In the Senate of the United States,

June 15, 1998.

Resolved, That the resolution from the House of Representatives (H. Con. Res. 284) entitled ‘‘Concurrent resolution revising the congressional budget for the United States

Government for fiscal year 1998, establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal

year 1999, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for

fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003.’’, do pass with the

following

AMENDMENT:

Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert:

1 SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET

2 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999.

3 (a) DECLARATION.—Congress determines and declares

4 that this resolution is the concurrent resolution on the budg5 et for fiscal year 1999 including the appropriate budgetary

6 levels for fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 as re7 quired by section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of

8 1974 and revising the budgetary levels for fiscal year 1998
2

HCON 284 EAS

1 set forth in the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal

2 year 1998 as authorized by section 304 of the Congressional

3 Budget Act of 1974.

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

5 this concurrent resolution is as follows:

Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999.

TITLE I—LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.

Sec. 102. Social Security.

Sec. 103. Major functional categories.

TITLE II—BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

Sec. 201. Tax cut reserve fund.

Sec. 202. Tobacco reserve fund.

Sec. 203. Separate environmental allocation.

Sec. 204. Dedication of offsets to transportation.

Sec. 205. Adjustments for line item veto litigation.

Sec. 206. Extension of Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.

Sec. 207. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

TITLE III—SENSE OF CONGRESS AND THE SENATE

Sec. 301. Sense of the Senate regarding passage of the Senate Finance Committee’s IRS restructuring bill.

Sec. 302. Sense of Congress regarding the sunset of the Internal Revenue Code of

1986.

Sec. 303. Sense of Congress on the tax treatment of home mortgage interest and

charitable giving.

Sec. 304. Sense of the Senate on preservation of Social Security for the future.

Sec. 305. Sense of the Senate on annual statement of accrued liability of Social

Security and Medicare.

Sec. 306. Sense of the Senate on full funding for IDEA.

Sec. 307. Sense of the Senate on Social Security.

Sec. 308. Sense of the Senate on School-to-Work programs.

Sec. 309. Sense of the Senate regarding taxpayer rights.

Sec. 310. Sense of the Senate on National Guard funding.

Sec. 311. Sense of the Senate on Medicare payment.

Sec. 312. Sense of the Senate on long-term care.

Sec. 313. Sense of the Senate on climate change research and other funding.

Sec. 314. Sense of the Senate on increased funding for the Child Care and Development Block Grant.

Sec. 315. Sense of the Senate on the formula change for Federal Family Education Loan.

Sec. 316. Sense of the Senate regarding the deductibility of health insurance premiums of the self-employed.

Sec. 317. Sense of the Senate on objection to Kyoto Protocol implementation prior

to Senate ratification.
3

HCON 284 EAS

Sec. 318. Sense of the Senate on price increase on tobacco products of $1.50 per

pack.

Sec. 319. Findings; sense of Congress.

Sec. 320. Sense of the Senate concerning immunity.

Sec. 321. Sense of Senate regarding agricultural trade programs.

Sec. 322. Sense of the Senate supporting long-term entitlement reforms.

Sec. 323. Sense of Congress regarding freedom of health care choice for Medicare

seniors.

Sec. 324. Sense of the Senate regarding repair and construction needs of Indian

schools.

Sec. 325. Sense of the Senate on Social Security personal retirement accounts and

the budget surplus.

Sec. 326. Sense of the Senate regarding the elimination of the marriage penalty.

Sec. 327. Findings and sense of Ccongress regarding affordable, high-quality

health care for seniors.

Sec. 328. Sense of Congress regarding permanent extension of income averaging

for farmers.

Sec. 329. Sense of the Senate to maintain full funding for the Section 202 Elderly

Housing program.

Sec. 330. Sense of the Senate regarding outlay estimates of the Department of Defense budget.

Sec. 331. Sense of the Senate regarding outlay estimates for the budgets of Federal agencies other than the Department of Defense.

Sec. 332. Sense of the Senate regarding an evaluation of the outcome of welfare

reform.

Sec. 333. Sense of the Senate regarding the establishment of a national background check system for long-term care workers.

Sec. 334. Sense of the Senate on expanding Medicare benefits.

Sec. 335. Sense of the Senate on battlefield preservation.

Sec. 336. A resolution regarding the Senate’s support for Federal, State and local

law enforcement.

Sec. 337. Sense of the Senate on analysis of civilian science and technology programs in the Federal budget.

Sec. 338. Sense of the Senate on civilian science and technology programs in the

Federal budget.

Sec. 339. Sense of the Senate on long-term budgeting and repayment of the public

debt.

Sec. 340. Sense of the Senate regarding President’s budget.

Sec. 341. Sense of the Senate regarding the value of the Social Security system

for future retirees.

Sec. 342. Sense of the Senate on the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

Sec. 343. Sense of the Senate on education goals.

Sec. 344. Findings and sense of the Senate.

Sec. 345. Sense of the Senate on INS circuit riders in the former Soviet Union.

Sec. 346. Sense of the Senate regarding funding for the airport improvement program.

Sec. 347. Sense of the Senate that the One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Session should reauthorize funds for the farmland protection program.

Sec. 348. Sense of the Senate on health care quality.

Sec. 349. Sense of the Senate regarding wasteful spending in Defense Department

acquisition practices.

Sec. 350. Sense of the Senate regarding the United States response to the changing nature of terrorism.
4

HCON 284 EAS

Sec. 351. Sense of the Senate on economic growth, Social Security, and Government efficiency.

Sec. 352. Sense of the Senate regarding a supermajority requirement for raising

taxes.

Sec. 353. Sense of the Senate on health care quality.

Sec. 354. Sense of the Senate on the use of budget surplus for tax relief or debt

reduction.

Sec. 355. Use of budget surplus to reform Social Security.

Sec. 356. Sense of the Senate on Colombian drug war helicopters.

Sec. 357. Sense of the Senate on funding for medical care for veterans.

Sec. 358. Sense of the Senate on objection to the use of the sale of public lands

to fund certain programs.

Sec. 359. Sense of the Senate regarding a multinational alliance against drug

trafficking.

Sec. 360. Sense of the Senate regarding legislation that increases complexity of

tax returns.

Sec. 361. General prohibition on the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Sec. 362. Sense of the Senate regarding Amtrak funding.

Sec. 363. Sense of the Senate regarding market access program.

Sec. 364. Sense of the Senate regarding the National Institutes of Health.

Sec. 365. Sense of the Senate regarding display of Ten Commandments.

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 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003.

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

7 (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues

8 are as follows:

9 Fiscal year 1998: $1,262,400,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 1999: $1,300,200,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2000: $1,325,800,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2001: $1,369,400,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002: $1,431,900,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2003: $1,486,900,000,000.
5

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of

2 Federal revenues should be changed are as follows:

3 Fiscal year 1998: $0.

4 Fiscal year 1999: $0.

5 Fiscal year 2000: $0.

6 Fiscal year 2001: $0.

7 Fiscal year 2002: $0.

8 Fiscal year 2003: $0.

9 (C) The amounts for Federal Insurance Con10 tributions Act revenues for hospital insurance within

11 the recommended levels of Federal revenues are as fol12 lows:

13 Fiscal year 1998: $117,700,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 1999: $123,900,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2000: $129,700,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2001: $135,300,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2002: $141,400,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2003: $148,100,000,000.

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

20 enforcement of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total

21 new budget authority are as follows:

22 Fiscal year 1998: $1,374,700,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 1999: $1,425,300,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2000: $1,471,100,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001: $1,513,200,000,000.
6

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2002: $1,547,200,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003: $1,615,800,000,000.

3 (3) BUDGET OUTLAYS.—For purposes of the enforce4 ment of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget

5 outlays are as follows:

6 Fiscal year 1998: $1,358,000,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 1999: $1,408,400,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2000: $1,450,100,000,000.

9 Fiscal year 2001: $1,490,000,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2002: $1,507,000,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2003: $1,579,200,000,000.

12 (4) DEFICITS.—For purposes of the enforcement of this

13 resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:

14 Fiscal year 1998: ¥$95,600,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 1999: ¥$108,200,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2000: ¥$124,300,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2001: ¥$120,600,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2002: ¥$75,100,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2003: ¥$92,300,000,000.

20 (5) PUBLIC DEBT.—The appropriate levels of the pub21 lic debt are as follows:

22 Fiscal year 1998: $5,482,000,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 1999: $5,668,300,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2000: $5,868,700,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001: $6,064,400,000,000.
7

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2002: $6,220,000,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003: $6,392,700,000,000.

3 SEC. 102. SOCIAL SECURITY.

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

5 Senate enforcement under sections 302, 602, and 311 of the

6 Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the amounts of revenues

7 of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust

8 Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund are

9 as follows:

10 Fiscal year 1998: $417,300,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 1999: $438,200,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 2000: $457,800,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2001: $477,100,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2002: $497,900,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2003: $520,700,000,000.

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

17 Senate enforcement under sections 302, 602, and 311 of the

18 Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the amounts of outlays

19 of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust

20 Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund are

21 as follows:

22 Fiscal year 1998: $313,300,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 1999: $212,600,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2000: $331,600,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2001: $344,100,000,000.
8

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2002: $355,700,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003: $369,400,000,000.

3 SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

4 Congress determines and declares that the appropriate

5 levels of new budget authority, budget outlays, new direct

6 loan obligations, and new primary loan guarantee commit7 ments for fiscal years 1998 through 2003 for each major

8 functional category are:

9 (1) National Defense (050):

10 Fiscal year 1998:

11 (A) New budget authority,

12 $267,700,000,000.

13 (B) Outlays, $268,100,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 1999:

15 (A) New budget authority,

16 $270,500,000,000.

17 (B) Outlays, $265,500,000,000.

18 Fiscal year 2000:

19 (A) New budget authority,

20 $274,300,000,000.

21 (B) Outlays, $268,000,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2001:

23 (A) New budget authority,

24 $280,800,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $269,700,000,000.
9

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2002:

2 (A) New budget authority,

3 $288,600,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, $272,100,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2003:

6 (A) New budget authority,

7 $296,800,000,000.

8 (B) Outlays, $279,800,000,000.

9 (2) International Affairs (150):

10 Fiscal year 1998:

11 (A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $14,100,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 1999:

14 (A) New budget authority, $14,600,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $14,200,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2000:

17 (A) New budget authority, $14,300,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $14,700,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001:

20 (A) New budget authority, $15,100,000,000.

21 (B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2002:

23 (A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2003:
10

HCON 284 EAS

1 (A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.

2 (B) Outlays, $14,400,000,000.

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

4 Fiscal year 1998:

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

6 (B) Outlays, $17,700,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 1999:

8 (A) New budget authority, $18,300,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, $17,900,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2000:

11 (A) New budget authority, $17,800,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $17,900,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2001:

14 (A) New budget authority, $17,700,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $17,600,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2002:

17 (A) New budget authority, $17,300,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $17,400,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2003:

20 (A) New budget authority, $17,000,000,000.

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

22 (4) Energy (270):

23 Fiscal year 1998:

24 (A) New budget authority, $500,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $1,000,000,000.
11

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 1999:

2 (A) New budget authority, $600,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $300,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2000:

5 (A) New budget authority, $600,000,000.

6 (B) Outlays, $0.

7 Fiscal year 2001:

8 (A) New budget authority, $500,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, ¥$200,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2002:

11 (A) New budget authority, $400,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, ¥$400,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2003:

14 (A) New budget authority, $400,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, ¥$400,000,000.

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

17 Fiscal year 1998:

18 (A) New budget authority, $24,200,000,000.

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

20 Fiscal year 1999:

21 (A) New budget authority, $23,400,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $23,400,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2000:

24 (A) New budget authority, $23,300,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $23,500,000,000.
12

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2001:

2 (A) New budget authority, $23,000,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $23,400,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2002:

5 (A) New budget authority, $22,900,000,000.

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

7 Fiscal year 2003:

8 (A) New budget authority, $22,900,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, $22,900,000,000.

10 (6) Agriculture (350):

11 Fiscal year 1998:

12 (A) New budget authority, $11,800,000,000.

13 (B) Outlays, $10,800,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 1999:

15 (A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $10,500,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 2000:

18 (A) New budget authority, $11,600,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $9,900,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2001:

21 (A) New budget authority, $10,300,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $8,700,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2002:

24 (A) New budget authority, $10,200,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $8,500,000,000.
13

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2003:

2 (A) New budget authority, $10,400,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $8,800,000,000.

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

5 Fiscal year 1998:

6 (A) New budget authority, $7,300,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $700,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 1999:

9 (A) New budget authority, $4,200,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, $3,200,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2000:

12 (A) New budget authority, $15,100,000,000.

13 (B) Outlays, $10,000,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2001:

15 (A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.

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

17 Fiscal year 2002:

18 (A) New budget authority, $15,600,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $11,800,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2003:

21 (A) New budget authority, $14,900,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $11,700,000,000.

23 (8) Transportation (400):

24 Fiscal year 1998:

25 (A) New budget authority, $46,000,000,000.
14

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 1999:

3 (A) New budget authority, $51,500,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, $42,800,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2000:

6 (A) New budget authority, $51,800,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $44,700,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2001:

9 (A) New budget authority, $52,100,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, $45,700,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 2002:

12 (A) New budget authority, $51,400,000,000.

13 (B) Outlays, $45,800,000,000.

14 Fiscal year 2003:

15 (A) New budget authority, $52,000,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $46,900,000,000.

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

18 Fiscal year 1998:

19 (A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.

20 (B) Outlays, $11,200,000,000.

21 Fiscal year 1999:

22 (A) New budget authority, $8,700,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $10,900,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2000:

25 (A) New budget authority, $7,900,000,000.
15

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, $9,700,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2001:

3 (A) New budget authority, $7,600,000,000.

4 (B) Outlays, $8,900,000,000.

5 Fiscal year 2002:

6 (A) New budget authority, $7,600,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $8,100,000,000.

8 Fiscal year 2003:

9 (A) New budget authority, $7,600,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, $8,100,000,000.

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

12 Services (500):

13 Fiscal year 1998:

14 (A) New budget authority, $61,300,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $56,100,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 1999:

17 (A) New budget authority, $63,050,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $61,006,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2000:

20 (A) New budget authority, $63,350,000,000.

21 (B) Outlays, $62,740,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2001:

23 (A) New budget authority, $64,550,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $63,849,000,000.

25 Fiscal year 2002:
16

HCON 284 EAS

1 (A) New budget authority, $64,950,000,000.

2 (B) Outlays, $63,750,000,000.

3 Fiscal year 2003:

4 (A) New budget authority, $68,450,000,000.

5 (B) Outlays, $67,150,000,000.

6 (11) Health (550):

7 Fiscal year 1998:

8 (A) New budget authority,

9 $136,200,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, $132,000,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 1999:

12 (A) New budget authority,

13 $145,800,000,000.

14 (B) Outlays, $143,700,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2000:

16 (A) New budget authority,

17 $152,600,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $151,600,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001:

20 (A) New budget authority,

21 $161,500,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $160,400,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2002:

24 (A) New budget authority,

25 $170,100,000,000.
17

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, $169,900,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003:

3 (A) New budget authority,

4 $181,200,000,000.

5 (B) Outlays, $181,100,000,000.

6 (12) Medicare (570):

7 Fiscal year 1998:

8 (A) New budget authority,

9 $199,200,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, $199,700,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 1999:

12 (A) New budget authority,

13 $210,300,000,000.

14 (B) Outlays, $210,900,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2000:

16 (A) New budget authority,

17 $221,800,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $221,100,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001:

20 (A) New budget authority,

21 $239,400,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $242,300,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2002:

24 (A) New budget authority,

25 $251,200,000,000.
18

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, $248,800,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003:

3 (A) New budget authority,

4 $273,400,000,000.

5 (B) Outlays, $273,600,000,000.

6 (13) Income Security (600):

7 Fiscal year 1998:

8 (A) New budget authority,

9 $229,500,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, $234,700,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 1999:

12 (A) New budget authority,

13 $243,300,000,000.

14 (B) Outlays, $248,100,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2000:

16 (A) New budget authority,

17 $257,300,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $259,400,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001:

20 (A) New budget authority,

21 $268,500,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $266,700,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2002:

24 (A) New budget authority,

25 $279,200,000,000.
19

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, $274,200,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003:

3 (A) New budget authority,

4 $289,800,000,000.

5 (B) Outlays, $282,400,000,000.

6 (14) Social Security (650):

7 Fiscal year 1998:

8 (A) New budget authority, $12,000,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 1999:

11 (A) New budget authority, $12,600,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $12,800,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2000:

14 (A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2001:

17 (A) New budget authority, $12,500,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $12,500,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2002:

20 (A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.

21 (B) Outlays, $14,500,000,000.

22 Fiscal year 2003:

23 (A) New budget authority, $15,300,000,000.

24 (B) Outlays, $15,300,000,000.

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

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 1998:

2 (A) New budget authority, $42,600,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $42,500,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 1999:

5 (A) New budget authority, $42,800,000,000.

6 (B) Outlays, $43,300,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2000:

8 (A) New budget authority, $43,400,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, $44,000,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2001:

11 (A) New budget authority, $44,800,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $45,200,000,000.

13 Fiscal year 2002:

14 (A) New budget authority, $46,200,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $46,600,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2003:

17 (A) New budget authority, $48,200,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, $48,600,000,000.

19 (16) Administration of Justice (750):

20 Fiscal year 1998:

21 (A) New budget authority, $25,100,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $22,500,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 1999:

24 (A) New budget authority, $25,800,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $24,600,000,000.
21

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2000:

2 (A) New budget authority, $24,500,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $24,900,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2001:

5 (A) New budget authority, $24,500,000,000.

6 (B) Outlays, $24,800,000,000.

7 Fiscal year 2002:

8 (A) New budget authority, $24,700,000,000.

9 (B) Outlays, $24,300,000,000.

10 Fiscal year 2003:

11 (A) New budget authority, $25,000,000,000.

12 (B) Outlays, $24,200,000,000.

13 (17) General Government (800):

14 Fiscal year 1998:

15 (A) New budget authority, $14,500,000,000.

16 (B) Outlays, $14,300,000,000.

17 Fiscal year 1999:

18 (A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $13,400,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2000:

21 (A) New budget authority, $13,900,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2001:

24 (A) New budget authority, $13,600,000,000.

25 (B) Outlays, $13,800,000,000.
22

HCON 284 EAS

1 Fiscal year 2002:

2 (A) New budget authority, $13,400,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $13,600,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2003:

5 (A) New budget authority, $13,500,000,000.

6 (B) Outlays, $13,500,000,000.

7 (18) Net Interest (900):

8 Fiscal year 1998:

9 (A) New budget authority,

10 $291,600,000,000.

11 (B) Outlays, $291,600,000,000.

12 Fiscal year 1999:

13 (A) New budget authority,

14 $300,100,000,000.

15 (B) Outlays, $300,100,000,000.

16 Fiscal year 2000:

17 (A) New budget authority,

18 $301,700,000,000.

19 (B) Outlays, $301,700,000,000.

20 Fiscal year 2001:

21 (A) New budget authority,

22 $302,100,000,000.

23 (B) Outlays, $302,100,000,000.

24 Fiscal year 2002:
23

HCON 284 EAS

1 (A) New budget authority,

2 $302,600,000,000.

3 (B) Outlays, $302,600,000,000.

4 Fiscal year 2003:

5 (A) New budget authority,

6 $304,900,000,000.

7 (B) Outlays, $304,900,000,000.

8 (19) Allowances (920):

9 Fiscal year 1998:

10 (A) New budget authority, ¥$0.

11 (B) Outlays, ¥$0.

12 Fiscal year 1999:

13 (A) New budget authority, ¥$300,000,000.

14 (B) Outlays, ¥$1,900,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2000:

16 (A) New budget authority,

17 ¥$1,200,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, ¥$4,600,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001:

20 (A) New budget authority,

21 ¥$2,700,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, ¥$3,000,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2002:

24 (A) New budget authority,

25 ¥$3,800,000,000.
24

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, ¥$7,000,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003:

3 (A) New budget authority,

4 ¥$5,400,000,000.

5 (B) Outlays, ¥$5,000,000,000.

6 (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):

7 Fiscal year 1998:

8 (A) New budget authority,

9 ¥$36,700,000,000.

10 (B) Outlays, ¥$36,700,000,000.

11 Fiscal year 1999:

12 (A) New budget authority,

13 ¥$36,300,000,000.

14 (B) Outlays, ¥$36,300,000,000.

15 Fiscal year 2000:

16 (A) New budget authority,

17 ¥$36,000,000,000.

18 (B) Outlays, ¥$36,000,000,000.

19 Fiscal year 2001:

20 (A) New budget authority,

21 ¥$37,900,000,000.

22 (B) Outlays, ¥$37,900,000,000.

23 Fiscal year 2002:

24 (A) New budget authority,

25 ¥$45,000,000,000.
25

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) Outlays, ¥$45,000,000,000.

2 Fiscal year 2003:

3 (A) New budget authority,

4 ¥$35,700,000,000.

5 (B) Outlays, ¥$35,700,000,000.

6 TITLE II—BUDGETARY

7 RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

8 SEC. 201. TAX CUT RESERVE FUND.

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, revenue and spend10 ing aggregates may only be reduced and allocations may

11 be reduced only for legislation that reduces revenues by pro12 viding family tax relief (including relief from the ‘‘mar13 riage penalty’’ and support for child care expenses incurred

14 by all parents), and incentives to stimulate savings, invest15 ment, job creation, and economic growth (including commu16 nity renewal initiatives) if such legislation will not increase

17 the deficit or reduce the surplus for—

18 (1) fiscal year 1999;

19 (2) the period of fiscal years 1999–2003; or

20 (3) the period of fiscal years 2004–2008.

21 (b) REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—Upon the consideration

22 of legislation pursuant to subsection (a), the Chairman of

23 the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may file with

24 the Senate appropriately revised allocations under section

25 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised
26

HCON 284 EAS

1 aggregates to carry out this section. These revised alloca2 tions and aggregates shall be considered for the purposes

3 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations and

4 aggregates contained in this resolution.

5 SEC. 202. TOBACCO RESERVE FUND.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, revenue aggregates

7 may be increased for legislation which reserves the Federal

8 share of receipts from tobacco legislation only for the Medi9 care Hospital Insurance Trust Fund.

10 (b) REVISED AGGREGATES.—Upon the consideration

11 of legislation pursuant to subsection (a), the Chairman of

12 the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may file in13 creased aggregates to carry out this section. These aggre14 gates shall be considered for the purposes of the Congres15 sional Budget Act of 1974 as the aggregates contained in

16 this resolution.

17 (c) APPLICATION OF SECTION 202 OF H. CON. RES.

18 67.—For the purposes of enforcement of section 202 of H.

19 Con. Res. 67 (104th Congress) with respect to this resolu20 tion, the increase in receipts resulting from tobacco legisla21 tion shall not be taken into account.

22 SEC. 203. SEPARATE ENVIRONMENTAL ALLOCATION.

23 (a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, revenue and spend24 ing aggregates may be increased and allocations may be

25 increased only for legislation that reauthorizes and reforms
27

HCON 284 EAS

1 the Superfund program to facilitate the cleanup of hazard2 ous waste sites if such legislation will not increase the defi3 cit or reduce the surplus for—

4 (1) fiscal year 1999;

5 (2) the period of fiscal years 1999–2003; or

6 (3) the period of fiscal years 2004–2008.

7 (b) REVISED AGGREGATES.—In the Senate, after the

8 Committee on Environment and Public Works reports a bill

9 (or after the submission of a conference report thereon) to

10 reform the Superfund program to facilitate the cleanup of

11 hazardous waste sites that does not exceed—

12 (1) $200,000,000 in budget authority and out13 lays for fiscal year 1999; and

14 (2) $1,000,000,000 in budget authority and out15 lays for the period of fiscal years 1999 through 2003;

16 the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate

17 may increase the appropriate aggregates and the appro18 priate allocations of budget authority in this resolution by

19 the amounts provided in that bill for that purpose and the

20 outlays flowing in all years from such budget authority.

21 These revised allocations and aggregates shall be considered

22 for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974

23 as the allocations and aggregates contained in this resolu24 tion.
28

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 204. DEDICATION OF OFFSETS TO TRANSPORTATION.

2 (a) SPENDING RESERVE.—In accordance with section

3 312(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and for the

4 purposes of title III of that Act, the Chairman of the Com5 mittee on the Budget may reserve the estimated reductions

6 in new budget authority and outlays resulting from changes

7 in legislation affecting the programs specified in subsection

8 (b), if contained in the Department of Transportation and

9 Related Agencies Appropriations Act, for the purpose of off10 setting—

11 (1) additional outlays not to exceed

12 $1,300,000,000 in fiscal year 1999 and

13 $18,500,000,000 for fiscal years 1999 through 2003

14 for discretionary highway programs as called for in

15 the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

16 of 1998; and

17 (2) additional budget authority not to exceed

18 $1,000,000,000 in fiscal year 1999 and

19 $5,000,000,000 for fiscal years 1999 through 2003 for

20 discretionary transit programs as called for in the

21 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of

22 1998.

23 (b) OFFSETS.—The following reductions in mandatory

24 spending are reserved in function 920, Allowances, for pur25 poses of subsection (a):
29

HCON 284 EAS

1 (1) For reductions in programs in function 350,

2 Agriculture: For fiscal year 1999, $107,000,000 in

3 budget authority and $107,000,000 in outlays; For

4 fiscal years 1999–2003, $603,000,000 in budget au5 thority and $598,000,000 in outlays.

6 (2) For reductions in programs in function 370,

7 Commerce and Housing Credit: For fiscal year 1999,

8 $242,000,000 in budget authority and $242,000,000

9 in outlays; For fiscal years 1999–2003,

10 $1,195,000,000 in budget authority and

11 $1,195,000,000 in outlays.

12 (3) For reductions in programs in function 500,

13 Education, Training, Employment, and Social Serv14 ices: For fiscal year 1999, $471,000,000 in budget au15 thority and $424,000,000 in outlays; For fiscal years

16 1999–2003, $3,182,000,000 in budget authority and

17 $3,079,000,000 in outlays.

18 (4) For reductions in programs in function 550,

19 Health: For fiscal year 1999, $250,000,000 in budget

20 authority and $250,000,000 in outlays; For fiscal

21 years 1999–2003, $1,900,000,000 in budget authority

22 and $1,900,000,000 in outlays.

23 (5) For reductions in programs in function 600,

24 Income Security: For fiscal year 1999, $260,000,000

25 in budget authority and $260,000,000 in outlays; For
30

HCON 284 EAS

1 fiscal years 1999–2003, $1,700,000,000 in budget au2 thority and $1,700,000,000 in outlays.

3 (6) For reductions in programs in function 700,

4 Veterans Benefits and Services: For fiscal year 1999,

5 $500,000,000 in budget authority and $500,000,000

6 in outlays; For fiscal years 1999–2003,

7 $10,500,000,000 in budget authority and

8 $10,500,000,000 in outlays.

9 (c) SENSE OF THE SENATE ON VA COMPENSATION AND

10 POST-SERVICE SMOKING-RELATED ILLNESSES.—

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

12 (A) the President has twice included in his

13 budgets a prohibition on the entitlement expan14 sion that the Department of Veterans Affairs (re15 ferred to as the ‘‘VA’’) is proposing to allow post16 service smoking-related illness to be eligible for

17 VA compensation;

18 (B) Congress has never acted on this entitle19 ment expansion;

20 (C) the Congressional Budget Office and the

21 Office of Management and Budget have con22 cluded that this change in VA policy would re23 sult in at least $10,000,000,000 over 5 years and

24 $45,000,000,000 over 10 years in additional

25 mandatory costs to the VA;
31

HCON 284 EAS

1 (D) these increased number of claims and

2 the resulting costs may present undue delay and

3 hardship on veterans seeking claim review;

4 (E) the entitlement expansion apparently

5 runs counter to all existing VA policy, including

6 a statement by former Secretary Brown that ‘‘It

7 is inappropriate to compensate for death or dis8 ability resulting from veterans’ personal choice

9 to engage in conduct damaging to their health.’’;

10 and

11 (F) Secretary Brown’s comment was re12 cently reaffirmend by Acting Secretary of Veter13 ans Affairs Togo West, who stated ‘‘It has been

14 the position of the Department and of my prede15 cessor that the decision to use tobacco by service

16 members is a personal decision and is not a re17 quirement for military service. And that there18 fore to compensate veterans for diseases whose

19 sole connection to service is a veteran’s own to20 bacco use should not rest with the Government.’’.

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

22 the Senate that the function totals and assumptions

23 underlying this resolution assume the following:
32

HCON 284 EAS

1 (A) The support of the President’s proposal

2 to not allow post-service smoking related illnesses

3 to be eligible for VA.

4 (B) The study and report required by sub5 paragraph (C) will be completed.

6 (C) The Secretary of the Department of Vet7 erans Affairs, the Office of Management and

8 Budget, and the General Accounting Office are

9 jointly required to—

10 (i) jointly study (referred to in this

11 section as the ‘‘study’’) the VA General

12 Counsel’s determination and the resulting

13 actions to change the compensation rules to

14 include disability and death benefits for

15 conditions related to the use of tobacco

16 products during service; and

17 (ii) deliver an opinion as to whether

18 illnesses resulting from post-service smoking

19 should be considered as a compensable dis20 ability.

21 (D) The study should include—

22 (i) the estimated numbers of those fil23 ing such claims, the cost resulting from such

24 benefits, the time necessary to review such

25 claims, and how such a number of claims
33

HCON 284 EAS

1 will affect the VA’s ability to review its cur2 rent claim load;

3 (ii) an examination of how the pro4 posed change corresponds to prior VA policy

5 relating to post-service actions taken by an

6 individual; and

7 (iii) what Federal benefits, both VA

8 and non-VA, former service members having

9 smoking-related illnesses are eligible to re10 ceive.

11 (E) The study shall be completed no later

12 than July 1, 1999.

13 (F) The Department of Veterans Affairs and

14 the Office of Management and Budget shall re15 port their finding to the Majority and Minority

16 Leaders of the Senate and the chairmen and

17 ranking minority members of the Senate Budget

18 and Veterans’ Affairs Committees.

19 SEC. 205. ADJUSTMENTS FOR LINE ITEM VETO LITIGATION.

20 If the Supreme Court rules that the Line Item Veto

21 Act is unconstitutional, the Chairman of the Committee on

22 the Budget may make appropriate adjustments to the allo23 cations and aggregates in this resolution to reflect the effects

24 of the President’s cancellations becoming null and void.
34

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 206. EXTENSION OF VIOLENT CRIME REDUCTION

2 TRUST FUND.

3 (a) DISCRETIONARY LIMITS.—In the Senate, in this

4 section and for the purposes of allocations made for the dis5 cretionary category pursuant to section 302(a) of the Con6 gressional Budget Act of 1974, the term ‘‘discretionary

7 spending limit’’ means—

8 (1) with respect to fiscal year 1999—

9 (A) for the defense category:

10 $271,570,000,000 in new budget authority and

11 $266,635,000,000 in outlays;

12 (B) for the nondefense category:

13 $255,450,000,000 in new budget authority and

14 $289,547,000,000 in outlays; and

15 (C) for the violent crime reduction category:

16 $5,800,000,000 in new budget authority and

17 $4,953,000,000 in outlays;

18 (2) with respect to fiscal year 2000—

19 (A) for the discretionary category:

20 $532,693,000,000 in new budget authority and

21 $558,711,000,000 in outlays; and

22 (B) for the violent crime reduction category:

23 $4,500,000,000 in new budget authority and

24 $5,554,000,000 in outlays;

25 (3) with respect to fiscal year 2001—
35

HCON 284 EAS

1 (A) for the discretionary category:

2 $537,632,000,000 in new budget authority and

3 $558,415,000,000 in outlays; and

4 (B) for the violent crime reduction category:

5 $4,400,000,000 in new budget authority and

6 $5,981,000,000 in outlays; and

7 (4) with respect to fiscal year 2002—

8 (A) for the discretionary category:

9 $546,574,000,000 in new budget authority and

10 $556,269,000,000 in outlays; and

11 (B) for the violent crime reduction category:

12 $4,500,000,000 in new budget authority and

13 $4,530,000,000 in outlays;

14 as adjusted in strict conformance with subsection (b) of sec15 tion 251 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit

16 Control Act of 1985 and section 314 of the Congressional

17 Budget Act.

18 (b) POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.—

19 (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para20 graph (2), it shall not be in order in the Senate to

21 consider—

22 (A) a revision of this resolution or any con23 current resolution on the budget for fiscal years

24 1999, 2000, 2001, or 2002 (or amendment, mo25 tion, or conference report on such a resolution)
36

HCON 284 EAS

1 that provides discretionary spending in excess of

2 the discretionary spending limit or limits for

3 such fiscal year; or

4 (B) any bill or resolution (or amendment,

5 motion, or conference report on such bill or reso6 lution) for fiscal year 1999, 2000, 2001, or 2002

7 that would cause any of the limits in this section

8 (or suballocations of the discretionary limits

9 made pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congres10 sional Budget Act of 1974) to be exceeded.

11 (2) EXCEPTION.—This section shall not apply if

12 a declaration of war by the Congress is in effect or

13 if a joint resolution pursuant to section 258 of the

14 Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act

15 of 1985 has been enacted.

16 (c) WAIVER.—This section may be waived or sus17 pended in the Senate only by the affirmative vote of three18 fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn.

19 (d) APPEALS.—Appeals in the Senate from the deci20 sions of the Chair relating to any provision of this section

21 shall be limited to 1 hour, to be equally divided between,

22 and controlled by, the appellant and the manager of the

23 concurrent resolution, bill, or joint resolution, as the case

24 may be. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members

25 of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required in
37

HCON 284 EAS

1 the Senate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair

2 on a point of order raised under this section.

3 (e) DETERMINATION OF BUDGET LEVELS.—For pur4 poses of this section, the levels of new budget authority, out5 lays, new entitlement authority, revenues, and deficits for

6 a fiscal year shall be determined on the basis of estimates

7 made by the Committee on the Budget of the Senate.

8 SEC. 207. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

9 Congress adopts the provisions of this title—

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

11 Senate and the House of Representatives, respectively,

12 and as such they shall be considered as part of the

13 rules of each House, or of that House to which they

14 specifically apply, and such rules shall supersede

15 other rules only to the extent that they are inconsist16 ent therewith; and

17 (2) with full recognition of the constitutional

18 right of either House to change those rules (so far as

19 they relate to that House) at any time, in the same

20 manner, and to the same extent as in the case of any

21 other rule of that House.
38

HCON 284 EAS

1 TITLE III—SENSE OF CONGRESS

2 AND THE SENATE

3 SEC. 301. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING PASSAGE OF

4 THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE’S IRS RE5 STRUCTURING BILL.

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

7 (1) the House of Representatives passed H.R.

8 2676 on November 5, 1997;

9 (2) the Finance Committee of the Senate has held

10 several days of hearings this year on Internal Reve11 nue Service restructuring proposals;

12 (3) the hearings demonstrated many areas in

13 which the House-passed bill could be improved;

14 (4) on March 31, 1998, the Senate Finance Com15 mittee voted 20–0 to report an Internal Revenue

16 Service restructuring package that contains more

17 oversight over the Internal Revenue Service, more ac18 countability for employees, and a new arsenal of tax19 payer protections; and

20 (5) the Senate Finance package includes the fol21 lowing items which were not included in the House

22 bill—

23 (A) removal of the statutory impediments to

24 the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s efforts to
39

HCON 284 EAS

1 reorganize the agency to create a more stream2 lined, taxpayer-friendly organization,

3 (B) the providing of real oversight authority

4 for the Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board

5 to help prevent taxpayer abuse,

6 (C) the creation of a new Treasury Inspec7 tor General for Tax Administration to ensure

8 independence and accountability,

9 (D) real, meaningful relief for innocent

10 spouses,

11 (E) provisions which abate penalties and

12 interest after 1 year so that the Internal Revenue

13 Service does not profit from its own delay,

14 (F) provisions which ensure due process of

15 law to taxpayers by granting them a right to a

16 hearing before the Internal Revenue Service can

17 pursue a lien, levy, or seizure,

18 (G) provisions which forbid the Internal

19 Revenue Service from coercing taxpayers to ex20 tend the 10-year statute of limitations for collec21 tion,

22 (H) provisions which require the Internal

23 Revenue Service to terminate employees who

24 abuse taxpayers or other Internal Revenue Serv25 ice employees,
40

HCON 284 EAS

1 (I) provisions which make the Taxpayer

2 Advocate more independent, and

3 (J) provisions enabling the Commissioner of

4 Internal Revenue to manage employees more ef5 fectively.

6 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen7 ate that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

8 in this budget resolution assume that the Senate shall, as

9 expeditiously as possible, consider and pass an Internal

10 Revenue Service restructuring bill which provides the most

11 taxpayer protections, the greatest degree of Internal Reve12 nue Service employee accountability, and enhanced over13 sight.

14 SEC. 302. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE SUNSET

15 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986.

16 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that a simple and fair

17 Federal tax system is one that—

18 (1) applies a low tax rate, through easily under19 stood laws, to all Americans;

20 (2) provides tax relief for working Americans;

21 (3) protects the rights of taxpayers and reduces

22 tax collection abuses;

23 (4) eliminates the bias against savings and in24 vestment;

25 (5) promotes economic growth and job creation;
41

HCON 284 EAS

1 (6) does not penalize marriage or families; and

2 (7) provides for a taxpayer-friendly collections

3 process to replace the Internal Revenue Service.

4 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress

5 that the provisions of this resolution assume that all taxes

6 imposed under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall sun7 set for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2001

8 (or in the case of any tax not imposed on the basis of a

9 taxable year, on any taxable event or for any period after

10 December 31, 2001) and that a new Federal tax system will

11 be enacted that is both simple and fair as described in sub12 section (a) and that provides only those resources for the

13 Federal Government that are needed to meet its responsibil14 ities to the American people.

15 SEC. 303. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE TAX TREATMENT OF

16 HOME MORTGAGE INTEREST AND CHARI17 TABLE GIVING.

18 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—

19 (1) current Federal income tax laws embrace a

20 number of fundamental tax policies including long21 standing encouragement for home ownership and

22 charitable giving, expanded health and retirement

23 benefits;

24 (2) the mortgage interest deduction is among the

25 most important incentives in the income tax code and
42

HCON 284 EAS

1 promotes the American Dream of home ownership—

2 the single largest investment for most families, and

3 preserving it is critical for the more than 20,000,000

4 families claiming it now and for millions more in the

5 future;

6 (3) favorable tax treatment to encourage gifts to

7 charities is a longstanding principle that helps char8 ities raise funds needed to provide services to poor

9 families and others when government is simply un10 able or unwilling to do so, and maintaining this tax

11 incentive will help charities raise money to meet the

12 challenges of their charitable missions in the decades

13 ahead;

14 (4) legislation has been proposed to repeal the

15 entire income tax code at the end of the year 2001

16 without providing a specific replacement; and

17 (5) sunsetting the entire income tax code without

18 describing a replacement threatens our Nation’s fu19 ture economic growth and unwisely eliminates exist20 ing tax incentives that are crucial for taxpayers who

21 are often making the most important financial deci22 sions of their lives.

23 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress

24 that the levels in this resolution assume that Congress sup25 ports the continued tax deductibility of home mortgage in-
43

HCON 284 EAS

1 terest and charitable contributions and that a sunset of the

2 tax code that does not provide a replacement tax system

3 that preserves this deductibility could damage the American

4 dream of home ownership and could threaten the viability

5 of nonprofit institutions.

6 SEC. 304. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON PRESERVATION OF SO7 CIAL SECURITY FOR THE FUTURE.

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

9 (1) Social Security is one of the Nation’s most

10 important income security programs;

11 (2) the preservation of Social Security both for

12 those now retired and for future generations of work13 ing Americans is a vital national priority;

14 (3) the Trustees of the Federal Old Age and Sur15 vivors Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust

16 Funds have reported to Congress that—

17 (A) the retirement of the baby boom genera18 tion will cause Social Security expenditures to

19 accelerate rapidly beginning around 2010;

20 (B) Social Security expenditures will exceed

21 Social Security revenues after 2012 and the trust

22 funds will be depleted of reserves in 2029; and

23 (C) after 2029, tax revenues will be suffi24 cient to cover only three-fourths of the benefits

25 promised under current law, and, by the end of
44

HCON 284 EAS

1 the 75 year projection period, the annual deficit

2 in the trust funds will reach 2.1 percent of the

3 GDP;

4 (4) Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal

5 Reserve Board, has testified before Congress that So6 cial Security’s unfunded liability stands at around

7 $3,000,000,000,000 and advised Congress to move ex8 peditiously to reform the program so that current

9 workers will have sufficient time to adjust to any

10 changes in the program;

11 (5) the $124,000,000,000 in new domestic spend12 ing programs in the President’s budget undermines

13 Social Security by diverting resources from budget

14 surpluses to a bigger government and more spending;

15 and

16 (6) the Medicare Hospital Insurance program is

17 projected to become insolvent in 2010 and a study by

18 the National Center on Addiction and Substance

19 Abuse at Columbia University estimated that 14 per20 cent of Medicare spending in 1995 was for tobacco21 related illnesses.

22 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen23 ate that the provisions of this resolution assume that—

24 (1) Congress should use unified budget surpluses

25 to reform Social Security for future generations; and
45

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) Congress should reserve the Federal proceeds

2 from any tobacco settlement for saving Medicare until

3 legislation is enacted to make Medicare actuarially

4 sound.

5 SEC. 305. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ANNUAL STATEMENT

6 OF ACCRUED LIABILITY OF SOCIAL SECURITY

7 AND MEDICARE.

8 It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this

9 resolution assume that—

10 (1) the concurrent resolution on the budget

11 should include a statement of the current accrued li12 ability of the Federal Government for future pay13 ments under the Social Security and Medicare pro14 grams; and

15 (2) the President’s budget should include for fis16 cal years beginning with 1999 a statement of the cur17 rent accrued liability of the Federal Government for

18 future payments under the Social Security and Medi19 care programs.

20 SEC. 306. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FULL FUNDING FOR

21 IDEA.

22 It is the sense of the Senate that the budgetary levels

23 in this resolution assume that part B of the Individuals

24 with Disabilities Act (20 U.S.C. 1411 et seq.) should be fully
46

HCON 284 EAS

1 funded at the originally promised level before any funds are

2 appropriated for new education programs.

3 SEC. 307. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

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

5 (1) the Social Security program, created in 1935

6 to provide old-age survivors, and disability insurance

7 benefits, has been one of the most successful govern8 ment programs ever;

9 (2) in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of

10 1990, Congress created section 13301 of the Congres11 sional Budget Act, which removed Social Security

12 spending and revenues from all Federal budget cal13 culations;

14 (3) under current budget law, the Federal budget

15 is still in deficit; and

16 (4) in his State of the Union message on Janu17 ary 27, 1998, President Clinton called on Congress to

18 ‘‘save Social Security first’’ and to ‘‘reserve one hun19 dred percent of the surplus, that is any penny of the

20 surplus, until we have taken all the necessary meas21 ures to strengthen the Social Security system for the

22 twenty-first century’’.

23 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen24 ate that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

25 included in this resolution assume—
47

HCON 284 EAS

1 (1) Congress and the President should continue

2 to rid our country of debt and work to balance the

3 budget without counting Social Security trust fund

4 surpluses; and

5 (2) Congress and the President should work in a

6 bipartisan way on specific legislation to reform the

7 Social Security system, to ensure that it is finan8 cially sound over the long term and will be available

9 for all future generations.

10 SEC. 308. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON SCHOOL-TO-WORK

11 PROGRAMS.

12 It is the sense of the Senate that the budget totals and

13 levels in this resolution assume the President’s policy with

14 respect to the School-to-Work program under the Education

15 Reform Account and any such savings as a result should

16 be applied to local initiatives focusing on early childhood

17 development.

18 SEC. 309. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING TAXPAYER

19 RIGHTS.

20 It is the sense of the Senate that of revenues designated

21 under section 201 for tax relief, a portion be set aside for—

22 (1) improvement of taxpayer rights, including

23 protections for taxpayers in cases involving seizure of

24 property by the Internal Revenue Service; and
48

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) reform of the penalty rules under the Inter2 nal Revenue Code of 1986.

3 SEC. 310. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON NATIONAL GUARD

4 FUNDING.

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

6 (1) The Army National Guard represents 34 per7 cent of total Army forces, including 55 percent of

8 combat divisions and brigades, 46 percent of combat

9 support, and 25 percent of combat service support.

10 (2) The Army National Guard receives just 9.5

11 percent of Army funds.

12 (3) A recent military study estimates the average

13 cost to train and equip an active duty soldier is

14 $73,000 per year, while the average cost to train and

15 equip a National Guard soldier is just $17,000 per

16 year.

17 (4) The Constitution of the United States pro18 vides for a specific role for the National Guard in our

19 national defense.

20 (5) The National Guard will play an increasing

21 role in a variety of ongoing worldwide operations by

22 relieving active units and reducing the operational

23 and personnel burdens of the Army’s frequent and

24 lengthy deployments.
49

HCON 284 EAS

1 (6) The home land defense is a mission of grow2 ing importance for our military forces and the Na3 tional Guard forces will play an increasingly key role

4 in that mission.

5 (7) Congress created the National Defense Panel

6 to recommend ways in which to transform United

7 States defense and national security policy for the

8 21st century and it reached the following rec9 ommendations:

10 (A) Some portion of the Army National

11 Guard’s divisional combat units (including com12 bat support) should become part of active divi13 sions and brigades.

14 (B) The National Guard’s enhanced bri15 gades should report to an active Army command.

16 (C) The Guard should develop selected

17 early-deploying units that would join the active

18 component.

19 (D) Some additional reserve or Guard units

20 may be needed to reduce pressure on the active

21 Army.

22 (E) The Guard should assume the entire

23 U.S. Army South (USARSO) mission, the Army

24 component of the United States Southern Com25 mand (Southcom) based in Panama.
50

HCON 284 EAS

1 (F) The National Guard should continue to

2 provide general purpose forces to give prompt

3 military support to civil authorities.

4 (G) The National Guard should provide

5 forces organized and equipped for training of

6 civil agencies and the immediate reinforcement

7 of first-response efforts in domestic emergencies.

8 (H) New homeland defense missions develop

9 (e.g., National Missile Defense and information

10 warfare), the Guard should be used in lieu of ac11 tive forces wherever possible.

12 (8) The National Guard estimates it was under13 funded by $743,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 and by

14 $634,000,000 in fiscal year 1999.

15 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen16 ate that the functional totals in the budget resolution as17 sume that the Department of Defense will give the highest

18 priority to moving toward fully funding the National

19 Guard.

20 SEC. 311. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON MEDICARE PAYMENT.

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

22 (1) one of the goals of the Balanced Budget Act

23 of 1997 was to expand options for Medicare bene24 ficiaries under the new Medicare+Choice program;

25 and
51

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) the new Medicare payment formula in the

2 Balanced Budget Act of 1997 was intended to make

3 these choices available to all Americans, but because

4 of the low update and specific budget neutrality pro5 visions of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, the blend6 ing of rates to create greater equity for rural and

7 other lower payment areas was not implemented in

8 1998 or 1999.

9 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen10 ate that the functional totals underlying this concurrent res11 olution on the budget assume that funding the blending of

12 local and national payment rates pursuant to the Balanced

13 Budget Act of 1997 should be a priority for the Senate Fi14 nance Committee this year within the budget as established

15 by this Committee.

16 SEC. 312. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON LONG-TERM CARE.

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

18 (1) our Nation is not financially prepared to

19 meet the long-term care needs of its rapidly aging

20 population and that long-term care needs threaten the

21 financial security of American families; and

22 (2) many people are unaware that most long23 term care costs are not covered by Medicare and that

24 Medicaid covers long-term care only after the person’s

25 assets have been exhausted.
52

HCON 284 EAS

1 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen2 ate that—

3 (1) this concurrent resolution on the budget as4 sumes that the National Bipartisan Commission on

5 the Future of Medicare should, as part of its delibera6 tions, describe long-term care needs and make all ap7 propriate recommendations including private sector

8 options that reflect the need for a continuum of care

9 that spans from acute to long-term care. This is not

10 a specific recommendation that any new program be

11 added to Medicare;

12 (2) the Federal Government should take all ap13 propriate steps to inform the public about the finan14 cial risks posed by long-term care costs and about the

15 need for families to plan for their long-term care

16 needs;

17 (3) the Federal Government should take all ap18 propriate steps to inform the public that Medicare

19 does not cover most long-term care costs and that

20 Medicaid covers long-term care costs only when the

21 beneficiary has exhausted his or her assets;

22 (4) the appropriate committees of the Senate, to23 gether with the Department of Health and Human

24 Services and other appropriate Executive Branch

25 agencies, should develop specific ideas for encouraging
53

HCON 284 EAS

1 Americans to plan for their own long-term care needs;

2 and

3 (5) the upcoming National Summit on Retire4 ment Income Savings should ensure that planning for

5 long-term care is an integral part of any discussion

6 of retirement security.

7 SEC. 313. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON CLIMATE CHANGE RE8 SEARCH AND OTHER FUNDING.

9 It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions un10 derlying the functional totals in this resolution assume the

11 following:

12 (1) To the extent that funding is made available

13 through grants or other Federal expenditures to re14 duce emissions of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse

15 gases or to increase sequestration of carbon to offset

16 such emissions, such funding shall be made available

17 through competitive, merit-based awards designed to

18 select cost-effective methods for reducing, sequestering,

19 or mitigating such emissions. Such awards shall con20 sider all technologies, methods, and research for reduc21 ing, sequestering, or mitigating emissions, including

22 sustainable agricultural practices and forest manage23 ment and conservation strategies. Funding criteria

24 shall be comprehensive in scope, not limited to spe25 cific technologies or industries, awarded on a non-
54

HCON 284 EAS

1 discriminatory basis, and target cost-effectiveness in

2 reducing, sequestering, or mitigating carbon dioxide

3 and other greenhouse gases through natural resource

4 management programs or products. In considering

5 the cost-effectiveness of various reduction, sequestra6 tion, or mitigation technologies, other environmental

7 benefits should be considered.

8 (2) To the extent any tax credits or other tax in9 centives are created to stimulate the adoption of tech10 nologies or practices that reduce, sequester, or miti11 gate emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse

12 gases (‘‘emissions tax incentives’’), such emission tax

13 incentives shall also be available to any person that

14 employs an alternative technology or practice that re15 duces, sequesters, or mitigates emissions of carbon di16 oxide or other greenhouse gases as effectively as those

17 technologies or practices for which a tax credit or

18 other incentive is provided. Only payments for tech19 nologies or in support of practices not legally required

20 when payment is made shall qualify for tax incen21 tives.

22 SEC. 314. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INCREASED FUNDING

23 FOR THE CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT

24 BLOCK GRANT.

25 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
55

HCON 284 EAS

1 (1) 54 percent of women in the labor force have

2 children under 13 and are either single parents or

3 have husbands who earn less than $30,000 per year;

4 (2) in 1995, 62 percent of women with children

5 younger than age 6, and 77 percent of women with

6 children ages 6–17 were in the labor force, and 59

7 percent of women with children younger than 3 were

8 in the labor force;

9 (3) a 1997 General Accounting Office study

10 found that the increased work participation require11 ments of the welfare reform law will cause the need

12 for child care to exceed the known supply;

13 (4) a 1995 study by the Urban Institute of child

14 care prices in 6 cities found that the average cost of

15 care for a 2-year-old in a child care center ranged

16 from $3,100 to $8,100;

17 (5) for an entry-level worker, the family’s child

18 care costs at the average price of care for an infant

19 in a child care center would be at least 50 percent of

20 family income in 5 of the 6 cities examined;

21 (6) 40 percent of children under the age of 5 are

22 taken care of at home by 1 parent;

23 (7) a large number of low- and middle-income

24 families sacrifice a second full-time income so that a

25 parent may be at home with the child;
56

HCON 284 EAS

1 (8) the average income of 2-parent families with

2 a single income is $20,000 less than the average in3 come of 2-parent families with 2 incomes;

4 (9) the recent National Institute for Child

5 Health and Development study found that the greatest

6 factor in the development of a young child is ‘‘what

7 is happening at home and in families’’; and

8 (10) increased tax relief directed at making child

9 care more affordable, and increased funding for the

10 Child Care and Development Block Grant, would take

11 significant steps toward bringing quality child care

12 within the reach of many parents, and would increase

13 the options available to parents in deciding how best

14 to care for their children.

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

16 that the levels in this resolution and legislation enacted pur17 suant to this resolution assume—

18 (1) that tax relief should be directed at parents

19 who are struggling to afford quality child care, in20 cluding those who wish to stay at home to care for a

21 child, and should be included in any tax cut package;

22 and

23 (2) doubling funding for the Child Care and De24 velopment Block Grant will significantly increase the
57

HCON 284 EAS

1 States’ ability to deliver quality child care to low-in2 come working families.

3 SEC. 315. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE FORMULA

4 CHANGE FOR FEDERAL FAMILY EDUCATION

5 LOAN.

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

7 (1) Postsecondary students receive critical access

8 to a higher education through student loans made

9 available by lenders in the Federal Family Education

10 Loan (FFEL) program.

11 (2) Guaranteed student loan borrowers currently

12 pay an interest rate on their FFEL loans equal to the

13 91-day Treasury bill rate plus 2.5 percent while the

14 borrower attends school, and the 91-day Treasury bill

15 rate plus 3.1 percent during repayment. In addition,

16 the maximum FFEL student loan rate is capped at

17 8.25 percent.

18 (3) As a result of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili19 ation Act of 1993, the new formula for FFEL student

20 loans, effective July 1, 1998, will be equal to the 10-

21 year Treasury bond rate plus 1 percent. In addition,

22 the same 8.25 percent rate cap would apply to these

23 new loans.

24 (4) Lenders in the FFEL program have alerted

25 Congress that the scheduled formula change will make
58

HCON 284 EAS

1 these loans unprofitable. As a result, lenders may

2 withdraw from the FFEL program or significantly

3 reduce their participation in the program after July

4 1, 1998.

5 (5) A July 25, 1997 report by the Congressional

6 Research Service stated that the scheduled formula

7 change ‘‘can result in a greater likelihood that the

8 program will become unprofitable at certain points in

9 the business cycle,’’ and ‘‘the result could be a shut10 down of the guaranteed delivery system.’’.

11 (6) In a report by the Treasury Department on

12 February 26, 1998, the Clinton Administration con13 cluded that the new formula will provide a rate of re14 turn on student loans that is below the target rate of

15 return of for-profit bank lenders in the guaranteed

16 student loan program. Furthermore, the Administra17 tion concluded that there are inefficiencies associated

18 with the proposed formula, and joint benefits could be

19 realized to students and lenders from moving back to

20 a short-term index.

21 (7) At the time that the proposed formula change

22 was adopted in 1993, the rate of return to lenders

23 would have been higher under the proposed formula

24 than under the existing formula.
59

HCON 284 EAS

1 (8) The withdrawal of lenders from the FFEL

2 program, who now account for approximately 70 per3 cent of all student loans, would be devastating to stu4 dents because, as the Administration has acknowl5 edged, the Federal direct loan program would be un6 able to absorb the demand for student loans that

7 would arise from the absence of guaranteed lenders.

8 (9) A variety of proposals have been put forward

9 to resolve this pending crisis in the FFEL program

10 by modifying the scheduled formula change.

11 (b) SENSE OF SENATE.—It is the sense of the Senate

12 that the levels in this resolution and legislation enacted pur13 suant to this resolution assume that the documented prob14 lems that will rise from the scheduled formula change for

15 the Federal Family Education Loan program should be re16 solved in a manner that ensures that students are not

17 harmed by the withdrawal of lenders from this program.

18 SEC. 316. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE DEDUCT19 IBILITY OF HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS

20 OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED.

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

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

23 enjoy parity with their corporate competitors with re24 spect to the deductibility of their health insurance

25 premiums;
60

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) at present, the self-employed can deduct only

2 45 percent of their health insurance premiums;

3 (3) scheduled changes in the deductible amount

4 of health insurance premiums will rise slowly, to only

5 60 percent by 2002;

6 (4) only by 2007 will the self-employed enjoy eq7 uitable treatment with their corporate competitors

8 with respect to the deductibility of their health insur9 ance premiums;

10 (5) the limited deductibility available to the self11 employed greatly reduces the affordability of their

12 health insurance;

13 (6) these disadvantages faced by the self-em14 ployed are exacerbated by the fact that the self-em15 ployed generally pay higher premium rates because

16 they do not have access to group insurance plans;

17 (7) these disadvantages are reflected in the higher

18 rate of lack of insurance among self-employed indi19 viduals that stands at 23.6 percent compared with

20 17.4 percent for all other wage and salaried workers,

21 for self-employed living at or below the poverty level

22 the rate of uninsured is over 57 percent, for self-em23 ployed living at 100–150 percent poverty the rate of

24 uninsured is 47 percent, and for self-employed living
61

HCON 284 EAS

1 at 150–199 percent the rate of uninsured is 40 per2 cent;

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

4 face significant occupational safety hazards, this lack

5 of health insurance affordability has even greater

6 ramifications; and

7 (9) this lack of full deductibility is adversely af8 fecting the growing number of women who own small

9 businesses.

10 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen11 ate that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

12 in this resolution assume that legislation implementing this

13 concurrent resolution on the budget should include acceler14 ated movement toward parity between the self-employed

15 and corporations with respect to the tax treatment of health

16 insurance premiums, while maintaining deficit neutrality.

17 SEC. 317. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON OBJECTION TO KYOTO

18 PROTOCOL IMPLEMENTATION PRIOR TO SEN19 ATE RATIFICATION.

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

21 (1) The agreement reached by the Administra22 tion in Kyoto, Japan, regarding legally binding com23 mitments on greenhouse gas reductions is inconsistent

24 with the provisions of S. Res. 98, The Byrd-Hagel
62

HCON 284 EAS

1 Resolution, that passed the United States Senate

2 unanimously.

3 (2) The Administration has pledged to Congress

4 that it would not implement any portion of the Kyoto

5 Protocol prior to its ratification in the Senate.

6 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress

7 that funds should not be provided to put in effect the Kyoto

8 Protocol prior to the Senate ratification in compliance with

9 the requirements of the Byrd-Hagel Resolution and consist10 ent with Administration assurances to Congress.

11 SEC. 318. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON PRICE INCREASE ON

12 TOBACCO PRODUCTS OF $1.50 PER PACK.

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

14 (1) smoking rates among children and teenagers

15 have reached epidemic proportions;

16 (2) of the 3,000 children and teenagers who begin

17 smoking every day, 1,000 will eventually die of smok18 ing-related disease; and

19 (3) public health experts and economists agree

20 that the most effective and efficient way to achieve

21 major reduction in youth smoking rates is to raise the

22 price of tobacco products by at least $1.50 per pack.

23 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen24 ate that comprehensive tobacco legislation should increase

25 the price of each pack of cigarettes sold by at least $1.50
63

HCON 284 EAS

1 through a per-pack fee or other mechanism that will guar2 antee a price increase of $1.50 per pack within 3 years,

3 not including existing scheduled Federal, State, and local

4 tax increases, with equivalent price increases on other to5 bacco products, and should index these price increases by

6 an appropriate measure of inflation.

7 SEC. 319. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.

8 (a) Congress finds that—

9 (1) studies have found that quality child care,

10 particularly for infants and young children, requires

11 a sensitive, interactive, loving, and consistent care12 giver;

13 (2) as most parents meet and exceed the criteria

14 described in paragraph (1), circumstances allowing,

15 parental care is the best form of child care;

16 (3) a recent National Institute for Child Health

17 and Development study found that the greatest factor

18 in the development of a young child is ‘‘what is hap19 pening at home and in families’’;

20 (4) as a child’s interaction with his or her par21 ents has the most significant impact on the develop22 ment of the child, any Federal child care policy

23 should enable and encourage parents to spend more

24 time with their children;
64

HCON 284 EAS

(5) nearly 1 1 ⁄2 of preschool children have at-home

mothers and only 1 2 ⁄3 of preschool children have moth3 ers who are employed full time;

4 (6) a large number of low- and middle-income

5 families sacrifice a second full-time income so that a

6 mother may be at home with her child;

7 (7) the average income of 2-parent families with

8 a single income is $20,000 less than the average in9 come of 2-parent families with 2 incomes;

10 (8) only 30 percent of preschool children are in

11 families with paid child care and the remaining 70

12 percent of preschool children are in families that do

13 not pay for child care, many of which are low- to

14 middle-income families struggling to provide child

15 care at home;

16 (9) child care proposals should not provide fi17 nancial assistance solely to the 30 percent of families

18 that pay for child care and should not discriminate

19 against families in which children are cared for by

20 an at-home parent; and

21 (10) any congressional proposal that increases

22 child care funding should provide financial relief to

23 families that sacrifice an entire income in order that

24 a mother or father may be at home for a young child.
65

HCON 284 EAS

1 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress

2 that the functional totals in this concurrent resolution on

3 the budget assume that—

4 (1) many families in the United States make

5 enormous sacrifices to forego a second income in order

6 to have a parent care for a child at home;

7 (2) there should be no bias against at-home par8 ents;

9 (3) parents choose many different forms of child

10 care to meet the needs of their families, such as child

11 care provided by an at-home parent, grandparent,

12 aunt, uncle, neighbor, nanny, preschool, or child care

13 center;

14 (4) any quality child care proposal should in15 clude, as a key component, financial relief for those

16 families where there is an at-home parent; and

17 (5) mothers and fathers who have chosen and

18 continue to choose to be at home should be applauded

19 for their efforts.

20 SEC. 320. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING IMMUNITY.

21 It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this reso22 lution assume that no immunity will be provided to any

23 tobacco product manufacturer with respect to any health24 related civil action commenced by a State or local govern-
66

HCON 284 EAS

1 mental entity or an individual or class of individuals prior

2 to or after the date of the adoption of this resolution.

3 SEC. 321. SENSE OF SENATE REGARDING AGRICULTURAL

4 TRADE PROGRAMS.

5 It is the sense of the Senate that the functional totals

6 in this concurrent resolution assume the Secretary of Agri7 culture will use agricultural trade programs established by

8 law to promote, to the maximum extent practicable, the ex9 port of United States agricultural commodities and prod10 ucts.

11 SEC. 322. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING LONG-TERM

12 ENTITLEMENT REFORMS.

13 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that the resolution

14 assumes the following—

15 (1) entitlement spending has risen dramatically

16 over the last thirty-five years;

17 (2) in 1963, mandatory spending (i.e. entitle18 ment spending and interest on the debt) made up 30

19 percent of the budget, this figure rose to 45 percent by

20 1973, to 56 percent by 1983 and to 61 percent by

21 1993;

22 (3) mandatory spending is expected to make up

23 68 percent of the Federal budget in 1998;

24 (4) absent changes, that spending is expected to

25 take up over 70 percent of the Federal budget shortly
67

HCON 284 EAS

1 after the year 2000 and 74 percent of the budget by

2 the year 2008;

3 (5) if no action is taken, mandatory spending

4 will consume 100 percent of the budget by the year

5 2030;

6 (6) this mandatory spending will continue to

7 crowd out spending for the traditional ‘‘discre8 tionary’’ functions of Government like clean air and

9 water, a strong National defense, parks and recre10 ation, education, our transportation system, law en11 forcement, research and development and other infra12 structure spending;

13 (7) taking significant steps sooner rather than

14 later to reform entitlement spending will not only

15 boost economic growth in this country, it will also

16 prevent the need for drastic tax and spending deci17 sions in the next century.

18 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen19 ate that the levels in this budget resolution assume that Con20 gress and the President should work to enact structural re21 forms in entitlement spending in 1998 and beyond which

22 sufficiently restrain the growth of mandatory spending in

23 order to keep the budget in balance over the long term, ex24 tend the solvency of the Social Security and Medicare Trust

25 Funds, avoid crowding out funding for basic Government
68

HCON 284 EAS

1 functions and that every effort should be made to hold man2 datory spending to no more than seventy percent of the

3 budget.

4 SEC. 323. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING FREEDOM OF

5 HEALTH CARE CHOICE FOR MEDICARE SEN6 IORS.

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

8 (1) Medicare beneficiaries should have the same

9 right to obtain health care from the physician or pro10 vider of their choice as do Members of Congress and

11 virtually all other Americans.

12 (2) Most seniors are denied this right by current

13 restrictions on their health care choices.

14 (3) Affording seniors this option would create

15 greater health-care choices and result in fewer claims

16 being paid out of the near-bankrupt Medicare trust

17 funds.

18 (4) Legislation to uphold this right of health care

19 choice for seniors must protect beneficiaries and Medi20 care from fraud and abuse. Such legislation must in21 clude provisions that—

22 (A) require that such contracts providing

23 this right be in writing, be signed by the Medi24 care beneficiary, and provide that no claim be
69

HCON 284 EAS

1 submitted to the Health Care Financing Admin2 istration;

3 (B) preclude such contracts when the bene4 ficiary is experiencing a medical emergency;

5 (C) allow for the Medicare beneficiary to

6 modify or terminate the contract prospectively at

7 any time and to return to Medicare; and

8 (D) are subject to stringent fraud and abuse

9 law, including the Medicare anti-fraud provi10 sions in the Health Insurance Portability and

11 Accountability Act of 1996.

12 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress

13 that seniors have the right to see the physician or health

14 care provider of their choice, and not be limited in such

15 right by the imposition of unreasonable conditions on pro16 viders who are willing to treat seniors on a private basis,

17 and that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

18 in this resolution assume that legislation will be enacted

19 to ensure this right.

20 SEC. 324. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING REPAIR AND

21 CONSTRUCTION NEEDS OF INDIAN SCHOOLS.

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

23 (1) many of our Nation’s tribal schools are in a

24 state of serious disrepair. The Bureau of Indian Af25 fairs (BIA) operates 187 school facilities nationwide.
70

HCON 284 EAS

1 Enrollment in these schools, which presently numbers

2 47,214 students, has been growing rapidly. A recent

3 General Accounting Office report indicates that the

4 repair backlog in these schools totals $754,000,000,

5 and that the BIA schools are in generally worse con6 dition than all schools nationally;

7 (2) approximately 60 of these schools are in need

8 of complete replacement or serious renovation. Many

9 of the renovations include basic structural repair for

10 the safety of children, new heating components to keep

11 students warm, and roofing replacement to keep the

12 snow and rain out of the classroom. In addition to

13 failing to provide adequate learning environments for

14 Indian children, these repair and replacement needs

15 pose a serious liability issue for the Federal Govern16 ment;

17 (3) sixty-three percent of the BIA schools are

18 over 30 years old, and 26 percent are over 50 years

19 old. Approximately 40 percent of all students in BIA

20 schools are in portable classrooms. Originally in21 tended as temporary facilities while tribes awaited

22 new construction funds, these ‘‘portables’’ have a max23 imum 10 year life-span. Because of the construction

24 backlog, children have been shuffling between class-
71

HCON 284 EAS

1 rooms in the harsh climates of the Northern plains

2 and Western States for 10 to 15 years;

3 (4) annual appropriations for BIA education fa4 cilities replacement and repair combined have aver5 aged $20,000,000 to $30,000,000 annually, meeting

6 only 4 percent of total need. At the present rate, one

7 deteriorating BIA school can be replaced each year,

8 with estimates of completion of nine schools in the

9 next seven years. Since the new construction and re10 pair backlog is so great and growing, the current

11 focus at BIA construction must remain on emergency

12 and safety needs only, without prioritizing program

13 needs such as increasing enrollment or technology in

14 the classroom; and

15 (5) unlike most schools, the BIA schools are a re16 sponsibility of the Federal Government. Unfortu17 nately, the failure of the Federal Government to live

18 up to this responsibility has come at the expense of

19 quality education for some of this Nation’s poorest

20 children with the fewest existing opportunities to bet21 ter themselves.

22 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen23 ate that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

24 in this budget resolution assume that the repair and con25 struction backlog affecting Bureau of Indian Affairs school
72

HCON 284 EAS

1 facilities should be eliminated over a period of no more than

2 5 years beginning with fiscal year 1999, and that the Presi3 dent should submit to Congress a plan for the orderly elimi4 nation of this backlog.

5 SEC. 325. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON SOCIAL SECURITY

6 PERSONAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS AND THE

7 BUDGET SURPLUS.

8 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find9 ings:

10 (1) The Social Security program is the founda11 tion of retirement income for most Americans, and

12 solving the financial problems of the Social Security

13 program is a vital national priority and essential for

14 the retirement security of today’s working Americans

15 and their families.

16 (2) There is a growing bipartisan consensus that

17 personal retirement accounts should be an important

18 feature of Social Security reform.

19 (3) Personal retirement accounts can provide a

20 substantial retirement nest egg and real personal

21 wealth. For an individual 28 years old on the date

22 of the adoption of this resolution, earning an average

23 wage, and retiring at age 65 in 2035, just 1 percent

24 of that individual’s wages deposited each year in a

25 personal retirement account and invested in securities
73

HCON 284 EAS

1 consisting of the Standard & Poors 500 would grow

2 to $132,000, and be worth approximately 20 percent

3 of the benefits that would be provided to the individ4 ual under the current provisions of the Social Secu5 rity program.

6 (4) Personal retirement accounts would give the

7 majority of Americans who do not own any invest8 ment assets a new stake in the economic growth of

9 America.

10 (5) Personal retirement accounts would dem11 onstrate the value of savings and the magic of com12 pound interest to all Americans. Today, Americans

13 save less than people in almost every other country.

14 (6) Personal retirement accounts would help

15 Americans to better prepare for retirement generally.

16 According to the Congressional Research Service, 60

17 percent of Americans are not actively participating

18 in a retirement plan other than Social Security, al19 though Social Security was never intended to be the

20 sole source of retirement income.

21 (7) Personal retirement accounts would allow

22 partial prefunding of retirement benefits, thereby pro23 viding for Social Security’s future financial stability.

24 (8) The Federal budget will register a surplus of

25 $671,000,000,000 over the next 10 years, offering a
74

HCON 284 EAS

1 unique opportunity to begin a permanent solution to

2 Social Security’s financing.

3 (9) Using the Federal budget surplus to fund

4 personal retirement accounts would be an important

5 first step in comprehensive Social Security reform

6 and ensuring the delivery of promised retirement ben7 efits.

8 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen9 ate that this resolution assumes that the Committee on Fi10 nance shall consider and report a legislative proposal this

11 year that would dedicate the Federal budget surplus to the

12 establishment of a program of personal retirement accounts

13 for working Americans and reduce the unfunded liabilities

14 of the Social Security program.

15 SEC. 326. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE ELIMI16 NATION OF THE MARRIAGE PENALTY.

17 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that:

18 (1) Marriage is the foundation of the American

19 society and the key institution preserving our values.

20 (2) The tax code should not penalize those who

21 choose to marry.

22 (3) However, the Congressional Budget Office

23 found that 42 percent of married couples face a mar24 riage penalty under the current tax system.
75

HCON 284 EAS

1 (4) The Congressional Budget Office found that

2 the average penalty amounts to $1,380 a year.

3 (5) This penalty is one of the factors behind the

4 decline of marriage.

5 (6) In 1970, just 0.5 percent of the couples in the

6 United States were unmarried. By 1996, this percent7 age had risen to 7.2 percent.

8 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen9 ate that the provisions in this budget resolution assume that

10 the Congress shall begin to phase out the marriage penalty

11 this year.

12 SEC. 327. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING

13 AFFORDABLE, HIGH-QUALITY HEALTH CARE

14 FOR SENIORS.

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

16 (1) Seniors deserve affordable, high quality

17 health care.

18 (2) The Medicare program under title XVIII of

19 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.) has

20 made health care affordable for millions of seniors.

21 (3) Beneficiaries under the Medicare program

22 deserve to know that such program will cover the ben23 efits that they are currently entitled to.
76

HCON 284 EAS

1 (4) Beneficiaries under the Medicare program

2 can pay out-of-pocket for health care services when3 ever they—

4 (A) do not want a claim for reimbursement

5 for such services submitted to such program; or

6 (B) want or need to obtain health care serv7 ices that such program does not cover.

8 (5) Beneficiaries under the Medicare program

9 can use doctors who do not receive any reimbursement

10 under such program.

11 (6) Close to 75 percent of seniors have annual

12 incomes below $25,000, including 4 percent who have

13 annual incomes below $5,000, making any additional

14 out-of-pocket costs for health care services extremely

15 burdensome.

16 (7) Very few beneficiaries under the Medicare

17 program report having difficulty obtaining access to

18 a physician who accepts reimbursement under such

19 program.

20 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress

21 that the assumptions underlying the functional totals in

22 this resolution assume that seniors have the right to afford23 able, high-quality health care, that they have the right to

24 choose their physicians, and that no change should be made

25 to the Medicare program that could—
77

HCON 284 EAS

1 (1) impose unreasonable and unpredictable out2 of-pocket costs for seniors or erode the benefits that the

3 38,000,000 beneficiaries under the Medicare program

4 are entitled to;

5 (2) compromise the efforts of the Secretary of

6 Health and Human Services to screen inappropriate

7 or fraudulent claims for reimbursement under such

8 program; and

9 (3) allow unscrupulous providers under such

10 program to bill twice for the same services.

11 SEC. 328. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING PERMANENT

12 EXTENSION OF INCOME AVERAGING FOR

13 FARMERS.

14 It is the sense of Congress that the provisions of this

15 resolution assume that if the revenue levels are reduced pur16 suant to section 201 of this resolution for tax legislation,

17 such amount as is necessary shall be used to permanently

18 extend income averaging for farmers for purposes of the In19 ternal Revenue Code of 1986.

20 SEC. 329. SENSE OF THE SENATE TO MAINTAIN FULL FUND21 ING FOR THE SECTION 202 ELDERLY HOUS22 ING PROGRAM.

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

24 (1) The Section 202 Elderly Housing program is

25 the most important housing program for elderly, low-
78

HCON 284 EAS

1 income Americans, providing both affordable low-in2 come housing and supportive services designed to meet

3 the special needs of the elderly.

4 (2) Since 1959, the Section 202 Elderly Housing

5 program has funded some 5,400 elderly housing

6 projects with over 330,000 housing units, with the

7 current average tenant in Section 202 housing being

8 a frail, older woman in her seventies, living alone

9 with an income of less than $10,000 per year.

10 (3) The combination of affordable housing and

11 supportive services under the Section 202 Elderly

12 Housing program is critical to promoting independ13 ent living, self-sufficiency, and dignity for the elderly

14 while delaying more costly institutional care.

15 (4) There are over 1.4 million elderly Americans

16 currently identified as having ‘‘worst case housing

17 needs’’ and in need of affordable housing.

18 (5) There are 33 million Americans aged 65 and

19 over, some 13 percent of all Americans. The number

20 of elderly Americans is anticipated to grow to over 69

21 million by the year 2030, which would be some 20

22 percent of all Americans, and continue to increase to

23 almost 80 million by 2050.

24 (6) The President’s Budget Request for fiscal

25 year 1999 proposes reducing funding for the Section
79

HCON 284 EAS

1 202 Elderly Housing program from the fiscal year

2 1998 level of $645,000,000 to $109,000,000 in fiscal

3 year 1999. This represents a reduction of over 83 per4 cent in funding, which will result in reducing the

5 construction of Section 202 housing units from some

6 6,000 units in fiscal year 1998 to only 1,500 units in

7 fiscal year 1999.

8 (7) The full funding of the Section 202 Elderly

9 Housing program as an independent Federal housing

10 program is an investment in our elderly citizens as

11 well as our Nation.

12 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen13 ate that the levels in this resolution assume that the Section

14 202 Elderly Housing program, as provided under section

15 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended, shall be funded

16 in fiscal years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 at not

17 less than the fiscal year 1998 funding level of $645,000,000.

18 SEC. 330. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING OUTLAY ESTI19 MATES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

20 BUDGET.

21 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find22 ings:

23 (1) The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 created a

24 new era for Federal spending and forced the Depart-
80

HCON 284 EAS

1 ment of Defense to plan on limited spending over the

2 five-year period from fiscal year 1998 through 2002.

3 (2) The agreements forged under the Balanced

4 Budget Act of 1997 specifically defined the available

5 amounts of budget authority and outlays, requiring

6 the Department of Defense to properly plan its future

7 activities in the new, constrained budget environment.

8 (3) The Department of Defense worked with the

9 Office of Management and Budget to develop a fiscal

10 year 1999 budget which complies with the Balanced

11 Budget Act of 1997.

12 (4) Based on Department of Defense program

13 plans and policy changes, the Office of Management

14 and Budget and the Department of Defense made de15 tailed estimates of fiscal year 1999 Department of De16 fense outlay rates to ensure that the budget submitted

17 would comply with the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.

18 (5) The Congressional Budget Office outlay esti19 mate of the fiscal year 1999 Department of Defense

20 budget request exceeds both the outlay limit imposed

21 by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and the Office

22 of Management and Budget’s outlay estimate, a dis23 agreement which would force a total restructuring of

24 the Department of Defense’s fiscal year 1999 budget.
81

HCON 284 EAS

1 (6) The restructuring imposed on the Depart2 ment of Defense would have a devastating impact on

3 readiness, troop morale, military quality of life, and

4 ongoing procurement and development programs.

5 (7) The restructuring of the budget would be

6 driven solely by differing statistical estimates made

7 by capable parties.

8 (8) In a letter currently under review, the Direc9 tor of the Office of Management and Budget will iden10 tify multiple differences between the Office of Manage11 ment and Budget’s estimated outlay rates and the

12 Congressional Budget Office’s estimated outlay rates.

13 (9) New information on Department of Defense

14 policy changes and program execution plans now per15 mit the Office of Management and Budget and the

16 Congressional Budget Office to reevaluate their initial

17 projections of fiscal year 1999 outlay rates.

18 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen19 ate that the totals underlying this concurrent resolution on

20 the budget assume that not later than April 22, 1998, the

21 Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the Sec22 retary of Defense, and the Director of the Congressional

23 Budget Office shall complete discussions and develop a com24 mon estimate of the projected fiscal year 1999 outlay rates

25 for Department of Defense accounts.
82

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 331. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING OUTLAY ESTI2 MATES FOR THE BUDGETS OF FEDERAL

3 AGENCIES OTHER THAN THE DEPARTMENT

4 OF DEFENSE.

5 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find6 ings:

7 (1) The Federal civilian workforce in non-De8 fense Department agencies shrank by 125,000 employ9 ees, or 10 percent, between 1992 and 1997.

10 (2) The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 assumed

11 over $60,000,000,000 in reductions in nondefense dis12 cretionary spending over the period 1998–2002.

13 (3) These reductions were agreed to notwith14 standing ever-increasing responsibilities in agencies

15 engaged in fighting crime, combating the drug war,

16 countering terrorist threats, cleaning the environment,

17 enforcing the law, improving education, conducting

18 health research, conducting energy research and devel19 opment, enhancing the Nation’s physical infrastruc20 ture, and providing veterans programs.

21 (4) All Federal agencies have worked closely with

22 the Office of Management and Budget to balance

23 much-needed programmatic needs with fiscal pru24 dence and to submit budget requests for fiscal year

25 1999 that comply with the Balanced Budget Act of

26 1997.
83

HCON 284 EAS

1 (5) Reductions in the President’s requests, as es2 timated by the Office of Management and Budget, to

3 comply with the Congressional Budget Office’s esti4 mates could seriously jeopardize priority domestic

5 discretionary programs.

6 (6) There is no mechanism through which the

7 Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Man8 agement and Budget identify their differences in out9 lay rates for nondefense agencies.

10 (7) Such consultation would lead to greater un11 derstanding between the two agencies and potentially

12 fewer and/or smaller differences in the future.

13 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen14 ate that the totals underlying this concurrent resolution on

15 the budget assume that not later than April 22, 1998, the

16 Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the

17 Director of the Congressional Budget Office, in consultation

18 with the Secretaries of the affected nondefense agencies, shall

19 complete discussions and develop a common estimate of the

20 projected fiscal year 1999 outlay rates for accounts in non21 defense agencies.
84

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 332. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING AN EVALUA2 TION OF THE OUTCOME OF WELFARE RE3 FORM.

4 It is the sense of the Senate that the budgetary levels

5 in this resolution assume that—

6 (1) the Secretary of Health and Human Services

7 will, as part of the annual report to Congress under

8 section 411 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

9 611), include data regarding the rate of employment,

10 job retention, and earnings characteristics of former

11 recipients of assistance under the State programs

12 funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security

13 Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) for each such State pro14 gram; and

15 (2) for purposes of the annual report for fiscal

16 year 1997, the information described in paragraph

17 (1) will be transmitted to Congress not later than

18 September 1, 1998.

19 SEC. 333. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE ESTAB20 LISHMENT OF A NATIONAL BACKGROUND

21 CHECK SYSTEM FOR LONG-TERM CARE WORK22 ERS.

23 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find24 ings:

25 (1) The impending retirement of the baby boom

26 generation will greatly increase the demand and need
85

HCON 284 EAS

1 for quality long-term care and it is incumbent on

2 Congress and the President to ensure that Medicare

3 and Medicaid patients are protected from abuse, ne4 glect, and mistreatment.

5 (2) Although the majority of long-term care fa6 cilities do an excellent job in caring for elderly and

7 disabled patients, incidents of abuse and neglect and

8 mistreatment do occur at an unacceptable rate and

9 are not limited to nursing homes alone.

10 (3) Current Federal and State safeguards are in11 adequate because there is little or no information

12 sharing between States about known abusers and no

13 common State procedures for tracking abusers from

14 State to State and facility to facility.

15 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen16 ate that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

17 in this concurrent resolution on the budget assume that a

18 national registry of abusive long-term care workers should

19 be established by building upon existing infrastructures at

20 the Federal and State levels that would enable long-term

21 care providers who participate in the Medicare and Medic22 aid programs (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.; 1396 et seq.) to con23 duct background checks on prospective employees.
86

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 334. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON EXPANDING MEDI2 CARE BENEFITS.

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

4 (1) In the 1997 Balanced Budget Agreement,

5 changes were made to Medicare that extended the sol6 vency of the Trust Fund for 10 years.

7 (2) The Medicare Commission, also established

8 in the Balanced Budget Agreement, has just started

9 the task of examining the Medicare program in an ef10 fort to make sound policy recommendations to Con11 gress and the Administration about what needs to be

12 done to ensure that Medicare is financially prepared

13 to handle the added burden when the baby boomers

14 begin retiring.

15 (3) The problems facing Medicare are not about

16 more revenues. The program needs to do more to im17 prove the health care status of retirees and give them

18 more choices and better information to make wise

19 consumer decisions when purchasing health care serv20 ices.

21 (4) Improving the health care status of senior

22 citizens would ensure additional savings for Medicare.

23 Helping seniors stay healthier should be a priority of

24 any legislation aimed at protecting Medicare.

25 (5) In order to keep seniors healthier, Medicare

26 has to become more prevention based. Currently,
87

HCON 284 EAS

1 Medicare offers prevention benefits, and the Balanced

2 Budget Act of 1997 made a substantial investment in

3 prevention benefits, providing $8,500,000,000 over 10

4 years.

5 (6) Preventing illnesses or long hospital stays or

6 repeated hospital stays will save Medicare dollars.

7 (7) Medicare cannot be saved without structural

8 changes and reforms.

9 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen10 ate that the functional totals underlying this resolution as11 sume that the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 directed the

12 National Bipartisan Commission on the future of Medicare

13 to examine Medicare’s benefit structure, including preven14 tion benefits, and make recommendations to the Congress

15 on such benefits in the context of an overall plan to extend

16 the solvency of the program.

17 SEC. 335. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON BATTLEFIELD PRESER18 VATION.

19 It is the sense of the Senate that the budget levels in

20 this resolution assume that—

21 (1) preserving Revolutionary War, War of 1812,

22 and Civil War battlefields is an integral part of pre23 serving our Nation’s history;

24 (2) the Secretary of the Interior should give spe25 cial priority to the preservation of Revolutionary War
88

HCON 284 EAS

1 and War of 1812 battlefields, by making funds avail2 able for the conduct of the Revolutionary War and

3 War of 1812 Historic Preservation Study as author4 ized by section 603 of Public Law 104–333 (16 U.S.C.

5 1a–5 note); and

6 (3) the Secretary of the Interior should give spe7 cial priority to the preservation of Revolutionary

8 War, War of 1812, and Civil War battlefields by allo9 cating funds in the Land and Water Conservation

10 Fund for the purchase of battlefield sites the integrity

11 of which is threatened by urban or suburban develop12 ment.

13 SEC. 336. A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE SENATE’S SUP14 PORT FOR FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAW

15 ENFORCEMENT.

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

17 (1) our Federal, State and local law enforcement

18 officers provide essential services that preserve and

19 protect our freedom and safety, and with the support

20 of Federal assistance, State and local law enforcement

21 officers have succeeded in reducing the national

22 scourge of violent crime, illustrated by a murder rate

23 in 1996 which is projected to be the lowest since 1971

24 and a violent crime total in 1996 which is the lowest

25 since 1990;
89

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) through a comprehensive effort to attack vio2 lence against women mounted by State and local law

3 enforcement, and dedicated volunteers and profes4 sionals who provide victim services, shelter, counsel5 ing and advocacy to battered women and their chil6 dren, important strides have been made against the

7 national scourge of violence against women, illus8 trated by the decline in the murder rate for wives, ex9 wives and girlfriends at the hands of their ‘‘inti10 mates’’ fell to a 19-year low in 1995;

11 (3) recent gains by Federal, State and local law

12 enforcement in the fight against violent crime and vi13 olence against women are fragile, and continued fi14 nancial commitment from the Federal Government for

15 funding and financial assistance is required to sus16 tain and build upon these gains; and

17 (4) the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund as

18 adopted by the Violent Crime Control and Law En19 forcement Act of 1994 funds the Violent Crime Con20 trol and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the Violence

21 Against Women Act of 1994, and the Antiterrorism

22 and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 without add23 ing to the Federal budget deficit.

24 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen25 ate that the provisions and the functional totals underlying
90

HCON 284 EAS

1 this resolution assume the Federal Government’s commit2 ment to fund Federal law enforcement programs and pro3 grams to assist State and local efforts to combat violent

4 crime, including violence against women, shall be main5 tained and funding for the Violent Crime Reduction Trust

6 Fund shall continue to at least fiscal year 2003.

7 SEC. 337. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ANALYSIS OF CIVILIAN

8 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS IN

9 THE FEDERAL BUDGET.

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

11 (1) The National Academy of Sciences, National

12 Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine

13 have recommended, in their 1995 report, entitled ‘‘Al14 locating Federal Funds for Science and Technology’’,

15 that the Federal science and technology budget ‘‘be

16 presented as a comprehensive whole in the President’s

17 budget and similarly considered as a whole at the be18 ginning of the congressional budget process before the

19 total Federal budget is disaggregated and sent to the

20 appropriations committees and subcommittees’’.

21 (2) Civilian Federal agencies are supporting

22 more than $35,000,000,000 of research and develop23 ment in fiscal year 1998, but it is difficult for the

24 Congress and the public to track or understand this
91

HCON 284 EAS

1 support because it is dispersed among 12 different

2 budget functions.

3 (3) A meaningful examination of the overall

4 Federal budget for science and technology, consistent

5 with the recommendation of the National Academies,

6 as well as an examination of science and technology

7 budgets in individual civilian agencies, would be fa8 cilitated if the President’s budget request clearly dis9 played the amounts requested for science and tech10 nology programs across all civilian agencies and clas11 sified these amounts in Budget Function 250.

12 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen13 ate that the congressional budget for the United States for

14 fiscal years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 should con15 solidate the spending for all Federal civilian science and

16 technology programs in Budget Function 250, and that the

17 President should accordingly transmit to the Congress a

18 budget request for fiscal year 2000 that classifies these pro19 grams, across all Federal civilian departments and agen20 cies, in Budget Function 250.

21 SEC. 338. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON CIVILIAN SCIENCE

22 AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS IN THE FED23 ERAL BUDGET.

24 It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions un25 derlying the function totals in this budget resolution assume
92

HCON 284 EAS

1 that expenditures for civilian science and technology pro2 grams in the Federal budget will double over the period

3 from fiscal year 1998 to fiscal year 2008.

4 SEC. 339. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON LONG-TERM BUDGET5 ING AND REPAYMENT OF THE PUBLIC DEBT.

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

7 (1) today, there are 34,000,000 Americans over

8 the age of 65, and by the year 2030, that number will

9 grow to nearly 70,000,000;

10 (2) in 1963, mandatory spending represented 30

11 percent of the Federal budget, while discretionary

12 spending made up 70 percent, and by 1998, those

13 proportions have almost completely reversed, in that

14 mandatory spending now accounts for 68 percent of

15 the Federal budget, while discretionary spending rep16 resents 32 percent;

17 (3) according to the 1997 Annual Report of the

18 Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Sur19 vivors Insurance and Disability Insurance (OASDI)

20 Trust Fund—

21 (A) the difference between the income and

22 benefits for the OASDI program is a deficit of

23 2.23 percent of taxable payroll;
93

HCON 284 EAS

1 (B) the assets in the Trust Fund are ex2 pected to be depleted under present law in the

3 year 2029;

4 (C) by the time the assets in the Trust Fund

5 are depleted, annual tax revenues will be suffi6 cient to cover only three-fourths of the annual ex7 penditures;

8 (D) intermediate estimates are that OASDI

9 will absorb nearly 17.5 percent of national pay10 roll by the year 2030; and

11 (E) the cost of the OASDI program is esti12 mated to rise from its current level of 4.7 percent

13 of Gross Domestic Product to 6.7 percent by the

14 end of the 75-year projection period;

15 (4) according to reports by the Congressional

16 Budget Office, the Economic and Budget Outlook:

17 Fiscal Years 1999-2008 (January 1998) and Reduc18 ing the Deficit: Spending and Revenue Options

19 (March 1997)—

20 (A) the Medicare Part A Trust Fund will be

21 exhausted early in fiscal year 2010;

22 (B) enrollment in Medicare will increase

23 dramatically as the baby boomers reach age 65;

24 (C) between the years 2010 and 2030, en25 rollment in Medicare is projected to grow by 2.4
94

HCON 284 EAS

1 percent per year, up from the 1.4 percent aver2 age annual growth projected through 2007;

3 (D) by the year 2030, Medicare enrollment

4 will have doubled, to 75,000,000 people; and

5 (E) the increase in Medicare enrollment

6 caused by the aging of the population will be ac7 companied by a tapering of the growth rate of

8 the working age population, and the number of

9 workers will drop from 3.8 for every Medicare

10 beneficiary in 1997 to 2.02 per beneficiary by

11 2030;

12 (5) the demographic shift that is currently tak13 ing place, and will continue for the next 30 years,

14 will put a tremendous burden on workers as the cost

15 of programs such as Social Security and Medicare

16 are borne by proportionately fewer workers;

17 (6) the current Budget Resolution, which projects

18 revenues and spending only for the next 10 years,

19 does not give Congress a clear picture of the budget

20 problems that confront the United States shortly after

21 the turn of the century;

22 (7) currently, 14 percent of the Federal budget is

23 spent on interest payments on the national debt; and

24 (8) if projected surpluses are used entirely for

25 debt reduction and current tax and spending policies
95

HCON 284 EAS

1 remain unchanged, the share of Federal income need2 ed to pay interest would drop below 5 percent within

3 12 years, and in 1997, that 10 percentage-point re4 duction would have amounted to $158,000,000,000

5 available for other priorities.

6 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen7 ate that the functional totals in this concurrent resolution

8 assume that future budget resolutions and future budgets

9 submitted by the President should include—

10 (1) an analysis for the period of 30 fiscal years

11 beginning with such fiscal year, of the estimated levels

12 of total budget outlays and total new budget author13 ity, the estimated revenues to be received, the esti14 mated surplus or deficit, if any, for each major Fed15 eral entitlement program for each fiscal year in such

16 period; and

17 (2) a specific accounting of payments, if any,

18 made to reduce the public debt, or unfunded liabilities

19 associated with each major Federal entitlement pro20 gram.

21 SEC. 340. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING PRESIDENT’S

22 BUDGET.

23 It is the sense of the Senate that the budgetary levels

24 in this resolution assume that the President should submit,

25 as part of the budget request of the President that is submit-
96

HCON 284 EAS

1 ted to Congress, a study of the impact of the provisions of

2 the budget on each generation of Americans and its long3 term effects on each generation.

4 SEC. 341. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE VALUE

5 OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM FOR FU6 TURE RETIREES.

7 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find8 ings:

9 (1) The Social Security system has allowed a

10 generation of Americans to retire with dignity.

11 Today, 13 percent of the population is 65 or older

12 and by 2030, 20 percent of the population will be 65

or older. More than 1 13 ⁄2 of the elderly do not receive

private pensions and more than 1 14 ⁄3 have no income

15 from assets.

16 (2) For 60 percent of all senior citizens, Social

17 Security benefits provide almost 80 percent of their

18 retirement income. For 80 percent of all senior citi19 zens, Social Security benefits provide over 50 percent

20 of their retirement income.

21 (3) Poverty rates among the elderly are at the

22 lowest level since the United States began to keep pov23 erty statistics, due in large part to the Social Secu24 rity system.
97

HCON 284 EAS

1 (4) 78 percent of Americans pay more in payroll

2 taxes than they do in income taxes.

3 (5) According to the 1997 report of the Manag4 ing Trustee for the Social Security trust funds, the

5 accumulated balance in the Federal Old-Age and Sur6 vivors Insurance Trust Fund is estimated to fall to

7 zero by 2029, and the estimated payroll tax at that

8 time will be sufficient to cover only 75 percent of the

9 benefits owed to retirees at that time.

10 (6) The average American retiring in the year

11 2015 will pay $250,000 in payroll taxes over the

12 course of a working career.

13 (7) Future generations of Americans must be

14 guaranteed the same value from the Social Security

15 system as past covered recipients.

16 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen17 ate that the budgetary levels in this resolution assume that

18 no change in the Social Security system should be made

19 that would reduce the value of the Social Security system

20 for future generations of retirees.

21 SEC. 342. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE LAND AND WATER

22 CONSERVATION FUND.

23 It is the sense of the Senate that the budget levels in

24 this resolution assume that programs funded from the Land
98

HCON 284 EAS

1 and Water Conservation Fund should be funded in the full

2 amount authorized by law.

3 SEC. 343. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON EDUCATION GOALS.

4 It is the sense of the Senate that the functional totals

5 underlying this resolution assume that the Federal Govern6 ment should work hand-in-hand with States, school dis7 tricts, and local leaders—

8 (1) to accomplish the following goals by the year

9 2005:

10 (A) establish achievement levels and assess11 ments in every grade for the core academic cur12 riculum; measure each regular student’s perform13 ance; and prohibit the practice of social pro14 motion of students (promoting students routinely

15 from one grade to the next without regard to

16 their academic achievement);

17 (B) provide remedial programs for students

18 whose achievement levels indicate they should not

19 be promoted to the next grade;

20 (C) create smaller schools to enable students

21 to have closer interaction with teachers;

22 (D) require at least 180 days per year of

23 instruction in core curriculum subjects;

24 (E) recruit new teachers who are adequately

25 trained and credentialed in the subject or sub-
99

HCON 284 EAS

1 jects they teach and encourage excellent, experi2 enced teachers to remain in the classroom by

3 providing adequate salaries; require all teachers

4 to be credentialed and limit emergency or tem5 porary teaching credentials to a limited period

6 of time; hold teachers and principals accountable

7 to high educational standards; and

8 (F) require all regular students to pass an

9 examination in basic core curriculum subjects in

10 order to receive a high school diploma; and

11 (2) to reaffirm the importance of public school12 ing and commit to guaranteeing excellence and ac13 countability in the public schools of this Nation.

14 SEC. 344. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF THE SENATE.

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

16 (1) while it is important to study the effects of

17 class size on learning and study the need to hire more

18 teachers, each type of study must be carried out in

19 conjunction with an effort to ensure that there will be

20 quality teachers in every classroom;

21 (2) all children deserve well-educated teachers;

22 (3) there is a teacher quality crisis in the United

23 States;

24 (4) individuals entering a classroom as teachers

25 should have a sound grasp on the subject the individ-
100

HCON 284 EAS

1 uals intend to teach, and the individuals should know

2 how to teach;

3 (5) less than 40 percent of the individuals teach4 ing core subjects (consisting of English, mathematics,

5 science, social studies, and foreign languages) majored

6 or minored in the core subjects;

7 (6) the quality of teachers impacts student

8 achievement;

9 (7) the measure of a good teacher is how much

10 and how well the teacher’s students learn;

11 (8) teachers should have the opportunity to learn

12 new technology and teaching methods through the es13 tablishment of teacher training facilities so that

14 teachers can share their new knowledge and experi15 ences with children in the classroom;

16 (9) school officials should have the flexibility the

17 officials need to have teachers in their schools ade18 quately trained to meet strenuous teacher standards;

19 (10) knowledgeable and eager individuals of

20 sound character and various professional backgrounds

21 should be encouraged to enter kindergarten through

22 grade 12 classrooms as teachers; and

23 (11) States should have maximum flexibility and

24 incentives to create alternative teacher certification
101

HCON 284 EAS

1 and licensure programs in order to recruit well-edu2 cated people into the teaching profession.

3 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen4 ate that the functional totals in this concurrent resolution

5 on the budget assume—

6 (1) the enactment of legislation to provide assist7 ance for programs that—

8 (A) focus on teacher training delivered

9 through local partnerships, with private and

10 public partners, to ensure that current and fu11 ture teachers possess necessary teaching skills

12 and knowledge of subject areas; and

13 (B) focus on alternative certification to re14 cruit knowledgeable and eager individuals of

15 sound character to enter kindergarten through

16 grade 12 classrooms as teachers;

17 (2) that the quality of teachers can be strength18 ened by improving the academic knowledge of teachers

19 in the subject areas in which the teachers teach;

20 (3) that institutions of higher education should

21 be held accountable to prepare teachers who are highly

22 competent in the subject areas in which the teachers

23 teach, including preparing teachers by providing

24 training in the effective uses of technologies in class25 rooms; and
102

HCON 284 EAS

1 (4) that there should be recruitment into teach2 ing of high quality individuals, including individuals

3 from other occupations.

4 SEC. 345. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INS CIRCUIT RIDERS

5 IN THE FORMER SOVIET UNION.

6 It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this

7 resolution assume that included in the funding for the Im8 migration and Naturalization Service (INS) is $2,000,000

9 for the establishment of INS circuit riders in the former

10 Soviet Union for the purpose of processing refugees and con11 ducting medical examinations of refugees who will enter the

12 United States under the Refugee Act of 1980.

13 SEC. 346. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING FUNDING

14 FOR THE AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

15 It is the sense of the Senate that the congressional

16 budget for the United States Government as provided for

17 in this resolution should assure that—

18 (1) the contract authority level for the Airport

19 Improvement Program (provided for in part B of sub20 title VII of title 49, United States Code) not be re21 duced below the current level of $2,347,000,000; and

22 (2) the critical infrastructure development,

23 maintenance, and repair of airports not be jeopard24 ized.
103

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 347. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE ONE HUNDRED

2 FIFTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION SHOULD

3 REAUTHORIZE FUNDS FOR THE FARMLAND

4 PROTECTION PROGRAM.

5 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find6 ings—

7 (1) eighteen States and dozens of localities have

8 spent nearly $1,000,000,000 to protect over 600,000

9 acres of important farmland;

10 (2) the Farmland Protection Program has pro11 vided cost-sharing for 18 States and dozens of local12 ities to protect over 82,000 acres on 230 farms since

13 1996;

14 (3) the Farmland Protection Program has gen15 erated new interest in saving farmland in commu16 nities around the country;

17 (4) the Farmland Protection Program represents

18 an innovative and voluntary partnership, rewards

19 local ingenuity, and supports local priorities;

20 (5) current funds authorized for the Farmland

21 Protection Program will be exhausted in the next six

22 months;

23 (6) the United States is losing two acres of our

24 best farmland to development every minute of every

25 day;
104

HCON 284 EAS

1 (7) these lands produce three quarters of the

2 fruits and vegetables and over one half of the dairy

3 in the United States.

4 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen5 ate that the functional totals contained in this resolution

6 assume that the One Hundred Fifth Congress, Second Ses7 sion will reauthorize funds for the Farmland Protection

8 Program.

9 SEC. 348. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON HEALTH CARE QUAL10 ITY.

11 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find12 ings—

13 (1) out of a total 549 plans under the Federal

14 Employees Health Benefits Program, which includes

15 fee-for-service, point of service, and Health Mainte16 nance Organizations, only 186 were fully accredited;

17 (2) out of a total 549 plans under the Federal

18 Employees Health Benefits Program, which includes

19 fee-for-service, point of service, and Health Mainte20 nance Organizations, 7 were denied accreditation.

21 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen22 ate that the assumptions underlying this resolution provide

23 for the enactment of legislation requiring all health plans

24 participating in the Federal Employees Health Benefits

25 Program to be accredited by a nationally recognized accred-
105

HCON 284 EAS

1 itation organization representative of a spectrum of health

2 care interests including purchasers, consumers, providers

3 and health plans.

4 SEC. 349. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING WASTEFUL

5 SPENDING IN DEFENSE DEPARTMENT ACQUI6 SITION PRACTICES.

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

8 (1) according to the Defense Department’s In9 spector General, despite efforts to streamline Govern10 ment purchases, the military, in some cases, paid

11 more than ‘‘fair value’’ for many items;

12 (2) efficient purchasing policies, in the context of

13 decreasing defense budgets, are more important than

14 ever to ensure Defense Department spending contrib15 utes to military readiness.

16 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen17 ate that the provisions of this resolution assume that the

18 Defense Department should continue efforts to eliminate

19 wasteful spending such that defense spending allocated in

20 the fiscal year 1999 budget, and all subsequent budgets, is

21 spent in the manner most efficient to maintain and pro22 mote military readiness for United States Armed Forces

23 around the globe.
106

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 350. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE UNITED

2 STATES RESPONSE TO THE CHANGING NA3 TURE OF TERRORISM.

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

5 (1) the threat of terrorism to American citizens

6 and interests remains high, with Americans suffering

7 one-third of the total terrorist attacks in the world in

8 1997;

9 (2) the terrorist threat is changing—while past

10 acts were generally limited to the use of conventional

11 explosives and weapons, terrorists today are exploit12 ing technological advances and increasingly lethal

13 tools and strategies to pursue their agenda;

14 (3) on a worldwide basis, terrorists are focusing

15 on afflicting mass casualties on civilian targets

16 through the acquisition of chemical, biological and

17 nuclear weapons of mass destruction;

18 (4) chemical and biological weapons in the

19 hands of terrorists or rogue nations constitute a

20 threat to the United States;

21 (5) the multifaceted nature of the terrorist threat

22 encompasses not only foreign terrorists targeting

23 American citizens and interests abroad, but foreign

24 terrorists operating within the United States itself, as

25 well as domestic terrorists;
107

HCON 284 EAS

1 (6) terrorists groups are becoming increasingly

2 multinational, more associated with criminal activ3 ity, and less responsive to external influences;

4 (7) terrorists exploit America’s free and open so5 ciety to illegally enter the country, raise funds, re6 cruit new members, spread propaganda, and plan fu7 ture activities;

8 (8) terrorists are also making use of computer

9 technology to communicate, solicit money and sup10 port, and store information essential to their oper11 ations;

12 (9) State sponsors of terrorism and other foreign

13 countries are known to be developing computer intru14 sion and manipulation capabilities which could pose

15 a threat to essential public and private information

16 systems in the United States;

17 (10) the infrastructures deemed critical to the

18 United States are the telecommunications networks,

19 the electric power grid, oil and gas distribution, water

20 distribution facilities, transportation systems, finan21 cial networks, emergency services, and the continuity

22 of Government services, the disruption of which could

23 result in significant losses to the United States eco24 nomic well-being, public welfare, or national security;
108

HCON 284 EAS

1 (11) a national strategy of infrastructure protec2 tion, as required by the Defense Appropriations Act

3 of 1996, and subsequent amendments, has yet to be

4 issued; and

5 (12) we as a Nation remain fundamentally un6 prepared to respond in a coordinated and effective

7 manner to these growing terrorist threats.

8 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen9 ate that the provisions of this resolution assume that—

10 (1) the Federal Government must take the lead

11 in establishing effective coordination between intel12 ligence-gathering and law enforcement agencies,

13 among Federal, State, and local levels of Government,

14 and with the private sector, for the purpose of assess15 ing, warning, and protecting against terrorist at16 tacks;

17 (2) technical preparedness for the detection and

18 analysis of chemical and biological weapons, and for

19 swift and adequate emergency response to their use by

20 terrorists, must be a near-term continuing priority;

21 (3) the United States must seek full inter22 national cooperation in securing the capture and con23 viction of terrorists who attack or pose a threat to

24 American citizens and interests;
109

HCON 284 EAS

1 (4) the United States should fully enforce its

2 laws intended to deny foreign terrorist organizations

3 the ability to raise money in the United States, pre4 vent the evasion of our immigration laws and further5 ing of criminal activities, and curtail the use of our

6 country as a base of operations; and

7 (5) a national strategy, adequate to addressing

8 the complexity of protecting our critical infrastruc9 tures, and as required by the Defense Appropriations

10 Act of 1996 and subsequent amendments, must be

11 completed and implemented immediately.

12 SEC. 351. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ECONOMIC GROWTH,

13 SOCIAL SECURITY, AND GOVERNMENT EFFI14 CIENCY.

15 It is the sense of the Senate that the functional totals

16 underlying this resolution assume that—

17 (1) the elimination of a discretionary spending

18 program may be used for either tax cuts or to reform

19 the Social Security system;

20 (2) the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the

21 Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act

22 of 1985, and other appropriate budget rules and laws

23 should be amended to implement the policy stated in

24 paragraph (1).
110

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 352. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING A SUPER2 MAJORITY REQUIREMENT FOR RAISING

3 TAXES.

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

5 (1) the Nation’s current tax system is indefensi6 ble, being overly complex, burdensome, and severely

7 limiting to economic opportunity for all Americans;

8 (2) fundamental tax reform should be undertaken

9 as soon as practicable to produce a tax system that—

10 (A) applies a low tax rate, through easily

11 understood laws, to all Americans;

12 (B) provides tax relief for working Ameri13 cans;

14 (C) protects the rights of taxpayers and re15 duces tax collection abuses;

16 (D) eliminates the bias against savings and

17 investment;

18 (E) promotes economic growth and job cre19 ation;

20 (F) does not penalize marriage or families;

21 and

22 (G) provides for a taxpayer-friendly collec23 tions process to replace the Internal Revenue

24 Service; and

25 (3) the stability and longevity of any new tax

26 system designed to achieve these goals should be guar-
111

HCON 284 EAS

1 anteed with a supermajority vote requirement so that

2 Congress cannot easily raise tax rates, impose new

3 taxes, or otherwise increase the amount of a tax4 payer’s income that is subject to tax.

5 (b) SENSE OF SENATE.—It is the sense of Senate that

6 the assumptions underlying the functional totals of this res7 olution assume fundamental tax reform that is accom8 panied by a proposal to amend the Constitution of the

9 United States to require a supermajority vote in each House

10 of Congress to approve tax increases.

11 SEC. 353. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON HEALTH CARE QUAL12 ITY.

13 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate makes the following find14 ings:

15 (1) Rapid changes in the health care marketplace

16 have compromised confidence in the our Nation’s

17 health system.

18 (2) American consumers want more convenience,

19 fewer hassles, more choices, and better service from

20 their health insurance plans.

21 (3) All Americans deserve quality-driven health

22 care supported by sound science and evidence-based

23 medicine.

24 (4) The Federal Government, through the Na25 tional Institutes of Health, supports research that im-
112

HCON 284 EAS

1 proves the quality of medical care that Americans re2 ceive.

3 (5) This resolution assumes increased funding

4 for the National Institutes of Health for 1999 of

5 $15,100,000,000, an 11-percent increase over current

6 funding levels, which are 7 percent higher than in

7 1997.

8 (6) As the largest purchaser of health care serv9 ices, the Federal Government has a responsibility to

10 utilize its purchasing power to demand high quality

11 health plans and providers for its health programs

12 and to protect its beneficiaries from inferior medical

13 care.

14 (7) The Federal Government must adopt the pos15 ture of private sector purchasers and insist on high

16 quality care for the 67,000,000 Medicare and Medic17 aid beneficiaries and the 9,000,000 Federal employees,

18 retirees, and their dependents.

19 (8) The private sector has proven to be more ca20 pable of keeping pace with the rapid changes in

21 health care delivery and medical practice that affect

22 quality of care considerations than the Federal Gov23 ernment.

24 (9) As Congress considers health care legislation,

25 it must first commit to ‘‘do no harm’’ to health care
113

HCON 284 EAS

1 quality, consumers, and the evolving market place.

2 Rushing to legislate or regulate based on anecdotal in3 formation and micro-managing health plans on po4 litically popular issues will not solve the problems of

5 consumer confidence and the quality of our health

6 care system.

7 (10) When health insurance premiums rise,

8 Americans lose health coverage. Studies indicate that

9 a 1 percent increase in private health insurance pre10 miums will be associated with an increase in the

11 number of persons without insurance of about 400,000

12 persons.

13 (11) Health care costs have begun to rise signifi14 cantly in the past year. The Congressional Budget Of15 fice (referred to as ‘‘CBO’’) projects that the growth

16 in health premiums will be 5.5 percent in 1998 up

17 from 3.8 percent in 1997. CBO continues to project

18 that premiums will grow about 1 percentage point

19 faster than the Gross Domestic Product in the longer

20 run. CBO also warns that new Federal mandates on

21 health insurance could exacerbate this increase in pre22 miums.

23 (12) The President’s Advisory Commission on

24 Consumer Protection and Quality in the Health Care

25 Industry developed the Consumer Bill of Rights and
114

HCON 284 EAS

1 Responsibilities. This includes information disclosure,

2 confidentiality of health information, and choice of

3 providers.

4 (13) The President’s Commission further deter5 mined that private sector organizations have the ca6 pacity to act in a timely manner needed to keep pace

7 with the swiftly evolving health system.

8 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen9 ate that the assumptions underlying this resolution assume

10 that the Senate will not pass any health care legislation

11 that will—

12 (1) make health insurance unaffordable for work13 ing families and increase the number of uninsured

14 Americans;

15 (2) divert limited health care resources away

16 from serving patients to paying lawyers and hiring

17 new bureaucrats; or

18 (3) impose political considerations on clinical

19 decisions, instead of allowing such decisions to be

20 made on the basis of sound science and the best inter21 ests of patients.
115

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 354. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE USE OF BUDGET

2 SURPLUS FOR TAX RELIEF OR DEBT REDUC3 TION.

4 It is the sense of the Senate that this resolution as5 sumes that any budget surplus should be dedicated to debt

6 reduction or direct tax relief for hard-working American

7 families.

8 SEC. 355. USE OF BUDGET SURPLUS TO REFORM SOCIAL SE9 CURITY.

10 It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions un11 derlying the functional totals included in the resolution as12 sume:

13 (1) The Congress and the President should use

14 any budget surplus to reduce the Social Security pay15 roll tax and to establish personal retirement accounts

16 with the tax reduction for hard-working Americans.

17 (2) The Congress and the President should not

18 use the Social Security surplus to finance general

19 Government programs and other spending, should

20 begin to build real assets for the trust funds, and

21 work to reform the Social Security system.

22 SEC. 356. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON COLOMBIAN DRUG

23 WAR HELICOPTERS.

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

25 (1) Colombia is the leading illicit drug produc26 ing country in the Western Hemisphere;
116

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) 80 percent of the world’s cocaine originates

2 in Colombia;

3 (3) based on the most recent data of the Drug

4 Enforcement Administration (DEA), more than 60

5 percent of the heroin seized in the United States origi6 nates in Colombia;

7 (4) in the last 10 years more than 4,000 officers

8 of the Colombian National Police have died fighting

9 the scourge of drugs;

10 (5) in one recent year alone, according to data

11 of the United States Government, the United States

12 had 141,000 new heroin users and the United States

13 faces historic levels of heroin use among teenagers be14 tween the ages of 12 and 17;

15 (6) once Colombian heroin is in the stream of

16 commerce it is nearly impossible to interdict because

17 it is concealed and trafficked in very small quantities;

18 (7) the best and most cost efficient method of pre19 venting Colombian heroin from entering the United

20 States is to destroy the opium poppies in the high

21 Andes mountains where Colombian heroin is pro22 duced;

23 (8) the elite anti-narcotics unit of the Colombian

24 National Police has the responsibility to eradicate

25 both coca and opium in Colombia, including the re-
117

HCON 284 EAS

1 duction and elimination of cocaine and heroin pro2 duction, and they have done a remarkably effective

3 job with the limited and outdated equipment at their

4 disposal;

5 (9) more than 40 percent of the anti-narcotics

6 operations of the Colombian National Police involve

7 hostile ground fire from narco-terrorists and 90 per8 cent of such operations involve the use of helicopters;

9 (10) the need for better high performance heli10 copters by the Colombian National Police, especially

11 for use in the high Andes mountains, is essential for

12 more effective eradication of opium in Colombia;

13 (11) on December 23, 1997, one of the antiquated

14 Vietnam-era UH–1H Huey helicopters used by the

15 Colombian National Police in an opium eradication

16 mission crashed in the high Andes mountains due to

17 high winds and because it was flying above the safety

18 level recommended by the original manufacturer;

19 (12) in the Foreign Operations, Export Financ20 ing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1998

21 (Public Law 105–118), amounts were appropriated

22 for the procurement by the United States for the Co23 lombian National Police of three UH–60L Blackhawk

24 utility helicopters that can operate safely and more

25 effectively at the high altitudes of the Andes moun-
118

HCON 284 EAS

1 tains where Colombian opium grows at altitudes as

2 high as 12,000 feet;

3 (13) the Blackhawk helicopter is a high perform4 ance utility helicopter, with greater lift capacity, that

5 can perform at the high altitudes of the Andes moun6 tains, as well as survive crashes and sustain ground

7 fire, much better than any other utility helicopter

8 now available to the Colombian National Police in

9 the war on drugs;

10 (14) because the Vietnam-era Huey helicopters

11 that the United States has provided the Colombian

12 National Police are outdated and have been develop13 ing numerous stress cracks, a sufficient number

14 should be upgraded to Huey II’s and the remainder

15 should be phased-out as soon as possible;

16 (15) these Huey helicopters are much older than

17 most of the pilots who fly them, do not have the range

18 due to limited fuel capacity to reach many of the ex19 panding locations of the coca fields or cocaine labs in

20 southern Colombia, nor do they have the lift capacity

21 to carry enough armed officers to reach and secure the

22 opium fields in the high Andes mountains prior to

23 eradication;

24 (16) the elite anti-narcotics unit of the Colom25 bian National Police has a stellar record in respecting
119

HCON 284 EAS

1 for human rights and has received the commendation

2 of a leading international human rights group in

3 their operations to reduce and eradicate illicit drugs

4 in Colombia;

5 (17) the narco-terrorists of Colombia have an6 nounced that they will now target United States citi7 zens, particularly those United States citizens work8 ing with their Colombian counterparts in the fight

9 against illicit drugs in Colombia;

10 (18) a leading commander of the Revolutionary

11 Armed Forces of Colombia (‘‘FARC’’) announced re12 cently that the objective of these narco-terrorists, in

13 light of recent successes, will be ‘‘to defeat the Ameri14 cans’’;

15 (19) United States Government personnel in Co16 lombia who fly in these helicopters accompanying the

17 Colombian National Police on missions are now at

18 even greater risk from these narco-terrorists and their

19 drug trafficking allies;

20 (20) in the last six months four anti-narcotics

21 helicopters of the Colombian National Police have

22 been downed in operations;

23 (21) Congress intends to provide the necessary

24 support and assistance to wage an effective war on il25 licit drugs in Colombia and provide the equipment
120

HCON 284 EAS

1 and assistance needed to protect all of the men and

2 women of the Colombian National Police as well as

3 those Americans who work side by side with the Co4 lombian National Police in this common struggle

5 against illicit drugs;

6 (22) the new Government of Bolivia has made a

7 commitment to eradicate coca and cocaine production

8 in that country within 5 years;

9 (23) the United States should support any coun10 try that is interested in removing the scourge of drugs

11 from its citizens; and

12 (24) Bolivia has succeeded, in large measure due

13 to United States assistance, in reducing acreage used

14 to produce coca, which is the basis for cocaine produc15 tion.

16 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen17 ate that the functional totals underlying this resolution as18 sume that—

19 (1) the President should, with funds made avail20 able under Public Law 105–118, expeditiously pro21 cure and provide to the Colombian National Police

22 three UH–60L Blackhawk utility helicopters solely for

23 the purpose of assisting the Colombian National Po24 lice to perform their responsibilities to reduce and

25 eliminate the production of illicit drugs in Colombia
121

HCON 284 EAS

1 and the trafficking of such illicit drugs, including the

2 trafficking of drugs such as heroin and cocaine to the

3 United States;

4 (2) if the President determines that the procure5 ment and transfer to the Colombian National Police

6 of three UH–60L Blackhawk utility helicopters is not

7 an adequate number of such helicopters to maintain

8 operational feasibility and effectiveness of the Colom9 bian National Police, then the President should

10 promptly inform Congress as to the appropriate num11 ber of additional UH–60L Blackhawk utility heli12 copters for the Colombian National Police so that

13 amounts can be authorized for the procurement and

14 transfer of such additional helicopters; and

15 (3) assistance for Bolivia should be maintained

16 at least at the level assumed in the fiscal year 1998

17 budget submission of the President and the Adminis18 tration should act accordingly.

19 SEC. 357. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FUNDING FOR MEDI20 CAL CARE FOR VETERANS.

21 It is the sense of the Senate that the functional totals

22 underlying this resolution assume that $40,274,000 in addi23 tional amounts above the President’s budget levels will be

24 made available for veterans health care for fiscal year 1999.
122

HCON 284 EAS

1 SEC. 358. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON OBJECTION TO THE

2 USE OF THE SALE OF PUBLIC LANDS TO

3 FUND CERTAIN PROGRAMS.

4 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that the Budget

5 Committee Report accompanying this resolution assumes

6 that the landowner incentive program of the Endangered

7 Species Recovery Act would be funded ‘‘from the gross re8 ceipts realized in the sales of excess BLM land: Provided,

9 That BLM has sufficient administrative funds to conduct

10 such sales’’.

11 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen12 ate that the functional totals underlying this resolution as13 sume that—

14 (1) the landowner incentive program included in

15 the Endangered Species Recovery Act should be fi16 nanced from a dedicated source of funding; and

17 (2) public lands should not be sold to fund the

18 landowner incentive program of the Endangered Spe19 cies Recovery Act through their proceeds alone, if sub20 sequent legislation provides an alternative or mixed,

21 dedicated source of mandatory funding.

22 SEC. 359. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING A MULTI23 NATIONAL ALLIANCE AGAINST DRUG TRAF24 FICKING.

25 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
123

HCON 284 EAS

1 (1) the traffic in illegal drugs greatly threatens

2 democracy, security and stability in the Western

3 Hemisphere due to the violence and corruption associ4 ated with drug trafficking organizations;

5 (2) drug trafficking organizations operate with6 out respect for borders or national sovereignty;

7 (3) the production, transport, sale, and use of il8 licit drugs endangers the people and legitimate insti9 tutions of all countries in the hemisphere;

10 (4) no single country can successfully confront

11 and defeat this common enemy;

12 (5) full bilateral cooperation with the United

13 States to reduce the flow of drugs is in the national

14 interests of our neighbors in the hemisphere;

15 (6) in addition, victory in the hemispheric battle

16 against drug traffickers requires expanded multilat17 eral cooperation among the nations of the region.

18 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen19 ate that the provisions of this resolution assume that in ad20 dition to existing bilateral cooperative efforts, the Adminis21 tration should promote at the Summit of the Americas and

22 in other fora the concept of a multinational hemispheric

23 ‘‘war alliance’’ bringing together the United States and key

24 illicit drug producing and transiting countries in the West25 ern Hemisphere for the purpose of implementing a coordi-
124

HCON 284 EAS

1 nated plan of action against illegal drug trafficking and

2 promoting full cooperation against this common menace.

3 SEC. 360. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING LEGISLATION

4 THAT INCREASES COMPLEXITY OF TAX RE5 TURNS.

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

7 (1) As part of the consideration by the Senate of

8 tax cuts for the families of America, the Senate should

9 also examine the condition of the Internal Revenue

10 Code of 1986.

11 (2) According to the Congressional Research

12 Service, the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1997 added

13 1,000,000 words and 315 pages to the Internal Reve14 nue Code.

15 (3) The Internal Revenue Code continues to grow

16 more complex and difficult for the average taxpayer

17 to understand, and the average tax return has become

18 more time-consuming to prepare.

19 (4) The average taxpayer will spend 9 hours and

20 54 minutes preparing Form 1040 for the 1997 tax

21 year.

22 (5) The average taxpayer spends between 21 and

23 28 hours each year on tax matters.

24 (6) In 1995, 58,965,000 of the 118,218,327 tax

25 returns that were filed, almost 50 percent, were filed
125

HCON 284 EAS

1 by taxpayers who utilized the help of a paid tax pre2 parer.

3 (7) The average taxpayer spends $72 each year

4 for tax preparation.

5 (8) The total burden on all taxpayers of main6 taining records, and preparing and filing tax returns

7 is estimated to be in excess of 1,600,000 hours per

8 year.

9 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen10 ate that the budgetary levels in this resolution assume that

11 the Senate should give priority to tax proposals that sim12 plify the tax code and reject proposals that add greater com13 plexity in the tax code and increased compliance costs for

14 the taxpayer.

15 SEC. 361. GENERAL PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF MARI16 JUANA FOR MEDICINAL PURPOSES.

17 It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this

18 resolution assume that no funds appropriated by Congress

19 should be used to provide, procure, furnish, fund or support,

20 or to compel any individual, institution or government en21 tity to provide, procure, furnish, fund or support, any item,

22 good, benefit, program or service, for the purpose of the use

23 of marijuana for medicinal purposes, except that this sec24 tion shall not apply to medical research and investigational
126

HCON 284 EAS

1 new drug programs under the jurisdiction of the Food and

2 Drug Administration.

3 SEC. 362. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING AMTRAK

4 FUNDING.

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

6 (1) on November 13, 1997 the Senate unani7 mously passed the Amtrak Reform and Accountability

8 Act of 1997, Public Law 105–134, authorizing appro9 priations of $1,058,000,000 for fiscal year 1999;

10 $1,023,000,000 for fiscal year 2000; $989,000,000 for

11 fiscal year 2001; and $955,000,000 for fiscal year

12 2002, totaling $4,025,000,000 for fiscal years 1999–

13 2002;

14 (2) in Public Law 105–134 the Congress declared

15 that ‘‘intercity rail passenger service is an essential

16 component of a national intermodal passenger trans17 portation system’’;

18 (3) section 201 of the Amtrak Reform and Ac19 countability Act of 1997 has now statutorily formal20 ized prior Congressional directives to Amtrak to reach

21 operating self-sufficiency by fiscal year 2002;

22 (4) the Congress and the President, through en23 actment of this legislation, have effectively agreed that

24 Congress will provide adequate funding to permit
127

HCON 284 EAS

1 Amtrak to achieve the goal of operating self-suffi2 ciency;

3 (5) capital investment is critical to reducing op4 erating costs and increasing the quality of Amtrak

5 service;

6 (6) capital investment is essential to improving

7 Amtrak’s long-term financial health;

8 (7) the $2,200,000,000 provided to Amtrak

9 through the Taxpayer Relief Act is for the sole pur10 pose of capital expenditures and other qualified ex11 penses and is intended to supplement, not supplant,

12 annual appropriations.

13 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen14 ate that the assumptions underlying the functional totals

15 in this budget resolution assume that Congress and the Ad16 ministration will fulfill the intent of the Amtrak Reform

17 and Accountability Act of 1997 and appropriate sufficient

18 funds in each of the next 5 fiscal years for Amtrak to imple19 ment its fiscal years 1998–2003 Strategic Business Plan,

20 while preserving the integrity of the $2,200,000,000 pro21 vided under the Taxpayer Relief Act for the statutory pur22 pose of capital investment.

23 SEC. 363. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING MARKET AC24 CESS PROGRAM.

25 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds the following:
128

HCON 284 EAS

1 (1) The Market Access Program (MAP) continues

2 to be a vital and important part of United States

3 trade policy aimed at maintaining and expanding

4 United States agricultural exports, countering sub5 sidized foreign competition, strengthening farm in6 come and protecting American jobs. Further, the Sen7 ate finds that:

8 (A) The Market Access Program is specifi9 cally targeted towards small business, farmer co10 operatives and trade associations.

11 (B) The Market Access Program is adminis12 tered on a cost-share basis. Participants, includ13 ing farmers and ranchers, are required to con14 tribute up to 50 percent or more toward the cost

15 of the program.

16 (2) The Market Access Program has been a tre17 mendous success by any measure. Since the program

18 was established, United States agricultural exports

19 have doubled. In fiscal year 1997, United States agri20 cultural exports amounted to $57,300,000,000, result21 ing in a positive agricultural trade surplus of ap22 proximately $22,000,000,000, and contributing bil23 lions of dollars more in increased economic activity

24 and additional tax revenues.
129

HCON 284 EAS

1 (3) The Market Access Program has also helped

2 maintain and create needed jobs throughout the Na3 tion’s economy. More than one million Americans

4 now have jobs that depend on United States agricul5 tural exports. Further, every billion dollars in addi6 tional United States agricultural exports helps create

7 as many as 17,000 or more new jobs.

8 (4) United States agriculture, including farm in9 come and related jobs, is more dependent than ever on

10 maintaining and expanding United States agricul11 tural exports as Federal farm programs are gradually

12 reduced under the FAIR Act of 1996.

13 (5) In addition to the Asian economic situation

14 and exchange rate fluctuations, United States agricul15 tural exports continue to be adversely impacted by

16 continued subsidized foreign competition, artificial

17 trade barriers and other unfair foreign trade prac18 tices.

19 (6) The European Union (EU) and other foreign

20 competitors continue to heavily outspend the United

21 States by more than 10 to 1 with regard to export

22 subsidies.

23 (A) In 1997, the EU budgeted

24 $7,200,000,000 for export subsidies aimed at
130

HCON 284 EAS

1 capturing a larger share of the world market at

2 the expense of United States agriculture.

3 (B) EU and other foreign competitors also

4 spend nearly $500,000,000 on market promotion

5 activities. The EU spends more on wine pro6 motion than the United States currently spends

7 on all commodities and related agricultural

8 products.

9 (C) The EU has announced a major new

10 initiative aimed at increasing their exports to

11 Japan—historically, the largest single market for

12 United States agriculture exports.

13 (7) United States agriculture is the most com14 petitive industry in the world, but it cannot and

15 should not be expected to compete alone against the

16 treasuries of foreign governments.

17 (8) Reducing or eliminating funding for the

18 Market Access Program would adversely affect United

19 States agriculture’s ability to remain competitive in

20 today’s global marketplace. A reduction in United

21 States agricultural exports would translate into lower

22 farm income, a worsening trade deficit, slower eco23 nomic growth, fewer export-related jobs, and a declin24 ing tax base.
131

HCON 284 EAS

1 (9) United States success in upcoming trade ne2 gotiations on agriculture scheduled to begin in 1999

3 depends on maintaining an aggressive trade strategy

4 and related policies and programs. Reducing or

5 eliminating the Market Access Program would rep6 resent a form of unilateral disarmament and weaken

7 the United States negotiating position.

8 (10) The Market Access Program is one of the

9 few programs specifically allowed under the current

10 Uruguay Round Agreement.

11 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen12 ate that funding for the Market Access Program (MAP)

13 should be fully maintained as authorized and aggressively

14 utilized by the United States Department of Agriculture to

15 encourage United States agricultural exports, strengthen

16 farm income, counter subsidized foreign competition, and

17 protect American jobs.

18 SEC. 364. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE NA19 TIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH.

20 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—

21 (1) heart disease was the leading cause of death

22 for both men and women in every year from 1970 to

23 1993;
132

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) mortality rates for individuals suffering from

2 prostate cancer, skin cancer, and kidney cancer con3 tinue to rise;

4 (3) the mortality rate for African American

5 women suffering from diabetes is 134 percent higher

6 than the mortality rate of Caucasian women suffering

7 from diabetes;

8 (4) asthma rates for children increased 58 per9 cent from 1982 to 1992;

10 (5) nearly half of all American women between

11 the ages of 65 and 75 reported having arthritis;

12 (6) AIDS is the leading cause of death for Amer13 icans between the ages of 24 and 44;

14 (7) the Institute of Medicine has described

15 United States clinical research to be ‘‘in a state of

16 crisis’’ and the National Academy of Sciences con17 cluded in 1994 that ‘‘the present cohort of clinical in18 vestigators is not adequate’’;

19 (8) biomedical research has been shown to be ef20 fective in saving lives and reducing health care ex21 penditures;

22 (9) research sponsored by the National Institutes

23 of Health has contributed significantly to the first

24 overall reduction in cancer death rates since record25 keeping was instituted;
133

HCON 284 EAS

1 (10) research sponsored by the National Insti2 tutes of health has resulted in the identification of ge3 netic mutations for osteoporosis; Lou Gehrig’s Dis4 ease, cystic fibrosis, and Huntington’s Disease; breast,

5 skin and prostate cancer; and a variety of other ill6 nesses;

7 (11) research sponsored by the National Insti8 tutes of Health has been key to the development of

9 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Positron

10 Emission Tomography (PET) scanning technologies;

11 (12) research sponsored by the National Insti12 tutes of Health has developed effective treatments for

13 Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL). Today, 80

14 percent of children diagnosed with Acute

15 Lymphoblastic Leukemia are alive and free of the dis16 ease after 5 years; and

17 (13) research sponsored by the National Insti18 tutes of Health contributed to the development of a

19 new, cost-saving cure for peptic ulcers.

20 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen21 ate that the function totals in this budget resolution assume

22 that—

23 (1) appropriations for the National Institutes of

24 Health should be increased by 100 percent over the

25 next 5 fiscal years;
134

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) appropriations for the National Institutes of

2 Health should be increased by $2,000,000,000 in year

3 1999 over the amount appropriated in fiscal year

4 1998;

5 (3) the budget resolution takes a major step to6 ward meeting this goal; and

7 (4) at a minimum, appropriations for the Na8 tional Institutes of Health should match the rec9 ommendations provided in the budget resolution.

10 SEC. 365. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING DISPLAY OF

11 TEN COMMANDMENTS.

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

13 (1) the Ten Commandments have had a signifi14 cant impact on the development of the fundamental

15 legal principles of Western Civilization; and

16 (2) the Ten Commandments set forth a code of

17 moral conduct, observance of which is acknowledged

18 to promote respect for our system of laws and the

19 good of society.

20 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen21 ate that the functional totals in this concurrent resolution

22 on the budget assume that—

23 (1) the Ten Commandments are a declaration of

24 fundamental principles that are the cornerstones of a

25 fair and just society; and
135

HCON 284 EAS

1 (2) the public display, including display in the

2 Supreme Court, the Capitol building, the White

3 House, and other government offices and courthouses

4 across the nation, of the Ten Commandments should

5 be permitted, as long as it is consistent with the es6 tablishment clause of the first amendment of the

7 United States Constitution.

Attest:

Secretary.
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 284

AMENDMENT
HCON 284 EAS——10

HCON 284 EAS——9HCON 284 EAS——8HCON 284 EAS——7HCON 284 EAS——6HCON 284 EAS——5HCON 284 EAS——4HCON 284 EAS——3HCON 284 EAS——2