Suchergebnisse

This report discusses the budget reconciliation process that is used by congress during the past quarter-century to implement major changes in budget policy.

This report discusses the Development and Consideration related to Budget Reconciliation Legislation.

This report addresses development and consideration related to Budget Reconciliation Legislation.

This report is about development and consideration in budget reconciliation legislation.

President Clinton's veto of the 1995 reconciliation bill, the largest and most ambitious such legislation ever passed by Congress, was the first time a reconciliation bill was ever rejected by a president. It was also the first reconciliation bill in two decades to include a tax reduction rather than a tax increase. The fate of this bill, and its scope and contents, suggest the need to assess the evolution of reconciliation within the congressional budget process. In the early 1980s, Congress altered budget reconciliation procedures, putting in place a powerful new capability for deficit reduction. Reconciliation became the primary means within the budget process of restraining entitlement spending and increasing taxes as part of congressional efforts to reduce the deficit. Gramm‐Rudman‐Hollings magnified certain problems Congress encountered in using reconciliation to control entitlements, producing increased pressure to cut discretionary spending. While the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 included new authority to use reconciliation to restrain entitlements, congressional spending priorities combined with the Peace Dividend to maintain the relative sanctuary entitlement programs have enjoyed. The limits of reconciliation as a deficit reduction tool, both in terms of increasing revenues and curtailing entitlements, are detailed. The inherent procedural advantages accorded to entitlements are contrasted with the treatment of discretionary programs, explaining in part the widening gulf between these two categories of spending. Congress has attempted, without success, to find alternatives to reconciliation. The failure of the seven‐year, deficit‐eliminating reconciliation bill of 1995 may indicate that certain Limits on the use of reconciliation may have been reached.

President Clinton's veto of the 1995 reconciliation bill, the largest and most ambitious such legislation ever passed by Congress, was the first time a reconciliation bill was ever rejected by a president. It was also the first reconciliation bill in two decades to include a tax reduction rather than a tax increase. The fate of this bill, and its scope and contents, suggest the need to assess the evolution of reconciliation within the congressional budget process. In the early 1980s, Congress altered budget reconciliation procedures, putting in place a powerful new capability for deficit reduction. Reconciliation became the primary means within the budget process of restraining entitlement spending and increasing taxes as part of congressional efforts to reduce the deficit. Gramm‐Rudman‐Hollings magnified certain problems Congress encountered in using reconciliation to control entitlements, producing increased pressure to cut discretionary spending. While the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 included new authority to use reconciliation to restrain entitlements, congressional spending priorities combined with the Peace Dividend to maintain the relative sanctuary entitlement programs have enjoyed. The limits of reconciliation as a deficit reduction tool, both in terms of increasing revenues and curtailing entitlements, are detailed. The inherent procedural advantages accorded to entitlements are contrasted with the treatment of discretionary programs, explaining in part the widening gulf between these two categories of spending. Congress has attempted, without success, to find alternatives to reconciliation. The failure of the seven‐year, deficit‐eliminating reconciliation bill of 1995 may indicate that certain Limits on the use of reconciliation may have been reached.

The report discusses the budget reconciliation process that operates as an adjunct to the budget resolution process. The chief purpose of the reconciliation process is to enhance congress's ability to change current law in order to bring revenue, spending, and debt-limit levels in conformity with the policies expresses in the budget resolution.

This report discusses the reconciliation under the congressional budget act of 1974 by which congress implements budget resolution policies affecting mainly permanent spending and revenue programs.

This report discusses the FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95), which was agreed to by the House and Senate on April 28, 2005, included reconciliation instructions for: (1) an omnibus bill to reduce mandatory outlays by about $35 billion over a five-year period, covering FY2006-FY2010; (2) a bill to reduce revenues by $70 billion over the same period; and (3) a bill to increase the limit on the public debt by $781 billion.

This report consists of the budget reconciliation process with timing of legislative action.