion
increase in enforcement funding would raise $103 billion (for
a net effect of $63 billion). The methods used for this
estimate differ in several ways from the methods used for
that one.
First, CBO used updated ROIs that incorporated the IRS's
most recent estimates of the return on enforcement
activities. CBO then adjusted the ROIs to reflect both direct
revenues and protected revenues, increasing the peak ROI from
6.4 to 7.1.
Second, CBO's current methods allow for positive
interaction between enforcement spending and other IRS
funding. That is, CBO accounts for ways in which increased
capabilities, such as more digitization of taxpayers'
information and greater visibility of income flows, can
increase the productivity of enforcement activities.
Third, this analysis reflects a longer time frame for
receiving enforcement revenues because of the complexity of
audits associated with high-wealth individuals, large
corporations, and partnerships. Taxpayers with greater
resources may be more likely to appeal assessments or to
litigate their disputes in the U.S. Tax Court, delaying the
receipt of assessed taxes. As a result, revenues from some
audits will not be received until later than CBO estimated in
its July 2020 analysis.
Sources of Uncertainty. The change in revenues resulting
from an increase in the IRS's funding could be different from
CBO's estimate. It depends on the IRS's ability to hire
experienced candidates, changes in voluntary compliance, and
the interaction of enforcement funding with the IRS's other
capabilities.
The IRS intends to hire mid- and senior-level people with
private-sector experience who will not require a great deal
of training to become productive. But it might not be able to
hire its desired mix of candidates. If it hired less
experienced candidates, it would have to spend more resources
training them. Not only would they take longer to become
productive, but current staff members would have to devote
more time to training them. A related source of uncertainty
in CBO's estimate is attrition: if it proved higher than
expected, personnel would have fewer years at full
productivity.
An increase in the IRS's funding could signal that the
agency was more capable of detecting noncompliance, thus
increasing voluntary compliance and revenues. However, if
there were fewer noncompliant taxpayers to audit, the ROIs
from the IRS's enforcement activities would drop, and the
direct revenues from increased enforcement would be lower
than CBO estimated.
Finally, it is unclear how much the greater information
reporting or the increased IRS spending in areas other than
enforcement (such as technology) could improve examiners'
productivity. Greater nonenforcement spending might increase
overall revenues but decrease ROIs--for example, if improved
services for taxpayers enabled those taxpayers to more
accurately determine their
[[Page H2700]]
tax liability, reducing the pool of noncompliant taxpayers to
audit.
Effects on Taxpayers
The proposed increase in spending on the IRS's enforcement
activities would result in higher audit rates than those
underlying CBO's baseline budget projections. Between 2010
and 2018, the audit rate for higher-income taxpayers fell,
while the audit rate for lower-income taxpayers remained
fairly stable. In CBO's baseline projections, the overall
audit rate declines, resulting in lower audit rates for both
higher-income and lower-income taxpayers. The proposal, by
contrast, would return audit rates to the levels of about 10
years ago; the rate would rise for all taxpayers, but higher-
income taxpayers would face the largest increase. In
addition, the Administration's policies would focus
additional IRS resources on enforcement activity aimed at
high-wealth taxpayers, large corporations, and partnerships.
CBO estimates that if the proposals were enacted, tax
compliance would be improved, and more households would meet
their obligation under the law.
Higher audit rates would probably also result in some
audits of taxpayers who would later be determined not to owe
additional taxes. However, the Administration's proposal for
more information reporting, as well as additional spending on
IRS technology, might reduce the burden on compliant
taxpayers by allowing the IRS to better target noncompliant
ones and to reduce the number of audits that resulted in no
change in tax assessment.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I come from a town called
Butler, Pennsylvania, and in that area, it is Pennsylvania's 16th
Congressional District. In that district, the average annual income for
a family of four is about $52,000.
Now, down here people laugh and say nobody can live on $52,000 a
year. I said, in my district they do. In my district they do.
But let's talk about this in kitchen-table economics. Last year, we
had about $4.9 trillion in revenue. We spent $6.22 trillion.
Kitchen-table economics is that you tell that family that earned
$49,000, go out and spend $62,000, and they look at you like there is
something wrong with your head. They say, you can't do that. I said,
your government does. Your government does. They do it every year, and
they do it with your tax dollars.
Listen, this is America's wake-up call. This isn't about the blue
side of the House or the red side of the House. Look up in the gallery.
That is red, white, and blue. That is America. Those are the people
that pay our taxes.
All we are asking tonight is we look at the Fiscal Responsibility
Act. What a weird name to be used in Washington. I wish we could stop
playing this game of who struck John. Both parties have spent too much
money for far too long.
Tonight is the night to turn this ship around. This is the USS
Abraham Lincoln, and it takes more than one person at the wheel. We
have all got to grab that wheel, and we have got to start pulling on
that wheel to turn this ship around.
Tonight is a wake-up call, America. It is not a Republican wake-up
call or a Democrat wake-up call, but it is an American wake-up call.
Please, wake up.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I commend President Biden, Leader
Jeffries, and all of our negotiators for the great work they have done
to keep us from defaulting on our debts.
This agreement protects critical funding for children and families. I
am especially pleased with the protections for homeless youth in
school, foster children who have aged out of care, and veterans in need
of health services. It protects Medicare, Medicaid, and Social
Security.
This bill protects historic investments in clean energy. It also
protects the 40 million student loan borrowers under President Biden's
student loan relief plan, and it provides relief for some of my
concerns about SNAP and work benefits and work requirements in TANF.
I still have some serious concerns about how it affects the
environment and responds to climate control issues. The bill is not
everything I wanted, but it does give us an opportunity to pay our debt
and protect the good work we have done during the first term of
President Biden.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington), the Budget chairman.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, as I have repeatedly warned, the fiscal
state of our Nation is in decline. Our financial health is rapidly
deteriorating, and our national debt is unsustainable, and, by the way,
both parties bear some blame.
One thing is for sure, Mr. Speaker. We didn't get here overnight, and
we won't get out of this mess with just one piece of legislation.
Here is my admonition to my colleagues. This can't just be a one-off
deal. It must be the beginning of a movement to restore fiscal sanity
in our Nation's Capitol. We must end the era of Big Government funded
on the backs of our children and change the culture in Washington to
continuously and repeatedly rein in our out-of-control deficit
spending.
Today, there is only one deal on the table, and only one question for
me and my colleagues to answer: Do the biggest cuts to the wasteful and
bloated bureaucracy, record rescissions of Federal funds and reforms to
welfare and environmental regulations constitute a meaningful step in
the right direction?
Mr. Speaker, the answer is unequivocally, yes. As I have said all
along, we will pay our bills. We will protect the good faith and credit
of the United States, but we will not give politicians a blank check to
bankrupt our country.
The American people gave Republicans the majority in the House to
stop our Democratic colleagues' unbridled spending and reverse Biden's
failed economic policies, and I believe the Fiscal Responsibility Act
is certainly a good start, which is why I support this piece of
legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Alabama (Ms. Sewell), a very capable member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
Ms. SEWELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bipartisan budget
agreement in order to protect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security,
while also preventing a devastating default on our debt.
To be clear, this bill is far from perfect, but it prevents a
default, it prevents future efforts to hold this Nation hostage for the
rest of the 118th Congress, and it prevents cruel Republican cuts.
This budget agreement that President Biden negotiated protects
funding for education, healthcare, veterans' benefits, Medicare,
Medicaid, and Social Security. Most importantly, it prevents
Republicans from forcing a devastating default that would kill
countless jobs in my district and destroy our economy.
Mr. Speaker, I join in expressing my frustration with the crisis that
my Republican colleagues have manufactured. The American people deserve
better than a Republican majority that chooses to govern crisis by
crisis. Let's lift this debt ceiling and get on with the people's
business in the people's House.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker).
{time} 2030
Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fiscal Responsibility
Act. How could I not support a bill that claws back billions in unspent
COVID funds, a bill that cuts trillions in Biden's out-of-control
spending, a bill that caps spending levels for years to come, and a
bill that enacts work requirements to bring more Americans back into
the workforce, lift households out of poverty by connecting them with
the best antipoverty program--a good job. Most importantly, this bill
is the beginning. It is a start to put our Nation on a better fiscal
trajectory.
Our debt-to-GDP today is at the highest level ever since the end of
World War II. If we do nothing to curb spending, our Federal debt will
be double our GDP by 2050. This is a start to change our trajectory.
Now, I wish I could be voting for more than this. I liked our
original bill a heck of a lot better, but the fact is, the President
and the Democrats who
[[Page H2701]]
control the Senate fought hard to maintain their spending addiction.
Given that we only control the House, I am very pleased with all that
is in this bill. It is most definitely an improvement over existing
law, and I am disappointed that some of my colleagues don't see that.
This bill will give our creditors the confidence that we can govern
by putting us on a better path.
It is a step in the right direction, and I am proud to support it.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, there isn't anybody in this Chamber who
believes that Republicans will abide by a cap on defense spending in
the next year.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from
Washington (Ms. DelBene), a champion of the child tax credit.
Ms. DelBENE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Bipartisan
Budget Agreement. This deal will protect American families and our
economy from a devastating default on our Nation's bills in just 5
days. It will also shield our veterans, seniors, law enforcement, and
schools from the worst of the extreme demands my Republican colleagues
issued while holding our economy hostage.
This deal is far from perfect, but we can't allow perfect to be the
enemy of the good when the stakes are this high. A default would mean
an immediate recession, millions of jobs lost, devastated retirement
accounts, and higher borrowing costs for Americans.
Compromise means that no one gets everything they want, so we have a
choice between a catastrophic outcome or a chance to move forward with
a bipartisan compromise. The worst outcome here would be a default.
Mr. Speaker, let's get this done and over to the Senate so we can
take default off the table.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Malliotakis).
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Mr. Speaker, the Rolling Stones said, ``You can't
always get what you want . . . you get what you need,'' and we need to
avert a default that would stop checks to our seniors, benefits for our
veterans, hurt the U.S. dollar, and Americans' retirement savings. We
also need to change the fiscal trajectory of our Nation.
This bill does both by reducing inflationary spending for the first
time in over a decade with the largest savings in history, imposing
spending caps, and adding checks and balances on the executive branch.
We started from a place where the President and the Senate refused to
negotiate, and we ended with conservative wins that include stopping
Biden's plan to hire additional IRS agents this year, clawing back
unused COVID funds, expanding work requirements to reduce dependency on
public benefits, and cutting costly red tape that slows down critical
infrastructure projects.
While no deal is perfect, this is only the beginning, and we cannot
allow perfect to be the enemy of the good. Republicans, under the
leadership of Speaker McCarthy, have restored balance to government. We
put an end to the Democrats' massive inflationary spending sprees, and
we will continue to fight for the American taxpayers as we proceed in
this process to stop reckless policies that fuel inflation.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), a very capable woman and member of the Ways and
Means Committee.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, Republicans claim they just had
to threaten the economic well-being of every American man, woman, and
child because the $31 trillion debt was too high.
Well, hypocrisy, thou hast a name, GOP. Because what they insisted
on, their red line was not financial at all; it was to double down on
the so-called ``work requirements.'' Thank God the White House
negotiations pushed back on the worst of these changes in TANF that
would have saved $6 million over 10 years.
Speaker after speaker has insisted on denying food to poor, old women
who are primarily Black and Brown. It seems like the pound of flesh
that you get is more delicious than having savings, but just wait.
Before the ink is dry on this bill, you will be pushing for $3.5
trillion in business tax cuts. Hear my words. You heard it here first.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser).
Mr. MEUSER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman very much for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, while the Fiscal Responsibility Act is not perfect and
God knows we need serious corrections, but there are at least ten
conservative American provisions in this bill that will benefit our
economy and advance a higher level of fiscal responsibility.
Let's be honest, this is the most conservative bill that can pass
with a Biden White House and a Schumer Senate. The Fiscal
Responsibility Act stops the excessive spending, stops the bleeding,
and adds to our workforce with work requirements. It includes the most
important Federal and environmental permitting reforms in 40 years.
Don't take my word for it. This is coming from the Associated General
Contractors of America, the American Petroleum Institute, the Marcellus
Shale Coalition, and the National Association of Manufacturers.
Virtually every small business association, every group committed to
sound, fiscal policy, such as Americans for Tax Reform and Americans
for Prosperity have endorsed this legislation. This bill reins in the
Biden administration's executive order spending which accounted for
over $1 trillion in spending over the last 2 years.
There is also a reduction of the IRS for $20 billion, it protects
Social Security, and all the while we will avoid a catastrophic
default. I urge support of this bill.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Kildee), whose voice and health have been returned.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the ranking member, for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, paying America's bills isn't an option. Defaulting on
our debt would have a consequence for every single American and, in
fact, would have global consequences. It would increase every families'
costs. It would eliminate millions of jobs, and threaten the retirement
security of seniors and families all across this country.
Let me be clear: We shouldn't be in this position. We shouldn't be
close to default. It is a manufactured crisis. The House Republican
majority created this crisis because they didn't have the will to
submit their ideas to the legislative process, rather holding us all
hostage to exact this price, to exact this legislation when we could
have simply gone through the legislative process of making decisions
about the priorities for this country.
They have the majority on the Appropriations Committee, on the Ways
and Means Committee, and on the Budget Committee. They ought not fear
the argument over these issues. We need to make sure that we accept the
fact that we have come to a compromise to protect Medicare and
Medicaid. It protects the American people from catastrophic default. I
urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3746.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. McClintock).
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, this is the first time in my 15 years in
Congress that I have voted to increase the debt limit. I do so today
because this measure places real constraints on future spending, more
than $2 trillion. That makes this bill the most important victory for
fiscal conservatism in more than a decade.
The debt is but a symptom of the central problem--reckless spending.
Once we have spent a dollar, there are only three ways to pay for it:
Taxes, inflation, or debt. It is the spending, stupid.
We have got a long way to go, but until the American people have had
enough and replace the President and the Senate majority, this is a
remarkable step forward. The many progrowth provisions in the bill
provide the most potent antidote to debt--economic expansion.
Mr. Speaker, defeating this bill would create a financial and
political panic that will quickly forfeit the many hard-won reforms
that are in this bill. We cannot let that happen.
Mr. NEAL. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Beyer), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this imperfect bill.
[[Page H2702]]
Mr. Speaker, look, I would have much rather voted for a clean debt
limit increase as we did three times under the previous President. I do
believe it is profoundly wrong that Republicans chose to hold our
economy hostage, using the American people as leverage to demand
concessions, and it was unnecessary.
We are in a divided House. They have all the leverage they need to
negotiate this through the regular appropriations process.
Our values sometimes overlap, but they don't here when they want to
protect the wealthiest tax cheats and we just want everyone to pay
their fair share.
Look, President Biden and his negotiating team worked skillfully and
successfully to prevent a majority of the draconian tax cuts. This bill
could have been so much worse, but it would be a catastrophe if we
didn't pass it.
Mr. Speaker, I will vote ``yes,'' and I continue to urge my
colleagues to permanently abolish the debt ceiling, which could cause a
real disaster someday soon if we don't get rid of it.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Lawler).
Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my support for the
Fiscal Responsibility Act. As I have said from the very beginning, we
must negotiate, we must cut spending, and we cannot default.
The FRA reduces discretionary spending for the first time in decades,
and it is the largest deficit reduction in our Nation's history. It
cuts nondefense and nonveteran spending to below 2022 levels, one of
the primary goals of the Limit, Save, Grow Act.
It saves taxpayers $2.1 trillion over the next 6 years while blocking
$5 trillion in new taxes proposed by the Biden administration. The bill
also caps spending at 1 percent growth over the next 6 years and
through the appropriations process, House Republicans will have the
opportunity to reduce spending even more.
That will help us take on the Biden administration's reckless
spending head on, crack down on record inflation, and get our economy
on the right track. This bill also protects Social Security, Medicare,
and veterans' benefits, despite previous false claims by my Democratic
colleagues that we were going to cut those vital programs.
It enacts critical permitting and NEPA reform, enacts safeguards on
executive spending, and forces Congress to engage in a functional
appropriations process.
The bottom line is this: With a divided government, no party is going
to get 100 percent of what it wants. We all have a responsibility to
govern, and default is not an option.
The Fiscal Responsibility Act puts us on the path to fiscal sanity,
protects our commitment to veterans and seniors, and raises the debt
ceiling so we will not default. This is a bill we should all support,
and I will vote ``aye.''
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, (Mr. Evans).
Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, this bill is far from perfect; however, the
full faith and credit of the United States is at risk, and we cannot
let Republicans drive us to default.
Defaulting on the national debt would disrupt Social Security
benefits for 92,000 households in my congressional district. I will not
stand by and let harm come to our Nation, seniors, and disabled people.
I urge my colleagues not to draw out this debt crisis and instead
return to our focus of lowering the costs for working families.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Guthrie). The gentleman from
Massachusetts has 10 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Missouri has
4 minutes remaining.
{time} 2045
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Schneider), another very capable member of the Ways and
Means Committee.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the bipartisan
budget agreement and President Biden's work to ensure the Nation pays
our bills and avoids a catastrophic, self-inflicted economic crisis.
This legislation protects the many bipartisan achievements realized
in the last Congress, such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act, CHIPS and Science Act, PACT Act, as well as the Inflation
Reduction Act with its historic investments in addressing climate
change.
With this vote, we will protect Social Security, Medicare, and
Medicaid and prevent devastating cuts sought to life-sustaining SNAP
and TANF programs. With this vote, we will keep America moving forward
to meet the challenges ahead of us.
Compromise requires give-and-take, and both sides made difficult
concessions to achieve this agreement. This is the result of bipartisan
dealmaking, and I look forward to holding up the President's side of
this bargain.
I hope this is a learning moment, and we can avoid future political
brinkmanship.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to put the American people over
politics and support this important bill.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Panetta), a very capable member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I support the bipartisan budget agreement
to raise the debt ceiling because if we don't, we will devastate the
global markets and undermine the faith of the world's most important
financial system, the United States of America.
I support a clean raising of the debt ceiling, but elections have
consequences. My colleagues on the other side wanted to use their
leverage for concessions. In a divided government, governing means
compromise, and it gets us this bill, legislation that would: one,
raise the debt ceiling until 2025; two, stop the drastic cuts desired
by the Republicans and protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
Although it limits SNAP for certain ages, it expands those types of
benefits for veterans and our homeless.
Finally, we protect the historic legislation we passed last Congress
to invest in our infrastructure and manufacturing, reduce drug costs,
and care for veterans. Part of this bill even furthers our transition
to clean energy.
I will vote for this bill, but we have a lot more to do if we want to
get serious about reducing our debt and deficit. That only begins when
we stop governing by crisis and start governing by leadership.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).
Mr. PFLUGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my district, the
most important energy district in the country, on behalf of American
energy independence, and on behalf of all Americans who are searching
for a reasonable solution to a looming crisis.
There are approximately, right now, 229 major fossil fuel projects in
the United States currently awaiting permit approval. A recent study
found that $157 billion in energy investment was stuck in the NEPA
pipeline and that simply a 2-year NEPA deadline would spur $67 billion
in energy investment. Killing energy projects by the bureaucratic red
tape nightmare and the slow-walking that we have seen is unacceptable.
No more.
I am extremely proud of the energy reforms, the NEPA reforms, and the
EPA reforms in this bill, the first in over 40 years, which will speed
up over 200 projects to lower costs for consumers and protect our
national security.
No, this bill is not perfect, and arguably, it shouldn't be. A
divided government yields compromise and slows the heavy hand of
government, but saving $2 trillion, lifting families out of poverty,
and defunding IRS agents is worth it. Vote ``yes'' for America's energy
independence.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the
Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett), an alum of the Ways and Means Committee.
Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Speaker, Democrats' leadership has protected our
hard-earned and historic economic recovery. That team secured an
agreement that prevents Republicans from forcing devastating default
and rejects their most extreme cuts in the GOP default on America bill.
President
[[Page H2703]]
Biden's agreement protected Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and
veterans' healthcare.
This was a negotiation with individuals whose top priority was
cutting food assistance and protecting the wealthy. That was their main
priority across the entire negotiation.
Fiscal responsibility? Their only responsibility was to protect their
tax cuts for the ultrawealthy that grew the debt by $7 trillion in the
first place.
The President successfully insisted that if this agreement was going
to include time limits on SNAP, it needed to include meaningful
improvements to SNAP.
Republicans protected the wealthy at the feet of the neediest
Americans.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rogers of Alabama). The time of the
gentlewoman has expired.
Ms. PLASKETT. Democrats understand the needs of the American people
and our most vulnerable Americans, as well as the full faith and credit
of the American people.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that
because of the Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the bottom 20 percent
of earners saw their average Federal tax rate fall to its lowest level
in 40 years. Low- and middle-income families of four saved at least
$2,000 on their tax bill each year.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. David Scott), the ranking member of the Committee on
Agriculture.
Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, this is a most historic
night.
First of all, I thank President Biden. President Biden invited me,
along with the other leaders, ranking member, and chairman of our
Agriculture Committee. It gave me a chance to talk straight to the
President about the serious food shortage that is coming to our
veterans.
Many of you may not know this, but the veterans are living in more
food-insecure households than anybody else--7.4 percent higher than the
general public. When I told President Biden that, he said that we have
to do something about it. That is when he moved, with his energy, to be
able to take not only the veterans but others off of SNAP work
requirements.
God bless this President for his leadership.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Mrvan).
Mr. MRVAN. Mr. Speaker, I ran for Congress to solve problems, and
this legislation averts a crisis. A default would jeopardize millions
of people with unemployment, increase interest rates, and put retirees
at risk and devastate their 401(k)'s.
A default would also jeopardize numerous investments in the American
worker in the 117th Congress, including the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act. That bill not only created jobs but also, with a strong
``buy American'' provision, strengthened our domestic steel and
manufacturing base and also allows for our veterans to be protected and
provides funds dedicated to the health benefits and resources for the
toxic exposures fund.
I appreciate the dedicated work of the administration and my
Democratic colleagues.
For my neighbor Gretchen, who had anxiety about her 401(k), this bill
supports the American worker. It supports American industry, the steel
industry, and it also protects the American Dream. I am voting ``yes.''
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 5
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Missouri has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for
closing.
Mr. Speaker, I think that this has been an elevating conversation
about how we arrived here tonight. Our colleagues on the other side
voted for the infrastructure bill, voted for the CHIPS Act, voted for
the CARES Act, voted for the defense spending increases, and they voted
for a tax cut in 2017 that borrowed $2.3 trillion that was added to the
national debt.
Now, for those who might be paying attention tonight, the national
debt is the cumulative effect of deficits. These were annual deficits
that were run up.
Neither party is responsible for the pandemic. On March 11, 2020, we
were warned what was coming. Twenty million jobs evaporated. Tonight,
in some measure because of the leadership of Joe Biden, every one of
those jobs has been returned and 9\1/2\ million jobs go unanswered.
In this negotiation, which means you don't get everything you want,
there are some quality moments that we take great credit for. We
defended Social Security despite the fact that there were three
Republican Senators who proposed cuts to Social Security. That is the
reality. We defended Medicare. We defended Medicaid. We defended
veterans benefits. We are very proud of the fact that we wrote the
pandemic relief act.
There is a group here tonight--I have been here long enough to know
this--that was against this before they were against it. They were
against it years ago, never mind tonight--this moment of bringing the
Nation to default, what it would do to the American dollar as the
currency of choice for the world, what this would do in treasury
markets for liquidity purposes, what this would do to the hard-earned
401(k) plans of the American family, to take us to this moment, this
showdown that we had.
This argument tonight was never about perfection. All 435 Members of
this House would probably have written a different version of this
bill. In a divided government, that is not reality.
The last point I want to make is this: In the coming days, after this
righteous debate about balancing the budget, our Republican colleagues
are about to offer a massive tax cut. We need to be ready because of
the fiscal rectitude that they have offered on this floor tonight. The
corresponding responsibility of all of us is to point out what they
intend to do with another tax cut--2001, $1.3 trillion, and by the way,
with two wars and 2 million more veterans that we need to support.
The other reality is that back in 2003 was another trillion dollars
of tax cuts. The worst one of all was that tax cut in December 2017,
where they borrowed $2.3 trillion for a tax cut that went to the
wealthiest among us and had very meager economic growth.
{time} 2100
This debate tonight was a good and spirited one because we also, I
think, have found a common purpose in passing this legislation.
Let's engage in this debate going forward. If we want the things that
we say they want, then we are going to have to pay for them. That
means, at some point, revisiting these tax cuts that have been put on
the table in an arbitrary fashion and, as I noted, with borrowed money.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Mr. Speaker, we hear the other side of the aisle over and over talk
about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Let me tell you about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Mr. Speaker. Last
year, we had record revenue into the United States of $4.9 trillion,
which was $900-plus billion more than what the Joint Committee on
Taxation and the CBO predicted would happen upon passage of the Tax
Cuts and Jobs Act.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act delivered for a family of four who makes
less than $60,000 a year. They paid zero in Federal taxes.
Mr. Speaker, let's talk about tax cuts. The other side passed
something called the Inflation Reduction Act, and it was tax cuts for
their wealthy donors. In fact, the CBO just came out with a new score
saying that it cost over $700 billion.
Guess what? Ninety percent of your tax credits go to corporations
with more than $1 billion in revenues, and $125 billion goes to China.
That is what your tax cuts did.
After years of Washington running in the wrong direction, we have an
opportunity to take meaningful steps in the right direction on
addressing America's debt crisis.
The American people deserve nothing less. They see what inflation,
caused by reckless spending of the Democratic Party, has done to their
family budgets, to their retirement security, and to their small
business plan.
[[Page H2704]]
We have the opportunity to end the constant doling out of tax dollars
under the guise of COVID relief.
We have the opportunity to downsize the $80 billion pay raise that
was given to the IRS last year. The IRS does not need a raise. It needs
a reckoning.
We have the opportunity to support those who can work to find work
and climb out of poverty.
We have the opportunity to put some guardrails on the administration,
so if they are going to spend tax dollars by executive fiat, then they
have to find savings somewhere else.
We have the opportunity and the responsibility to address our debt
crisis as we address the debt ceiling.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this bill to prevent a
catastrophic default, which would jack up interest rates, eliminate
700,000 jobs, raise mortgage rates to over 8 percent, cut housing
vouchers, and hurt small businesses and consumers.
All of this, because Republicans, who added $6.7 trillion to the debt
under twice-impeached former President Trump.
Republicans claim they care about debt reduction.
But their leader, former President Trump said, ``I'm the king of
debt. I'm great with debt. Nobody knows debt better than me.'' He said
this to Norah O'Donnell in an interview on CBS.
Very recently, Trump said, ``I say to the Republicans out there--
Congressmen, Senators--if they don't give you massive cuts, you're
going to have to do a default.''
Democrats support this bill because we refuse to allow our country to
default on its debt.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3746,
the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
This bill is not perfect. Some will say that it is not even good. But
I say it is better than the extortion bill pushed through this House
last month by this Republican majority that would have forced Congress
to either default on paying our nation's bills or make devastating cuts
that would hurt the health, safety, and well-being of the American
people.
This bill prevents a default that would trigger an economic
catastrophe, a global market panic, and a job killing recession.
The most egregious cuts that the Republicans originally proposed last
month in their Default on America Act will be avoided.
Cuts that were originally proposed to the Toxic Exposure Fund created
by the bipartisan PACT Act have been reversed as have the reductions in
veterans' health care and benefits.
I have been very concerned about the cuts to rural development
programs, nutrition for women and children, and funding for
economically distressed farmers which have been reduced.
We must pay our debts and debate issues of spending and revenue
through regular order and not under threat of default.
No, this bill is not perfect. And to many it may not be good. But it
is a better way forward than the chaos and consequences of a first ever
default on the full faith and credit of the United States.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, Section 321 of the Fiscal Responsibility
Act of 2023 (FRA) employs the term ``reasonably foreseeable'' in four
instances. The intent of using the term ``reasonably foreseeable'' in
subsection (a) of section 321, which amends section 102 of the National
Environmental Policy Act, is to narrow the scope of NEPA's
requirements. NEPA requires federal agencies to prepare ``a detailed
statement . . . on the environmental impact'' of any proposed federal
project ``significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.'' 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(i). This detailed statement is
colloquially known as an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). At
present, NEPA requires that an EIS must include, inter alia, a detailed
statement on ``the environmental impact of the proposed agency action''
and ``any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should
the proposal be implemented[.]'' 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(i) and (ii).
Ultimately, in amending NEPA to include the concept of reasonable
foreseeability, Congress intends to establish in statute Sierra Club v.
Marsh, 976 F.2d 763 (1st Cir. 1992). In Sierra Club, the court stated
succinctly that ``[n]ot all impacts need be discussed in exhaustive
detail. First, only those effects that are `likely' (or `foreseeable'
or `reasonably foreseeable') need be discussed . . . and, as in other
legal contexts. the terms `likely' and `foreseeable,' as applied to a
type of environmental impact, are properly interpreted as meaning that
the impact is sufficiently likely to occur that a person of ordinary
prudence would take it into account in reaching a decision.'' Sierra
Club at 765 (internal citations omitted). Through use of the term
``reasonably foreseeable'' in section 321 of the FRA, Congress intends
to narrow NEPA's scope by establishing in statute the ordinary prudence
standard with respect to NEPA analysis.
Section 321(a) of the FRA amends 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(i) and (ii)
with the intent to narrow the scope of what must be included in an EIS.
Clause (i) is amended from ``the environmental impact of the proposed
action'' to ``reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the
proposed agency action''. The intent of this amendment is to narrow the
scope from ``any environmental impact'', which can be broadly
construed, to only those ``environmental effects'' that would be a
``reasonably foreseeable'' result ``of the proposed agency action.'' In
executing this amendment to NEPA. Congress seeks to clarify that an
agency need not evaluate all effects of a proposed action, but rather
only those effects that are ``reasonably foreseeable.''
Clause (ii) is amended from ``any adverse environmental effects which
cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented'' to ``any
reasonably foreseeable adverse environmental effects which cannot be
avoided should the proposal be implemented''. The intent of this
amendment is to narrow the scope from ``any adverse environmental
effects'', which can be broadly construed, to only those adverse
environmental effects that are also ``reasonably foreseeable.'' In each
of these instances, it is Congress's intent to enshrine in statute the
ordinary prudence standard with respect to the content of an EIS.
Similarly, section 321(b) of the FRA also employs the term
``reasonably foreseeable'' in establishing in statute levels of review
under NEPA. By qualifying the ``significant effect'' with the term
``reasonably foreseeable'', Congress again intends to employ the
ordinary prudence standard to make clear the circumstances in which an
agency must issue an EIS. Specifically, Congress intends to limit
preparation of an EIS to only those instances where the significant
effect on the quality of the human environment is also ``reasonably
foreseeable'' as opposed to merely possible or any or all potential
significant effects. The term ``reasonably foreseeable'' is again
employed with respect to an ``environmental assessment'' for
consistency and to provide clarity in the distinction between
circumstances in which an EIS versus an environmental assessment is
required.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to speak on H.R. 3746,
the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
It is important to highlight and discuss how we got here and what is
at stake with this critical and momentous measure.
I know I am not alone in the disappointment at what steps have been
taken to hold our nation's economy hostage and put American lives at
risk.
It is shameful that, while we have a bipartisan agreement here today,
we have taken painful compromises to get here.
And although arduous efforts on both sides of the aisle allowed for
us to move forward with this agreement, and some critical protections
for the American people have been preserved--it must be stated that
this agreement is not one that entirely reflects what we in Congress
should be united on--namely, our most basic and fundamental truths that
hold us together as a democracy.
We are nation that upholds the ability for all to prosper, as well as
one that upholds the ability for all Americans to be protected and
cared for in our times of greatest need.
It is important to understand that the foundations of a society do
not extend only to its political and economic system; they must extend
to its social and moral system as well.
Taking all of these in balance there is no other comparable
governmental system that has raised the standard of living of millions
of people, created vast new wealth and resources, or inspired so many
beneficial innovations and technologies.
Governmental structures providing for protections and safety nets for
all Americans is what makes us all successful as a nation united.
Creating and preserving such structure is the critical investment in
our government, our nation, our security, and our development and
growth for current and future generations to benefit from.
Yet, instead of investing in America, many of my Republican
colleagues would rather focus on holding our economy hostage to advance
unpopular and dangerous priorities.
Holding our nation's debt ceiling as collateral to inflict painful
cuts that will impact the lives of millions of Americans and knowing
that breaching the debt limit would provoke unprecedented economic
damage and instability in the U.S. and around the world is a sad state
that we have found ourselves in.
Yes, it is evident that my Republican colleagues will not prioritize
the wellbeing, safety, health, and prosperity of the American people
when looking at what we have had to give up in this bill.
[[Page H2705]]
While much is unknown about the devastating impact this bill will
have, we do know that some immediate changes will inevitably cause harm
to many American families, children and vulnerable individuals.
That is why I offered several amendments during the Rules Committee
that will make additional exemptions and elimination of
disqualifications for several additional special populations in which
we must protect and continue to support when they are in their most
desperate and fragile times of need.
Ensuring that we are not taking critical resources and money for food
away from children and families living in poverty is not only the right
thing to do, but also the economically smart thing to do.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the nation's
most important and effective anti-hunger program.
Any changes in SNAP will have an incredible impact on millions of
Americans and Texans.
As of 2020, there were 18.66 million households relying on SNAP and
7.11 million SNAP households with children.
Texas holds the second highest number of households using the SNAP
program in 2023 at 1,167,720, making up 11.5 percent of Texas
households.
As of April 2023, there were 284,794 SNAP cases and 615,463 eligible
individuals in Harris County, my district's biggest county.
This included 92,214 individuals aged less than 5 and 228,519
individuals between the ages of 5 through 17.
My first amendment for H.R. 3746, listed on the Rules Co1nmittee
roster as Amendment No. 56, would have added a provision to extend
exemption regarding current work requirement exemptions in the Food and
Nutrition Act for a parent or person responsible for dependent child up
to age 24 in SNAP household.
In Texas, 79 percent of SNAP participants are families with children.
That's more than the national rate of 69 percent of SNAP participants
across the country being families with children.
Further, the SNAP participation rate in Texas for working poor people
is 72 percent--which is also more than the national rate of 41 percent
of SNAP participants nationwide being in working families.
We need to understand that parents continue to support children
beyond the age of adolescence impacting financial resources for
families well into a child's early twenties.
Across the country there 5.134 million, and 528,000 in Texas aged 18
through 24 in poverty as of 2021.
Nearly 1 in 3 parents (31 percent) have made a significant financial
sacrifice to help their adult children financially.
Over two-thirds (68 percent) of parents of adult children have made
or are currently making a financial sacrifice to help their kids
financially.
Parents say they sacrificed retirement savings (43 percent),
emergency savings (51 percent), paying down their own debt (49 percent)
or reaching a financial milestone (55 percent).
Over 40 percent of American children rely primarily on their mothers'
earnings for financial support in crosssectional surveys.
In July 2022, half of adults ages 18 to 29 were living with one or
both of their parents.
Significantly higher than the share who were living with their
parents in 2010 (44 percent on average that year) or 2000 (38 percent
on average).
What this means is that we need to understand that support for
families with dependent children under the age of 24 and who are living
in poverty need to be protected and extended the grace of an exemption
in this bill.
My second amendment for H.R. 3746, listed on the Rules Committee
roster as Amendment No. 59, would have extended the former foster care
exemption to all individuals 24 or younger under state custody and
aging out of critical support services.
More than 23,000 children will age out of the US foster care system
every year.
Every year in Texas, more than 1,200 young adults age out of the
foster care system without being adopted.
Less than half of Texas foster care alumni (46.9 percent) were
currently employed at least ten hours per week.
Only half of alumni (51.6 percent) reported having a household income
that was greater than the poverty line.
By 24 years old, 50 percent of former foster kids had been ``couch
surfing'' since leaving care.
One in ten interviewed alumni (11.1 percent) was currently
incarcerated; nearly seven in ten males (68.0 percent) had been
arrested since leaving care, 55.2 percent had been convicted of a
crime, and 62.3 percent had spent at least one night incarcerated.
Over 90 percent of foster youth who move more than four times will
end up in juvenile justice.
Many youth in the juvenile and criminal justice system are not deemed
to be indigent but have also had contact with the foster care system
and have been removed from their homes even if they have not been
formerly adjudicated as a foster child.
Far too often children in state custody are taken from their homes
for significant periods of times during their adolescence and at a time
when they are most vulnerable to recidivating upon their return to
their homes due to gaps and lack of resources to help them get jobs,
education, mental health care, substance abuse and housing.
It is important that we continue to provide necessary resources for
all children and youth aging out of state custody where they have been
removed from their homes during critical times of development and
growth--and often are left to survive on their own and/or cannot return
to their homes upon their release.
We need to do more to support youth aging out of state custody.
Despite no Democratic common-sense amendments being accepted at this
posture, we have no choice but to continue to move forward and still
try to make a better way for our nation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 456, the previous question is ordered on
the bill.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on passage of the bill will be followed by a 5-minute vote
on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 2797.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 314,
noes 117, not voting 4, as follows:
[Roll No. 243]
AYES--314
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Auchincloss
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barr
Bean (FL)
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Burgess
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Cicilline
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Comer
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davidson
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DelBene
Deluzio
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Estes
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia, Mike
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Green, Al (TX)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Manning
Massie
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McClintock
McCollum
McGarvey
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (UT)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nehls
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peltola
Pence
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
[[Page H2706]]
Quigley
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scalise
Scanlon
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Stewart
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tokuda
Tonko
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vasquez
Veasey
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
NOES--117
Alford
Barragan
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burlison
Bush
Cammack
Carter (TX)
Casar
Castro (TX)
Chu
Clarke (NY)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Connolly
Crane
Crockett
DeLauro
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Donalds
Espaillat
Fallon
Finstad
Fischbach
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Griffith
Grijalva
Guest
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hayes
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Jayapal
Kamlager-Dove
Khanna
LaHood
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (PA)
Lesko
Luna
Luttrell
Mace
Mann
Mast
McCormick
McGovern
Meng
Miller (IL)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Nadler
Norman
Ocasio-Cortez
Ogles
Palmer
Perry
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Ramirez
Rose
Rosendale
Roy
Santos
Schakowsky
Scott (VA)
Self
Sessions
Spartz
Stansbury
Steube
Strong
Tiffany
Timmons
Tlaib
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Vargas
Velazquez
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Zinke
NOT VOTING--4
Banks
Boebert
Craig
Ross
{time} 2121
Mr. MENENDEZ changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated against:
Mr. BANKS. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted
``nay'' on rollcall No. 243.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 243.
____________________