Calendar No. 64

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 20

[Report No. 106–27]

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Setting forth the congressional budget for the

through 2009.United States Government for fiscal years 2000

MARCH 19, 1999

Placed on the calendar
III

Calendar No. 64

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 20

[Report No. 106–27]

Setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government

for fiscal years 2000 through 2009.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 19, 1999

Mr. DOMENICI, from the Committee on the Budget, reported the following

original concurrent resolution; which was read twice and placed on the

calendar

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Setting forth the congressional budget for the United States

Government for fiscal years 2000 through 2009.

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring),

3 SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET

4 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000.

5 (a) DECLARATION.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—Congress determines and de7 clares that this resolution is the concurrent resolu-
2

•SCON 20 PCS

1 tion on the budget for fiscal year 2000 including the

2 appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2001

3 through 2009 as authorized by section 301 of the

4 Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

5 (2) FISCAL YEAR 1999 BUDGET RESOLUTION.—

6 S. Res. 312, approved October 21, 1998, (105th

7 Congress) shall be considered to be the concurrent

8 resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999.

9 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for

10 this concurrent resolution is as follows:

Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2000.

TITLE I—LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.

Sec. 102. Social Security.

Sec. 103. Major functional categories.

Sec. 104. Reconciliation of revenue reductions in the Senate.

Sec. 105. Reconciliation of revenue reductions in the House of Representatives.

TITLE II—BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

Sec. 201. Reserve fund for fiscal year 2000 surplus.

Sec. 202. Reserve fund for agriculture.

Sec. 203. Tax reduction reserve fund in the Senate.

Sec. 204. Clarification on the application of section 202 of H. Con. Res. 67.

Sec. 205. Emergency designation point of order.

Sec. 206. Authority to provide committee allocations.

Sec. 207. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for use of OCS receipts.

Sec. 208. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for managed care plans that agree to

provide additional services to the elderly.

Sec. 209. Reserve fund for Medicare and prescription drugs.

Sec. 210. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

TITLE III—SENSE OF THE CONGRESS AND THE SENATE

Sec. 301. Sense of the Senate on marriage penalty.

Sec. 302. Sense of the Senate on improving security for United States diplomatic missions.

Sec. 303. Sense of the Senate on access to medicare home health services.

Sec. 304. Sense of the Senate regarding the deductibility of health insurance

premiums of the self-employed.

Sec. 305. Sense of the Senate that tax reductions should go to working families.

Sec. 306. Sense of the Senate on the National Guard.
3

•SCON 20 PCS

Sec. 307. Sense of the Senate on effects of social security reform on women.

Sec. 308. Sense of the Senate on increased funding for the national institutes

of health.

Sec. 309. Sense of Congress on funding for Kyoto protocol implementation

prior to Senate ratification.

Sec. 310. Sense of the Senate on Federal research and development investment.

Sec. 311. Sense of the Senate on counter-narcotics funding.

Sec. 312. Sense of the Senate regarding tribal colleges.

Sec. 313. Sense of the Senate on the social security surplus.

Sec. 314. Sense of the Senate on the sale of Governor’s Island.

Sec. 315. Sense of the Senate on Pell Grant funding.

1 TITLE I—LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

2 SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

3 The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the

4 fiscal years 2000 through 2009:

5 (1) FEDERAL REVENUES.—For purposes of the en6 forcement of this resolution—

7 (A) The recommended levels of Federal reve8 nues are as follows:

9 Fiscal year 2000: $1,401,979,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2001: $1,435,214,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2002: $1,455,158,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2003: $1,531,015,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2004: $1,584,969,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2005: $1,648,259,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2006: $1,681,438,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2007: $1,735,646,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2008: $1,805,517,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2009: $1,868,515,000,000.
4

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels

2 of Federal revenues should be changed are as fol3 lows:

4 Fiscal year 2000: $0.

5 Fiscal year 2001: $¥7,433,000,000.

6 Fiscal year 2002: $¥53,118,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2003: $¥32,303,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2004: $¥49,180,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2005: $¥62,637,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2006: $¥109,275,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2007: $¥135,754,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2008: $¥150,692,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2009: $¥177,195,000,000.

14 (2) NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY.—For purposes of the

15 enforcement of this resolution, the appropriate levels of

16 total new budget authority are as follows:

17 Fiscal year 2000: $1,426,931,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2001: $1,456,294,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2002: $1,487,477,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2003: $1,560,513,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004: $1,612,278,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2005: $1,665,843,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2006: $1,697,402,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2007: $1,752,567,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2008: $1,813,739,000,000.
5

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2009: $1,873,969,000,000.

2 (3) BUDGET OUTLAYS.—For purposes of the enforce3 ment of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total

4 budget outlays are as follows:

5 Fiscal year 2000: $1,408,292,000,000.

6 Fiscal year 2001: $1,435,214,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2002: $1,455,158,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003: $1,531,015,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2004: $1,582,070,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2005: $1,638,428,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2006: $1,666,608,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2007: $1,715,883,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2008: $1,780,697,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2009: $1,840,699,000,000.

15 (4) DEFICITS OR SURPLUSES.—For purposes of the

16 enforcement of this resolution, the amounts of the deficits

17 or surpluses are as follows:

18 Fiscal year 2000: $¥6,313,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001: $0.

20 Fiscal year 2002: $0.

21 Fiscal year 2003: $0.

22 Fiscal year 2004: $2,899,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2005: $9,831,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2006: $14,830,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2007: $19,763,000,000.
6

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2008: $24,820,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2009: $27,816,000,000.

3 (5) PUBLIC DEBT.—The appropriate levels of the

4 public debt are as follows:

5 Fiscal year 2000: $5,635,900,000,000.

6 Fiscal year 2001: $5,716,100,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2002: $5,801,000,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003: $5,885,000,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2004: $5,962,200,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2005: $6,029,400,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2006: $6,088,100,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2007: $6,138,900,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2008: $6,175,100,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2009: $6,203,500,000,000.

15 (6) DEBT HELD BY THE PUBLIC.—The appropriate

16 levels of the debt held by the public are as follows:

17 Fiscal year 2000: $3,510,000,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2001: $3,377,700,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2002: $3,236,900,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2003: $3,088,200,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004: $2,926,000,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2005: $2,742,900,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2006: $2,544,200,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2007: $2,329,100,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2008: $2,099,500,000,000.
7

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2009: $1,861,100,000,000.

2 SEC. 102. SOCIAL SECURITY.

3 (a) SOCIAL SECURITY REVENUES.—For purposes of

4 Senate enforcement under sections 302, and 311 of the

5 Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the amounts of reve6 nues of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance

7 Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust

8 Fund are as follows:

9 Fiscal year 2000: $468,020,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2001: $487,744,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2002: $506,293,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2003: $527,326,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2004: $549,876,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2005: $576,840,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2006: $601,834,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2007: $628,277,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2008: $654,422,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2009: $681,313,000,000.

19 (b) SOCIAL SECURITY OUTLAYS.—For purposes of

20 Senate enforcement under sections 302, and 311 of the

21 Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the amounts of outlays

22 of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust

23 Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund

24 are as follows:

25 Fiscal year 2000: $327,256,000,000.
8

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2001: $339,789,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2002: $350,127,000,000.

3 Fiscal year 2003: $362,197,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2004: $375,253,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2005: $389,485,000,000.

6 Fiscal year 2006: $404,596,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2007: $420,616,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2008: $438,132,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2009: $459,496,000,000.

10 SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

11 Congress determines and declares that the appro12 priate levels of new budget authority, budget outlays, new

13 direct loan obligations, and new primary loan guarantee

14 commitments for fiscal years 2000 through 2009 for each

15 major functional category are:

16 (1) National Defense (050):

17 Fiscal year 2000:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $288,812,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $274,567,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2001:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $303,616,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $285,949,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2002:
9

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $308,175,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $291,714,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2003:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $318,277,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $303,642,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2004:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $327,166,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $313,460,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2005:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $328,370,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $316,675,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2006:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $329,600,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $315,111,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2007:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $330,870,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $313,687,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2008:
10

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $332,176,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $317,103,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2009:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $333,452,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $318,041,000,000.

8 (2) International Affairs (150):

9 Fiscal year 2000:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $12,511,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $14,850,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2001:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $12,716,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $15,362,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2002:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $11,985,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $14,781,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2003:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $13,590,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $14,380,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2004:
11

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $14,494,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $14,133,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2005:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $14,651,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $13,807,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2006:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $14,834,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $13,513,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2007:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $14,929,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $13,352,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2008:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $14,998,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $13,181,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2009:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $14,962,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $13,054,000,000.

24 (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):

25 Fiscal year 2000:
12

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $17,955,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $18,214,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2001:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $17,946,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $17,907,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2002:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $17,912,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $17,880,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2003:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $17,912,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $17,784,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2004:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $17,912,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $17,772,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2005:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $17,912,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2006:
13

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $17,912,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2007:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $17,912,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2008:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $17,912,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2009:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $17,912,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.

16 (4) Energy (270):

17 Fiscal year 2000:

18 (A) New budget authority, $49,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, ¥$650,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2001:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 ¥$1,435,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, ¥$3,136,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2002:
14

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $¥163,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,138,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2003:

5 (A) New budget authority, ¥$84,000,000.

6 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,243,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2004:

8 (A) New budget authority,

9 ¥$319,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,381,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2005:

12 (A) New budget authority,

13 ¥$447,000,000.

14 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,452,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2006:

16 (A) New budget authority,

17 ¥$452,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,453,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2007:

20 (A) New budget authority,

21 ¥$506,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,431,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2008:

24 (A) New budget authority,

25 ¥$208,000,000.
15

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,137,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2009:

3 (A) New budget authority, ¥$76,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,067,000,000.

5 (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):

6 Fiscal year 2000:

7 (A) New budget authority,

8 $21,520,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, $22,244,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2001:

11 (A) New budget authority,

12 $21,183,000,000.

13 (B) Outlays, $21,729,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2002:

15 (A) New budget authority,

16 $20,747,000,000.

17 (B) Outlays, $21,023,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2003:

19 (A) New budget authority,

20 $22,479,000,000.

21 (B) Outlays, $22,579,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2004:

23 (A) New budget authority,

24 $22,492,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $22,503,000,000.
16

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2005:

2 (A) New budget authority,

3 $22,536,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, $22,429,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2006:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $22,566,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $22,466,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2007:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $22,667,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $22,425,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2008:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $22,658,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $22,361,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2009:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $23,041,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $22,738,000,000.

21 (6) Agriculture (350):

22 Fiscal year 2000:

23 (A) New budget authority,

24 $14,831,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $13,660,000,000.
17

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2001:

2 (A) New budget authority,

3 $13,519,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, $11,279,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2002:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $11,288,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $9,536,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2003:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $11,955,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $10,252,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2004:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $12,072,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $10,526,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2005:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $10,553,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $9,882,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2006:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $10,609,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $9,083,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2007:
18

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $10,711,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $9,145,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2008:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $10,763,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $9,162,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2009:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $10,853,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $9,223,000,000.

12 (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):

13 Fiscal year 2000:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $9,864,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $4,470,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2001:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $10,620,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $5,754,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2002:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $14,450,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $10,188,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2003:
19

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $14,529,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $10,875,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2004:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $13,859,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $10,439,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2005:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $12,660,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $9,437,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2006:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $12,635,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $9,130,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2007:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $12,666,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $8,879,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2008:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $12,642,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $8,450,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2009:
20

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $13,415,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $8,824,000,000.

4 (8) Transportation (400):

5 Fiscal year 2000:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $51,325,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $45,333,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2001:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $51,128,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $47,711,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $51,546,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $47,765,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2003:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $52,477,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $46,720,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $52,580,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $46,207,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2005:
21

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $52,609,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $46,022,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2006:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $52,640,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $45,990,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2007:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $52,673,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $45,990,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2008:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $52,707,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $46,007,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2009:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $52,742,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $46,033,000,000.

20 (9) Community and Regional Development (450):

21 Fiscal year 2000:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $5,343,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $10,273,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001:
22

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $2,704,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $7,517,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2002:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $1,889,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $4,667,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $2,042,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $2,964,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2004:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $2,037,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $2,120,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2005:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $2,030,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $1,234,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2006:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $2,027,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $931,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2007:
23

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $2,021,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $795,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2008:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $2,019,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $724,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2009:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $2,013,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $688,000,000.

12 (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social

13 Services (500):

14 Fiscal year 2000:

15 (A) New budget authority,

16 $67,373,000,000.

17 (B) Outlays, $63,994,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2001:

19 (A) New budget authority,

20 $66,549,000,000.

21 (B) Outlays, $65,355,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2002:

23 (A) New budget authority,

24 $67,295,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $66,037,000,000.
24

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Fiscal year 2003:

2 (A) New budget authority,

3 $73,334,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, $68,531,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2004:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $76,648,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $72,454,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2005:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $77,464,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $75,891,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2006:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $78,229,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $77,189,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2007:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $79,133,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $78,119,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2008:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $80,144,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $79,109,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2009:
25

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $80,051,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $79,059,000,000.

4 (11) Health (550):

5 Fiscal year 2000:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $156,181,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $152,986,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2001:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $164,089,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $162,357,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $173,330,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $173,767,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2003:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $184,679,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $185,330,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $197,893,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $198,499,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2005:
26

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $212,821,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $212,637,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2006:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $228,379,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $228,323,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2007:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $246,348,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $245,472,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2008:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $265,160,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $264,420,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2009:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $285,541,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $284,941,000,000.

20 (12) Medicare (570):

21 Fiscal year 2000:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $208,652,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $208,698,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001:
27

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $222,104,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $222,252,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2002:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $230,593,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $230,222,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $250,743,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $250,871,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2004:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $268,558,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $268,738,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2005:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $295,574,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $295,188,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2006:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $306,772,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $306,929,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2007:
28

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $337,566,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $337,761,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2008:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $365,642,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $365,225,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2009:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $394,078,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $394,249,000,000.

12 (13) Income Security (600):

13 Fiscal year 2000:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $244,390,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $248,088,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2001:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $250,873,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $257,033,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2002:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $263,620,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $266,577,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2003:
29

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $276,386,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $276,176,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2004:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $285,576,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $285,388,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2005:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $297,942,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $298,128,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2006:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $304,155,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $304,593,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2007:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $310,047,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $310,948,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2008:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $323,315,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $324,766,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2009:
30

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $333,562,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $335,104,000,000.

4 (14) Social Security (650):

5 Fiscal year 2000:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $14,239,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $14,348,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2001:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $13,768,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $13,750,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $15,573,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $15,555,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2003:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $16,299,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $16,281,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $17,087,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $17,069,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2005:
31

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $17,961,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $17,943,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2006:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $18,895,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $18,877,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2007:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $19,907,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $19,889,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2008:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $21,033,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $21,015,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2009:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $22,233,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $22,215,000,000.

20 (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):

21 Fiscal year 2000:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $44,724,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $45,064,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001:
32

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $44,255,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $44,980,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2002:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $44,728,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $45,117,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $45,536,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $46,024,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2004:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $45,862,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $46,327,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2005:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $48,341,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $48,844,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2006:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $46,827,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $47,373,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2007:
33

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $47,377,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $45,803,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2008:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $47,959,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $48,505,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2009:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $48,578,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $49,150,000,000.

12 (16) Administration of Justice (750):

13 Fiscal year 2000:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $23,434,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $25,349,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2001:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $24,656,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $25,117,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2002:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $24,657,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $24,932,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2003:
34

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $24,561,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $24,425,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2004:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $24,467,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $24,356,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2005:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $24,355,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $24,242,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2006:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $24,242,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $24,121,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2007:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $24,114,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $23,996,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2008:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $23,989,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $23,885,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2009:
35

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $23,833,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $23,720,000,000.

4 (17) General Government (800):

5 Fiscal year 2000:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $12,339,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $13,476,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2001:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 $11,916,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $12,605,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 $12,080,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $12,282,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2003:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 $12,083,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $12,150,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $12,099,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $12,186,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2005:
36

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $12,112,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $11,906,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2006:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $12,134,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $11,839,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2007:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $12,150,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $11,873,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2008:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $12,169,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $12,064,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2009:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $12,178,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $11,931,000,000.

20 (18) Net Interest (900):

21 Fiscal year 2000:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 $275,682,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $275,682,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001:
37

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $271,443,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $271,443,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2002:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $267,855,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $267,855,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $265,573,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $265,573,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2004:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $263,835,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $263,835,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2005:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $261,411,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $261,411,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2006:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $259,195,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $259,195,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2007:
38

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $257,618,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $257,618,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2008:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $255,177,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $255,177,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2009:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $253,001,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $253,001,000,000.

12 (19) Allowances (920):

13 Fiscal year 2000:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 ¥$8,033,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, ¥$8,094,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2001:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 ¥$8,480,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, ¥$12,874,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2002:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 ¥$6,437,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, ¥$19,976,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2003:
39

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 ¥$4,394,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, ¥$4,835,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2004:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 ¥$4,481,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,002,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2005:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 ¥$4,515,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,067,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2006:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 ¥$4,619,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,192,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2007:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 ¥$5,210,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,780,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2008:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 ¥$5,279,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,851,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2009:
40

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 ¥$5,316,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,889,000,000.

4 (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):

5 Fiscal year 2000:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 ¥$34,260,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, ¥$34,260,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2001:

10 (A) New budget authority,

11 ¥$36,876,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, ¥$36,876,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002:

14 (A) New budget authority,

15 ¥$43,626,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, ¥$43,626,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2003:

18 (A) New budget authority,

19 ¥$37,464,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, ¥$37,464,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 2004:

22 (A) New budget authority,

23 ¥$37,559,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, ¥$37,559,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2005:
41

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 ¥$38,497,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, ¥$38,497,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2006:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 ¥$39,178,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, ¥$39,178,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2007:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 ¥$40,426,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, ¥$40,426,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2008:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 ¥$41,237,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, ¥$41,237,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2009:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 ¥$42,084,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, ¥$42,084,000,000.

20 SEC. 104. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN

21 THE SENATE.

22 Not later than June 18, 1999, the Senate Committee

23 on Finance shall report to the Senate a reconciliation bill

24 proposing changes in laws within its jurisdiction

25 necessary—
42

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (1) to reduce revenues by not more than $0 in

2 fiscal year 2000, $142,034,000,000 for the period of

3 fiscal years 2000 through 2004, and

4 $777,587,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2000

5 through 2009; and

6 (2) to decrease the statutory limit on the public

7 debt to not more than $5,865,000,000,000 for fiscal

8 year 2000.

9 SEC. 105. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN

10 THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

11 Not later than June 11, 1999, the Committee on

12 Ways and Means shall report to the House of Representa13 tives a reconciliation bill proposing changes in laws within

14 its jurisdiction necessary—

15 (1) to reduce revenues by not more than $0 in

16 fiscal year 2000, $142,034,000,000 for the period of

17 fiscal years 2000 through 2004, and

18 $777,587,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2000

19 through 2009; and

20 (2) to decrease the statutory limit on the public

21 debt to not more than $5,865,000,000,000 for fiscal

22 year 2000.
43

•SCON 20 PCS

1 TITLE II—BUDGETARY

2 RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

3 SEC. 201. RESERVE FUND FOR A FISCAL YEAR 2000 SUR4 PLUS.

5 (a) CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE UPDATED

6 BUDGET FORECAST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000.—Pursuant

7 to section 202(e)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of

8 1974, the Congressional Budget Office shall update its

9 economic and budget forecast for fiscal year 2000 by July

10 15, 1999.

11 (b) REPORTING A SURPLUS.—If the report provided

12 pursuant to subsection (a) estimates an on-budget surplus

13 for fiscal year 2000, the Chairman of the Committee on

14 the Budget shall make the adjustments as provided in sub15 section (c).

16 (c) ADJUSTMENTS.—The Chairman of the Com17 mittee on the Budget shall take the amount of the on18 budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 estimated in the report

19 submitted pursuant to subsection (a) and—

20 (1) reduce the on-budget revenue aggregate by

21 that amount for fiscal year 2000;

22 (2) provide for or increase the on-budget sur23 plus levels used for determining compliance with the

24 pay-as-you-go requirements of section 202 of H.
44

•SCON 20 PCS

1 Con. Res. 67 (104th Congress) by that amount for

2 fiscal year 2000; and

3 (3) adjust the instruction in sections 104(1)

4 and 105(1) of this resolution to—

5 (A) reduce revenues by that amount for

6 fiscal year 2000; and

7 (B) increase the reduction in revenues for

8 the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004

9 and for the period of fiscal years 2000 through

10 2009 by that amount.

11 (d) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—Revised aggre12 gates and other levels under subsection (c) shall be consid13 ered for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of

14 1974 as aggregates and other levels contained in this reso15 lution.

16 SEC. 202. RESERVE FUND FOR AGRICULTURE.

17 (a) ADJUSTMENT.—If legislation is reported by the

18 Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry

19 that provides risk management and income assistance for

20 agriculture producers, the Chairman of the Senate Com21 mittee on the Budget may increase the allocation of budg22 et authority and outlays to that Committee by an amount

23 that does not exceed—

24 (1) $500,000,000 in budget authority and in

25 outlays for fiscal year 2000; and
45

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (2) $6,000,000,000 in budget authority and

2 $5,165,000,000 in outlays for the period of fiscal

3 years 2000 through 2004; and

4 (3) $6,000,000,000 in budget authority and in

5 outlays for the period of fiscal years 2000 through

6 2009.

7 (b) LIMITATION.—The Chairman shall not make the

8 adjustments authorized in this section if legislation de9 scribed in subsection (a) would cause an on-budget deficit

10 when taken with all other legislation enacted for—

11 (1) fiscal year 2000;

12 (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through

13 2004; or

14 (3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through

15 2009.

16 (c) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—Revised alloca17 tions under subsection (a) shall be considered for the pur18 poses of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as alloca19 tions contained in this resolution.

20 SEC. 203. TAX REDUCTION RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE.

21 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, the Chairman of

22 the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may reduce

23 the spending and revenue aggregates and may revise com24 mittee allocations for legislation that reduces revenues if

25 such legislation will not increase the deficit for—
46

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (1) fiscal year 2000;

2 (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through

3 2004; or

4 (3) the period of fiscal years 2000 through

5 2009.

6 (b) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—Revised alloca7 tions and aggregates under subsection (a) shall be consid8 ered for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of

9 1974 as allocations and aggregates contained in this reso10 lution.

11 SEC. 204. CLARIFICATION ON THE APPLICATION OF SEC12 TION 202 OF H. CON. RES. 67.

13 Section 202(b) of H. Con. Res. 67 (104th Congress)

14 is amended—

15 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘the deficit’’

16 and inserting ‘‘the on-budget deficit or cause an on17 budget deficit’’; and

18 (2) in paragraph (6), by—

19 (A) striking ‘‘increases the deficit’’ and in20 serting ‘‘increases the on-budget deficit or

21 causes an on-budget deficit’’; and

22 (B) striking ‘‘increase the deficit’’ and in23 serting ‘‘increase the on-budget deficit or cause

24 an on-budget deficit’’.
47

•SCON 20 PCS

1 SEC. 205. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION POINT OF ORDER.

2 (a) POINT OF ORDER.—When the Senate is consid3 ering a bill, resolution, amendment, motion, or conference

4 report, a point of order may be made by a Senator against

5 an emergency designation in that measure and if the Pre6 siding Officer sustains that point of order, that provision

7 making such a designation shall be stricken from the

8 measure and may not be offered as an amendment from

9 the floor.

10 (b) DEFINITION OF AN EMERGENCY REQUIRE11 MENT.—A provision shall be considered an emergency des12 ignation if it designates any item an emergency require13 ment pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) or 252(e) of the

14 Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of

15 1985.

16 (c) WAIVER AND APPEAL.—This section may be

17 waived or suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative

18 vote of three-fifths of the members, duly chosen and

19 sworn. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members

20 of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required

21 in the Senate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the

22 Chair on a point of order raised under this section.

23 (d) FORM OF THE POINT OF ORDER.—A point of

24 order under this section may be raised by a Senator as

25 provided in section 313(e) of the Congressional Budget

26 Act of 1974.
48

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (e) CONFERENCE REPORTS.—If a point of order is

2 sustained under this section against a conference report

3 the report shall be disposed of as provided in section

4 313(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, except

5 that there shall be no limit on debate.

6 SEC. 206. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE COMMITTEE ALLOCA7 TIONS.

8 In the event there is no joint explanatory statement

9 accompanying a conference report on the concurrent reso10 lution on the budget for fiscal year 2000, and in conform11 ance with section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act

12 of 1974, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget

13 of the House of Representatives and of the Senate shall

14 submit for printing in the Congressional Record alloca15 tions consistent with the concurrent resolution on the

16 budget for fiscal year 2000, as passed by the House of

17 Representatives and of the Senate.

18 SEC. 207. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR USE OF

19 OCS RECEIPTS.

20 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, spending aggre21 gates and other appropriate budgetary levels and limits

22 may be adjusted and allocations may be revised for legisla23 tion that would use proceeds from Outer Continental Shelf

24 leasing and production to fund historic preservation, recre25 ation and land, water, fish, and wildlife conservation ef-
49

•SCON 20 PCS

1 forts and to support coastal needs and activities, provided

2 that, to the extent that this concurrent resolution on the

3 budget does not include the costs of that legislation, the

4 enactment of that legislation will not increase (by virtue

5 of either contemporaneous or previously passed deficit re6 duction) the deficit in this resolution for—

7 (1) fiscal year 2000;

8 (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through

9 2004; or

10 (3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through

11 2009.

12 (b) REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—

13 (1) ADJUSTMENTS FOR LEGISLATION.—Upon

14 the consideration of legislation pursuant to sub15 section (a), the Chairman of the Committee on the

16 Budget of the Senate may file with the Senate ap17 propriately revised allocations under section 302(a)

18 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised

19 functional levels and aggregates to carry out this

20 section. These revised allocations, functional levels,

21 and aggregates shall be considered for the purposes

22 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as alloca23 tions, functional levels, and aggregates contained in

24 this resolution.
50

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (2) ADJUSTMENTS FOR AMENDMENTS.—If the

2 Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the

3 Senate submits an adjustment under this section for

4 legislation in furtherance of the purpose described in

5 subsection (a), upon the offering of an amendment

6 to that legislation that would necessitate such sub7 mission, the Chairman shall submit to the Senate

8 appropriately revised allocations under section

9 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and

10 revised functional levels and aggregates to carry out

11 this section. These revised allocations, functional lev12 els, and aggregates shall be considered for the pur13 poses of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as

14 allocations, functional levels, and aggregates con15 tained in this resolution.

16 (c) REPORTING REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—The ap17 propriate committees shall report appropriately revised al18 locations pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congressional

19 Budget Act of 1974 to carry out this section.

20 SEC. 208. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR MAN21 AGED CARE PLANS THAT AGREE TO PROVIDE

22 ADDITIONAL SERVICES TO THE ELDERLY.

23 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, spending aggre24 gates and other appropriate budgetary levels and limits

25 may be adjusted and allocations may be revised for legisla-
51

•SCON 20 PCS

1 tion to provide: additional funds for medicare managed

2 care plans agreeing to serve elderly patients for at least

3 2 years and whose reimbursement was reduced because

4 of the risk adjustment regulations, provided that to the

5 extent that this concurrent resolution on the budget does

6 not include the costs of that legislation, the enactment of

7 that legislation will not increase (by virtue of either con8 temporaneous or previously passed deficit reduction) the

9 deficit in this resolution for—

10 (1) fiscal year 2000;

11 (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through

12 2004; or

13 (3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through

14 2009.

15 (b) REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—

16 (1) ADJUSTMENTS FOR LEGISLATION.—Upon

17 the consideration of legislation pursuant to sub18 section (a), the Chairman of the Committee on the

19 Budget of the Senate may file with the Senate ap20 propriately revised allocations under section 302(a)

21 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised

22 functional level and spending aggregates to carry out

23 this section. These revised allocations, functional lev24 els, and spending aggregates shall be considered for

25 the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of
52

•SCON 20 PCS

1 1974 as allocations, functional levels, and aggregates

2 contained in this resolution.

3 (2) ADJUSTMENTS FOR AMENDMENTS.—If the

4 Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the

5 Senate submits an adjustment under this section for

6 legislation in furtherance of the purpose described in

7 subsection (a), upon the offering of an amendment

8 to that legislation that would necessitate such sub9 mission, the Chairman shall submit to the Senate

10 appropriately revised allocations under section

11 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and

12 revised functional levels and spending aggregates to

13 carry out this section. These revised allocations,

14 functional levels, and aggregates shall be considered

15 for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of

16 1974 as allocations, functional levels, and aggregates

17 contained in this resolution.

18 (d) REPORTING REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—The ap19 propriate committees shall report appropriately revised al20 locations pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congressional

21 Budget Act of 1974 to carry out this section.

22 SEC. 209. RESERVE FUND FOR MEDICARE AND PRESCRIP23 TION DRUGS.

24 (a) ADJUSTMENT.—If legislation is reported by the

25 Senate Committee on Finance that significantly extends
53

•SCON 20 PCS

1 the solvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust

2 Fund without the use of transfers of new subsidies from

3 the general fund, the Chairman of the Committee on the

4 Budget may change committee allocations and spending

5 aggregates if such legislation will not cause an on-budget

6 deficit for—

7 (1) fiscal year 2000;

8 (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through

9 2004; or

10 (3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through

11 2009.

12 (b) PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT.—The adjust13 ments made pursuant to subsection (a) may be made to

14 address the cost of the prescription drug benefit.

15 (c) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—The revision of al16 locations and aggregates made under this section shall be

17 considered for the purposes of the Congressional Budget

18 Act of 1974 as allocations and aggregates contained in

19 this resolution.

20 SEC. 210. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

21 Congress adopts the provisions of this title—

22 (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of

23 the Senate and the House of Representatives, re24 spectively, and as such they shall be considered as

25 part of the rules of each House, or of that House
54

•SCON 20 PCS

1 to which they specifically apply, and such rules shall

2 supersede other rules only to the extent that they

3 are inconsistent therewith; and

4 (2) with full recognition of the constitutional

5 right of either House to change those rules (so far

6 as they relate to that House) at any time, in the

7 same manner, and to the same extent as in the case

8 of any other rule of that House.

9 TITLE III—SENSE OF THE

10 CONGRESS AND THE SENATE

11 SEC. 301. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON MARRIAGE PENALTY.

12 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—

13 (1) differences in income tax liabilities caused

14 by marital status are embodied in a number of tax

15 code provisions including separate rate schedules

16 and standard deductions for married couples and

17 single individuals;

18 (2) according to the Congressional Budget Of19 fice (CBO), 42 percent of married couples incurred

20 ‘‘marriage penalties’’ under the tax code in 1996,

21 averaging nearly $1,400;

22 (3) measured as a percent of income, marriage

23 penalties are largest for low-income families, as cou24 ples with incomes below $20,000 who incurred a
55

•SCON 20 PCS

1 marriage penalty in 1996 were forced to pay nearly

2 8 percent more of their income in taxes than if they

3 had been able to file individual returns;

4 (4) empirical evidence indicates that the mar5 riage penalty may affect work patterns, particularly

6 for a couple’s second earner, because higher rates

7 reduce after-tax wages and may cause second earn8 ers to work fewer hours or not at all, which, in turn,

9 reduces economic efficiency; and

10 (5) the tax code should not improperly influence

11 the choice of couples with regard to marital status

12 by having the combined Federal income tax liability

13 of a couple be higher if they are married than if they

14 are single.

15 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

16 Senate that the levels in this resolution and legislation en17 acted pursuant to this resolution assume that significantly

18 reducing or eliminating the marriage penalty should be a

19 component of any tax cut package reported by the Finance

20 Committee and passed by Congress during the fiscal year

21 2000 budget reconciliation process.

22 SEC. 302. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPROVING SECURITY

23 FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC MISSIONS.

24 It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this

25 resolution assume that there is an urgent and ongoing re-
56

•SCON 20 PCS

1 quirement to improve security for United States diplo2 matic missions and personnel abroad, which should be met

3 without compromising existing budgets for International

4 Affairs (Function 150).

5 SEC. 303. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ACCESS TO MEDICARE

6 HOME HEALTH SERVICES.

7 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

8 (1) medicare home health services provide a vi9 tally important option enabling homebound individ10 uals to stay in their own homes and communities

11 rather than go into institutionalized care; and

12 (2) implementation of the Interim Payment

13 System and other changes to the medicare home

14 health benefit have exacerbated inequalities in pay15 ments for home health services between regions, lim16 iting access to these services in many areas and pe17 nalizing efficient, low-cost providers.

18 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

19 Senate the levels in this resolution assume that the Senate

20 should act to ensure fair and equitable access to high qual21 ity home health services.

22 SEC. 304. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE DEDUCT23 IBILITY OF HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS

24 OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED.

25 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
57

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (1) under current law, the self-employed do not

2 enjoy parity with their corporate competitors with

3 respect to the tax deductibility of their health insur4 ance premiums;

5 (2) this April, the self-employed will only be

6 able to deduct only 45 percent of their health insur7 ance premiums for the tax year 1998;

8 (3) the following April, the self-employed will be

9 able to take a 60-percent deduction for their health

10 insurance premiums for the tax year 1999;

11 (4) it will not be until 2004 that the self-em12 ployed will be able to take a full 100-percent deduc13 tion for their health insurance premiums for the tax

14 year 2003;

15 (5) the self-employed’s health insurance pre16 miums are generally over 30 percent higher than the

17 health insurance premiums of group health plans;

18 (6) the increased cost coupled with the less fa19 vorable tax treatment makes health insurance less

20 affordable for the self-employed;

21 (7) these disadvantages are reflected in the

22 higher rate of uninsured among the self-employed

23 which stands at 24.1 percent compared with 18.2

24 percent for all wage and salaried workers, for self25 employed living at or below the poverty level the rate
58

•SCON 20 PCS

1 of uninsured is 53.1 percent, for self-employed living

2 at 100 through 199 percent of poverty the rate of

3 uninsured is 47 percent, and for self-employed living

4 at 200 percent of poverty and above the rate of un5 insured is 17.8 percent;

6 (8) for some self-employed, such as farmers

7 who face significant occupational safety hazards, this

8 lack of health insurance affordability has even great9 er ramifications; and

10 (9) this lack of full deductibility is also ad11 versely affecting the growing number of women who

12 own small businesses.

13 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

14 Senate that the levels in this resolution assume that tax

15 relief legislation should include parity between the self-em16 ployed and corporations with respect to the tax treatment

17 of health insurance premiums.

18 SEC. 305. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT TAX REDUCTIONS

19 SHOULD GO TO WORKING FAMILIES.

20 It is the sense of the Senate that this concurrent reso21 lution on the budget assumes any reductions in taxes

22 should be structured to benefit working families by pro23 viding family tax relief and incentives to stimulate savings,

24 investment, job creation, and economic growth.
59

•SCON 20 PCS

1 SEC. 306. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE NATIONAL

2 GUARD.

3 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

4 (1) the Army National Guard relies heavily

5 upon thousands of full-time employees, Military

6 Technicians and Active Guard/Reserves, to ensure

7 unit readiness throughout the Army National Guard;

8 (2) these employees perform vital day-to-day

9 functions, ranging from equipment maintenance to

10 leadership and staff roles, that allow the drill week11 ends and annual active duty training of the tradi12 tional Guardsmen to be dedicated to preparation for

13 the National Guard’s warfighting and peacetime

14 missions;

15 (3) when the ability to provide sufficient Active

16 Guard/Reserves and Technicians end strength is re17 duced, unit readiness, as well as quality of life for

18 soldiers and families is degraded;

19 (4) the Army National Guard, with agreement

20 from the Department of Defense, requires a min21 imum essential requirement of 23,500 Active Guard/

22 Reserves and 25,500 Technicians; and

23 (5) the fiscal year 2000 budget request for the

24 Army National Guard provides resources sufficient

25 for approximately 21,807 Active Guard/Reserves and
60

•SCON 20 PCS

1 22,500 Technicians, end strength shortfalls of 3,000

2 and 1,693, respectively.

3 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

4 Senate that the functional totals in the budget resolution

5 assume that the Department of Defense will give priority

6 to providing adequate resources to sufficiently fund the

7 Active Guard/Reserves and Military Technicians at min8 imum required levels.

9 SEC. 307. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON EFFECTS OF SOCIAL

10 SECURITY REFORM ON WOMEN.

11 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

12 (1) the Social Security benefit structure is of

13 particular importance to low-earning wives and wid14 ows, with 63 percent of women beneficiaries aged 62

15 or older receiving wife’s or widow’s benefits;

16 (2) three-quarters of unmarried and widowed

17 elderly women rely on Social Security for more than

18 half of their income;

19 (3) without Social Security benefits, the elderly

20 poverty rate among women would have been 52.2

21 percent, and among widows would have been 60.6

22 percent;

23 (4) women tend to live longer and tend to have

24 lower lifetime earnings than men do;
61

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (5) women spend an average of 11.5 years out

2 of their careers to care for their families, and are

3 more likely to work part-time than full-time; and

4 (6) during these years in the workforce, women

5 earn an average of 70 cents for every dollar men

6 earn.

7 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

8 Senate that the levels in this resolution assume that—

9 (1) women face unique obstacles in ensuring re10 tirement security and survivor and disability sta11 bility;

12 (2) Social Security plays an essential role in

13 guaranteeing inflation-protected financial stability

14 for women throughout their entire old age; and

15 (3) the Congress and the President should take

16 these factors into account when considering pro17 posals to reform the Social Security system.

18 SEC. 308. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INCREASED FUNDING

19 FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH.

20 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

21 (1) the National Institutes of Health is the Na22 tion’s foremost research center;

23 (2) the Nation’s commitment to and investment

24 in biomedical research has resulted in better health

25 and an improved quality of life for all Americans;
62

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (3) continued biomedical research funding must

2 be ensured so that medical doctors and scientists

3 have the security to commit to conducting long-term

4 research studies;

5 (4) funding for the National Institutes of

6 Health should continue to increase in order to pre7 vent the cessation of biomedical research studies and

8 the loss of medical doctors and research scientists to

9 private research organizations; and

10 (5) the National Institutes of Health conducts

11 research protocols without proprietary interests,

12 thereby ensuring that the best health care is re13 searched and made available to the Nation.

14 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

15 Senate that the levels in this resolution and legislation en16 acted pursuant to this resolution assume that there shall

17 be a continuation of the pattern of budgetary increases

18 for biomedical research.

19 SEC. 309. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON FUNDING FOR KYOTO

20 PROTOCOL IMPLEMENTATION PRIOR TO SEN21 ATE RATIFICATION.

22 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following:

23 (1) The agreement signed by the Administra24 tion on November 12, 1998, regarding legally bind25 ing commitments on greenhouse gas reductions is in-
63

•SCON 20 PCS

1 consistent with the provisions of S. Res. 98, the

2 Byrd-Hagel Resolution, which passed the Senate

3 unanimously.

4 (2) The Administration has agreed to allowing

5 at least 2 additional years for negotiations on the

6 Buenos Aires Action Plan to determine the provi7 sions of several vital aspects of the Treaty for the

8 United States, including emissions trading schemes,

9 carbon sinks, a clean development mechanism, and

10 developing Nation participation.

11 (3) The Administration has not submitted the

12 Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification and has

13 indicated it has no intention to do so in the foresee14 able future.

15 (4) The Administration has pledged to Con16 gress that it would not implement any portion of the

17 Kyoto Protocol prior to its ratification in the Senate.

18 (5) Congress agrees that Federal expenditures

19 are required and appropriate for activities which

20 both improve the environment and reduce carbon di21 oxide emissions. Those activities include programs to

22 promote energy efficient technologies, encourage

23 technology development that reduces or sequesters

24 greenhouse gases, encourage the development and

25 use of alternative and renewable fuel technologies,
64

•SCON 20 PCS

1 and other programs justifiable independent of the

2 goals of the Kyoto Protocol.

3 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con4 gress that the levels in this resolution assume that funds

5 should not be provided to put into effect the Kyoto Pro6 tocol prior to its Senate ratification in compliance with

7 the requirements of the Byrd-Hagel Resolution and con8 sistent with previous Administration assurances to Con9 gress.

10 SEC. 310. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FEDERAL RESEARCH

11 AND DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT.

12 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds the following:

13 (1) A dozen internationally, prestigious eco14 nomic studies have shown that technological

15 progress has historically been the single most impor16 tant factor in economic growth, having more than

17 twice the impact of labor or capital.

18 (2) The link between economic growth and

19 technology is evident: our dominant high technology

20 industries are currently responsible for 80 percent of

the value of today’s stock market, 1 21 ⁄3 of our eco22 nomic output, and half of our economic growth. Fur23 thermore, the link between Federal funding of re24 search and development (R&D) and market products

25 is conclusive: 70 percent of all patent applications
65

•SCON 20 PCS

1 cite nonprofit or federally-funded research as a core

2 component to the innovation being patented.

3 (3) The revolutionary high technology applica4 tions of today were spawned from scientific advances

5 that occurred in the 1960’s, when the government

6 intensively funded R&D. In the 3 decades since then,

7 our investment in R&D as a fraction of Gross Do8 mestic Product (GDP) has dropped to half its

9 former value. As a fraction of the Federal budget,

10 the investment in civilian R&D has dropped to only

1 11 ⁄3 its value in 1965.

12 (4) Compared to other foreign nation’s invest13 ment in science and technology, American competi14 tiveness is slipping: an Organization for Economic

15 Co-opertion and Development report notes that 14

16 countries now invest more in basic and fundamental

17 research as a fraction of GDP than the United

18 States.

19 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

20 Senate that the levels in this resolution assume that the

21 Federal investment in R&D should be preserved and in22 creased in order to ensure long-term United States eco23 nomic strength. Funding for Federal agencies performing

24 basic scientific, medical, and precompetitive engineering

25 research pursuant to the Balanced Budget Agreement Act
66

•SCON 20 PCS

1 of 1997 should be a priority for the Senate Budget and

2 Appropriations Committees this year, within the Budget

3 as established by this Committee, in order to achieve a

4 goal of doubling the Federal investment in R&D over an

5 11 year period.

6 SEC. 311. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON COUNTER-NARCOTICS

7 FUNDING.

8 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

9 (1) the drug crisis facing the United States is

10 a top national security threat;

11 (2) the spread of illicit drugs through United

12 States borders cannot be halted without an effective

13 drug interdiction strategy;

14 (3) effective drug interdiction efforts have been

15 shown to limit the availability of illicit narcotics,

16 drive up the street price, support demand reduction

17 efforts, and decrease overall drug trafficking and

18 use; and

19 (4) the percentage change in drug use since

20 1992, among graduating high school students who

21 used drugs in the past 12 months, has substantially

22 increased—marijuana use is up 80 percent, cocaine

23 use is up 80 percent, and heroin use is up 100 per24 cent.
67

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

2 Senate that the assumptions underlying the functional to3 tals included in this resolution assume the following:

4 (1) All counter-narcotics agencies will be given

5 a high priority for fully funding their counter-nar6 cotics mission.

7 (2) Front line drug fighting agencies are dedi8 cating more resources for intentional efforts to con9 tinue restoring a balanced drug control strategy.

10 Congress should carefully examine the reauthoriza11 tion of the United States Customs service and en12 sure they have adequate resources and authority not

13 only to facilitate the movement of internationally

14 traded goods but to ensure they can aggressively

15 pursue their law enforcement activities.

16 (3) By pursuing a balanced effort which re17 quires investment in 3 key areas: demand reduction

18 (such as education and treatment); domestic law en19 forcement; and international supply reduction, Con20 gress believes we can reduce the number of children

21 who are exposed to and addicted to illegal drugs.

22 SEC. 312. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING TRIBAL COL23 LEGES.

24 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
68

•SCON 20 PCS

1 (1) more than 26,500 students from 250 tribes

2 nationwide attend tribal colleges. The colleges serve

3 students of all ages, many of whom are moving from

4 welfare to work. The vast majority of tribal college

5 students are first-generation college students;

6 (2) while annual appropriations for tribal col7 leges have increased modestly in recent years, core

operation funding levels are still about 1 8 ⁄2 of the

9 $6,000 per Indian student level authorized by the

10 Tribally Controlled College or University Act;

11 (3) although tribal colleges received a

12 $1,400,000 increase in funding in fiscal year 1999,

13 because of rising student populations, these institu14 tions faced an actual per-student decrease in fund15 ing over fiscal year 1998; and

16 (4) per student funding for tribal colleges is

17 only about 63 percent of the amount given to main18 stream community colleges ($2,964 per student at

19 tribal colleges versus $4,743 per student at main20 stream community colleges).

21 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

22 Senate that—

23 (1) this resolution recognizes the funding dif24 ficulties faced by tribal colleges and assumes that

25 priority consideration will be provided to them
69

•SCON 20 PCS

1 through funding for the Tribally Controlled College

2 and University Act, the 1994 Land Grant Institu3 tions, and title III of the Higher Education Act; and

4 (2) the levels in this resolution assume that

5 such priority consideration reflects Congress’ intent

6 to continue work toward current statutory Federal

7 funding goals for the tribal colleges.

8 SEC. 313. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE SOCIAL SECURITY

9 SURPLUS.

10 (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds that—

11 (1) according to the Congressional Budget Of12 fice (CBO) January 1999 ‘‘Economic and Budget

13 Outlook,’’ the Social Security Trust Fund is pro14 jected to incur annual surpluses of

15 $126,000,000,000 in fiscal year 1999,

16 $137,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2000,

17 $144,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2001,

18 $153,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2002,

19 $161,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2003, and

20 $171,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2004;

21 (2) the fiscal year 2000 budget resolution craft22 ed by Chairman Domenici assumes that Trust Fund

23 surpluses will be used to reduce publicly-held debt

24 and for no other purposes, and calls for the enact-
70

•SCON 20 PCS

1 ment of statutory legislation that would enforce this

2 assumption;

3 (3) the President’s fiscal year 2000 budget pro4 posal not only fails to call for legislation that will en5 sure annual Social Security surpluses are used

6 strictly to reduce publicly-held debt, but actually

7 spends a portion of these surpluses on non-Social

8 Security programs;

9 (4) using CBO’s re-estimate of his budget pro10 posal, the President would spend approximately

11 $40,000,000,000 of the Social Security surplus in

12 fiscal year 2000 on non-Social Security programs;

13 $41,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2001;

14 $24,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2002;

15 $34,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2003; and

16 $20,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2004; and

17 (5) spending any portion of an annual Social

18 Security surplus on non-Social Security programs is

19 wholly-inconsistent with efforts to preserve and pro20 tect Social Security for future generations.

21 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

22 Senate that the levels in this resolution and legislation en23 acted pursuant to this resolution assume that Congress

24 shall reject any budget that would spend any portion of
71

•SCON 20 PCS

1 the Social Security surpluses generated in any fiscal year

2 for any Federal program other than Social Security.

3 SEC. 314. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON SALE OF GOVERNORS

4 ISLAND.

5 It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this

6 resolution assume that the sale of Governors Island should

7 be completed prior to the end of fiscal year 2000.

8 SEC. 315. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON PELL GRANT FUND9 ING.

10 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

11 (1) public investment in higher education yields

12 a return of several dollars for each dollar invested;

13 (2) higher education promotes economic oppor14 tunity for individuals, as recipients of bachelor’s de15 grees earn an average of 75 percent per year more

16 than those with high school diplomas and experience

17 half as much unemployment as high school grad18 uates;

19 (3) higher education promotes social oppor20 tunity, as increased education is correlated with re21 duced criminal activity, lessened reliance on public

22 assistance, and increased civic participation;

23 (4) a more educated workforce will be essential

24 for continued economic competitiveness in an age

25 where the amount of information available to society
72

•SCON 20 PCS

1 will double in a matter of days rather than months

2 or years;

3 (5) access to a college education has become a

4 hallmark of American society, and is vital to uphold5 ing our belief in equality of opportunity;

6 (6) for a generation, the Federal Pell Grant has

7 served as an established and effective means of pro8 viding access to higher education for students with

9 financial need;

10 (7) over the past decade, Pell Grant awards

11 have failed to keep pace with inflation, eroding their

12 value and threatening access to higher education for

13 the nation’s neediest students;

14 (8) grant aid as a portion of all students finan15 cial aid has fallen significantly over the past 5 years;

16 (9) the nation’s neediest students are now bor17 rowing approximately as much as its wealthiest stu18 dents to finance higher education; and

19 (10) the percentage of freshmen attending pub20 lic and private 4-year institutions from families

21 below national median income has fallen since 1981.

22 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

23 Senate that the levels in this resolution assume that—

24 (1) the President’s proposed reductions in the

25 Pell Grant program are incompatible with his pro-
73

•SCON 20 PCS

1 posed $125 increase in the Pell Grant maximum

2 award;

3 (2) the President’s proposed reductions should

4 be rejected; and

5 (3) within the discretionary allocation provided

6 to the Appropriations Committee, the maximum

7 grant award should be raised, to the maximum ex8 tent practicable and funding for the Pell Grant pro9 gram should be higher than the level requested by

10 the President.