```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 84 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con. Res.84
                                          Agreed to June 5, 1997        

                       One Hundred Fifth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
 the seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-seven

                          Concurrent Resolution

 
 Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government 
for fiscal year 1998 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for 
                fiscal years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 

SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998.

    (a) Declaration.--The Congress determines and declares that this 
resolution is the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 
1998 including the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 1999, 
2000, 2001, and 2002 as required by section 301 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974.
    (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this concurrent 
resolution is as follows:

Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1998.

                       TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Social Security.
Sec. 103. Major functional categories.
Sec. 104. Reconciliation in the Senate.
Sec. 105. Reconciliation in the House of Representatives.

              TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

Sec. 201. Discretionary spending limits.
Sec. 202. Allowance for the IMF.
Sec. 203. Allowance for section 8 housing assistance.
Sec. 204. Separate environmental allocation.
Sec. 205. Priority Federal land acquisitions and exchanges.
Sec. 206. Allowance for arrearages.
Sec. 207. Intercity passenger rail reserve fund for fiscal years 1998-
          2002.
Sec. 207A. Intercity passenger rail reserve fund in the Senate for 
          fiscal years 1998-2002.
Sec. 208. Mass transit reserve fund in the Senate for fiscal years 1998-
          2002.
Sec. 209. Highway reserve fund in the Senate for fiscal years 1998-2002.
Sec. 210. Deficit-neutral reserve fund in the House for surface 
          transportation.
Sec. 211. Sale of Government assets.
Sec. 212. Determinations of budgetary levels; reversals.
Sec. 213. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

       TITLE III--SENSE OF CONGRESS, HOUSE, AND SENATE PROVISIONS

                    Subtitle A--Sense of the Congress

Sec. 301. Sense of the Congress on repayment of the Federal debt.
Sec. 302. Sense of the Congress on tax cuts.
Sec. 303. Sense of the Congress that the 10-year revenue loss from the 
          tax relief package shall not exceed $250,000,000,000.

                     Subtitle B--Sense of the House

Sec. 306. Sense of the House on Commission on Long-Term Budgetary 
          Problems.
Sec. 307. Sense of the House on corporate welfare.
Sec. 308. Sense of the House on baselines.
Sec. 309. Sense of the House on family violence option clarifying 
          amendment.

                     Subtitle C--Sense of the Senate

Sec. 311. Sense of the Senate on long term entitlement reforms, 
          including accuracy in determining changes in the cost of 
          living.
Sec. 312. Sense of the Senate on tactical fighter aircraft programs.
Sec. 313. Sense of the Senate regarding children's health coverage.
Sec. 314. Sense of the Senate on a Medicaid per capita cap.
Sec. 315. Sense of the Senate that added savings go to deficit 
          reduction.
Sec. 316. Sense of the Senate on fairness in Medicare.
Sec. 317. Sense of the Senate regarding assistance to Lithuania and 
          Latvia.
Sec. 318. Sense of the Senate regarding a National Commission on Higher 
          Education.
Sec. 319. Sense of the Senate on lockbox.
Sec. 320. Sense of the Senate on the earned income credit.
Sec. 321. Sense of the Senate supporting long-term entitlement reforms.
Sec. 322. Sense of the Senate on disaster assistance funding.
Sec. 323. Sense of the Senate on enforcement of bipartisan budget 
          agreement.
Sec. 324. Sense of the Senate regarding the National Institutes of 
          Health.
Sec. 325. Sense of the Senate regarding certain elderly legal aliens.
Sec. 326. Sense of the Senate regarding retroactive taxes.
Sec. 327. Sense of the Senate on Social Security and balancing the 
          budget.
Sec. 328. Sense of the Senate supporting sufficient funding for veterans 
          programs and benefits.
Sec. 329. Sense of the Senate on family violence option clarifying 
          amendment.
Sec. 330. Sense of the Senate regarding assistance to Amtrak.
Sec. 331. Sense of the Senate regarding the protection of children's 
          health.
Sec. 332. Sense of the Senate on depositing all Federal gasoline taxes 
          into the Highway Trust Fund.
Sec. 333. Sense of the Senate on early childhood education.
Sec. 334. Sense of the Senate concerning Highway Trust Fund.
Sec. 335. Sense of the Senate concerning tax incentives for the cost of 
          post- secondary education.
Sec. 336. Sense of the Senate on additional tax cuts.
Sec. 337. Sense of the Senate regarding truth in budgeting and spectrum 
          auctions.
Sec. 338. Sense of the Senate on highway demonstration projects.
Sec. 339. Sense of the Senate regarding the use of budget savings.
Sec. 340. Sense of the Senate regarding the value of the Social Security 
          system for future retirees.
Sec. 341. Sense of the Senate on economic growth dividend protection.
Sec. 342. Sense of the Senate supporting Federal, State, and local law 
          enforcement officers.
Sec. 343. Sense of the Senate regarding parental involvement in 
          prevention of drug use by children.

                      TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

    The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the fiscal years 
1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002:
    (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
resolution--
        (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $1,199,000,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $1,241,900,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $1,285,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $1,343,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $1,407,600,000,000.
        (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
    revenues should be changed are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $-7,400,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $-11,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $-22,000,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $-22,800,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $-19,900,000,000.
        (C) The amounts for Federal Insurance Contributions Act 
    revenues for hospital insurance within the recommended levels of 
    Federal revenues are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $113,500,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $119,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $125,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $130,700,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $136,800,000,000.
    (2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
resolution, the appropriate levels of total new budget authority are as 
follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $1,386,700,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $1,440,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $1,486,400,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $1,520,200,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $1,551,600,000,000.
    (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget outlays are as 
follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $1,372,000,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $1,424,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $1,468,800,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $1,500,700,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $1,515,900,000,000.
    (4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this resolution, 
the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $-173,000,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $-182,200,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $-183,200,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $-157,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $-108,300,000,000.
    (5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt are as 
follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $5,593,500,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $5,841,000,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $6,088,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $6,307,300,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $6,481,200,000,000.
    (6) Direct loan obligations.--The appropriate levels of total new 
direct loan obligations are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $34,000,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $33,400,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $34,900,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $36,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $37,400,000,000.
    (7) Primary loan guarantee commitments.--The appropriate levels of 
new primary loan guarantee commitments are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $315,700,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $324,900,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $328,200,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $332,200,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $335,300,000,000.

SEC. 102. SOCIAL SECURITY.

    (a) Social Security Revenues.--For purposes of Senate enforcement 
under sections 302, 602, and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the amounts of revenues of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors 
Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund 
are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $402,800,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $422,300,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $442,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $461,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $482,800,000,000.
    (b) Social Security Outlays.--For purposes of Senate enforcement 
under sections 302, 602, and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the amounts of outlays of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors 
Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund 
are as follows:
            Fiscal year 1998: $317,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 1999: $330,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2000: $343,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $358,100,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $372,500,000,000.

SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

    The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate levels of 
new budget authority, budget outlays, new direct loan obligations, and 
new primary loan guarantee commitments for fiscal years 1998 through 
2002 for each major functional category are:
    (1) National Defense (050):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $268,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $266,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $600,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $270,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $265,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $800,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $274,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $268,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $1,100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $281,300,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $270,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $1,100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $289,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $272,600,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $1,100,000,000.
    (2) International Affairs (150):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $15,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,600,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $12,800,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $14,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,600,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $13,100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $15,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $15,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $13,400,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $13,800,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $16,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $14,200,000,000.
    (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $16,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $16,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $16,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $16,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $15,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $16,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $15,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $15,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $15,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $15,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (4) Energy (270):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $3,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $2,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $3,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $2,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $3,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $2,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $2,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $2,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $2,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $1,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $23,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $22,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $23,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $22,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $22,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $23,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $22,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $22,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $22,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $22,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (6) Agriculture (350):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $11,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $9,600,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $6,400,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $12,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $11,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $11,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $6,400,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $12,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $10,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $11,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $6,500,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $11,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $9,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $11,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $6,600,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $10,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $9,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $11,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $6,700,000,000.
    (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $6,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, -$900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $4,700,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $245,500,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $11,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $4,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,900,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $253,500,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $15,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $9,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $255,200,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $16,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $12,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,600,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $258,000,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $16,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $12,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,700,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $259,900,000,000.
    (8) Transportation (400):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $46,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $40,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $46,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $47,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $48,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $49,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $8,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $10,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,900,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $2,400,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $8,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $10,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $2,900,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $2,400,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $7,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $11,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $3,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $2,400,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $7,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $11,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $3,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $2,500,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $7,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $8,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $3,200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $2,500,000,000.
    (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services (500):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $60,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $56,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $12,300,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $20,700,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $60,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $59,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $13,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $21,900,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $61,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $60,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $13,900,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $23,300,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $63,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $61,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $14,700,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $24,500,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $63,300,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $62,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $15,400,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $25,700,000,000.
    (11) Health (550):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $137,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $137,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $145,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $144,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $154,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $153,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $163,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $163,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $172,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $171,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (12) Medicare (570):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $201,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $201,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $212,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $211,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $225,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $225,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $239,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $238,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $251,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $250,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (13) Income Security (600):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $239,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $247,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $254,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $258,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $269,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $268,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $275,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $277,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $286,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $285,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $100,000,000.
    (14) Social Security (650):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $11,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $11,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $12,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $12,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $12,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $12,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $13,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $13,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $40,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,300,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,000,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $27,100,000,000.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $41,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,100,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $26,700,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $41,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $41,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $26,200,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $42,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $42,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,200,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $25,600,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $42,300,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $42,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $1,300,000,000.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, 
        $25,100,000,000.
    (16) Administration of Justice (750):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $24,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $22,600,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $25,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $24,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $24,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $25,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $24,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $25,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $24,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $24,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (17) General Government (800):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $14,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,000,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $14,400,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,400,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $14,000,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $13,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $14,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $13,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $13,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (18) Net Interest (900):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $296,500,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $296,500,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $304,600,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $304,600,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $305,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $305,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $303,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $303,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $303,700,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, $303,700,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (19) Allowances (920):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, $0.
            (B) Outlays, $0.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, $0.
            (B) Outlays, $0.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, $0.
            (B) Outlays, $0.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, $0.
            (B) Outlays, $0.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, $0.
            (B) Outlays, $0.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
    (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
        Fiscal year 1998:
            (A) New budget authority, -$41,800,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, -$41,800,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 1999:
            (A) New budget authority, -$36,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, -$36,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2000:
            (A) New budget authority, -$36,900,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, -$36,900,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2001:
            (A) New budget authority, -$39,200,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, -$39,200,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
        Fiscal year 2002:
            (A) New budget authority, -$51,100,000,000.
            (B) Outlays, -$51,100,000,000.
            (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
            (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.

SEC. 104. RECONCILIATION IN THE SENATE.

    (a) Reconciliation of Spending Reductions.--Not later than June 13, 
1997, the committees named in this subsection shall submit their 
recommendations to the Committee on the Budget of the Senate. After 
receiving those recommendations, the Committee on the Budget shall 
report to the Senate a reconciliation bill carrying out all such 
recommendations without any substantive revision.
        (1) Committee on agriculture, nutrition, and forestry.--The 
    Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry shall 
    report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct 
    spending (as defined in section 250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget 
    and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985) to increase outlays by 
    not more than $300,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 and by not more than 
    $1,500,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (2) Committee on banking, housing, and urban affairs.--The 
    Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs shall 
    report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that reduce the 
    deficit $434,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 and $1,590,000,000 for the 
    period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (3) Committee on commerce, science, and transportation.--The 
    Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation shall 
    report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that reduce the 
    deficit $14,849,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 and $26,496,000,000 for 
    the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (4) Committee on energy and natural resources.--The Senate 
    Committee on Energy and Natural Resources shall report changes in 
    laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending (as 
    defined in section 250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
    Deficit Control Act of 1985) to reduce outlays $6,000,000 in fiscal 
    year 2002 and $13,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 
    through 2002.
        (5) Committee on finance.--The Senate Committee on Finance 
    shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction--
            (A) that provide direct spending (as defined in section 
        250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
        Act of 1985) to reduce outlays $40,911,000,000 in fiscal year 
        2002 and $100,646,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 
        through 2002; and
            (B) to increase the statutory limit on the public debt to 
        not more than $5,950,000,000,000.
        (6) Committee on governmental affairs.--The Senate Committee on 
    Governmental Affairs shall report changes in laws within its 
    jurisdiction that reduce the deficit $1,769,000,000 in fiscal year 
    2002 and $5,467,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 through 
    2002.
        (7) Committee on labor and human resources.--The Senate 
    Committee on Labor and Human Resources shall report changes in laws 
    within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending (as defined in 
    section 250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
    Control Act of 1985) to reduce outlays $1,057,000,000 in fiscal 
    year 2002 and $1,792,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 
    through 2002.
        (8) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The Senate Committee on 
    Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its 
    jurisdiction that provide direct spending (as defined in section 
    250(c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act 
    of 1985) to reduce outlays $681,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 and 
    $2,733,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
    (b) Reconciliation of Revenue Reductions.--Not later than June 20, 
1997, the Senate Committee on Finance shall report to the Senate a 
reconciliation bill proposing changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
necessary to reduce revenues by not more than $20,500,000,000 in fiscal 
year 2002 and $85,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 
through 2002.
    (c) Treatment of Congressional Pay-As-You-Go.--For purposes of 
section 202 of House Concurrent Resolution 67 (104th Congress), 
legislation which reduces revenues pursuant to a reconciliation 
instruction contained in subsection (b) shall be taken together with 
all other legislation passed pursuant to the reconciliation 
instructions contained in this resolution when determining the deficit 
effect of such legislation.
    (d) Children's Health Initiative.--
        (1) Deficit neutral adjustments.--After the reporting of 
    reconciliation legislation pursuant to subsection (a), or after the 
    submission of a conference report thereon, and if the Committee on 
    Finance reduces outlays by an amount greater than the outlay 
    reduction that is required by subsection (a)(5)(A), the Chairman of 
    the Committee on the Budget of the Senate, with the concurrence and 
    agreement of the ranking minority member, may submit in writing 
    appropriately revised (A) reconciliation instructions to the 
    Committee on Finance to reduce the deficit, (B) allocations, (C) 
    limits, and (D) aggregates.
        (2) Flexibility on adjustments.--The adjustments made pursuant 
    to this subsection shall not exceed $2,300,000,000 in fiscal year 
    1998 and $16,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 
    through 2002 and shall not cause an increase in the deficit levels 
    in this resolution.

SEC. 105. RECONCILIATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

    (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to provide for two 
separate reconciliation bills: the first for entitlement reform and the 
second for tax relief.
    (b) Submissions.--
        (1) Entitlement reforms.--Not later than June 13, 1997, the 
    House committees named in subsection (c) shall submit their 
    recommendations to the House Committee on the Budget. After 
    receiving those recommendations, the House Committee on the Budget 
    shall report to the House a reconciliation bill carrying out all 
    such recommendations without any substantive revision.
        (2) Tax relief and miscellaneous reforms.--Not later than June 
    14, 1997, the House committees named in subsection (d) shall submit 
    their recommendations to the House Committee on the Budget. After 
    receiving those recommendations, the House Committee on the Budget 
    shall report to the House a reconciliation bill carrying out all 
    such recommendations without any substantive revision.
    (c) Instructions Relating to Entitlement Reforms.--
        (1) Committee on agriculture.--The House Committee on 
    Agriculture shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
    that provide direct spending such that the total level of direct 
    spending for that committee does not exceed: $34,571,000,000 in 
    outlays for fiscal year 1998, $37,008,000,000 in outlays for fiscal 
    year 2002, and $179,884,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 
    through 2002.
        (2) Committee on banking and financial services.--The House 
    Committee on Banking and Financial Services shall report changes in 
    laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that 
    the total level of direct spending for that committee does not 
    exceed: -$8,435,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    -$5,091,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    -$32,743,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (3) Committee on commerce.--The House Committee on Commerce 
    shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide 
    direct spending such that the total level of direct spending for 
    that committee does not exceed: $393,533,000,000 in outlays for 
    fiscal year 1998, $507,150,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, 
    and $2,259,294,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 
    2002.
        (4) Committee on education and the workforce.--The House 
    Committee on Education and the Workforce shall report changes in 
    laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that 
    the total level of direct spending for that committee does not 
    exceed: $17,222,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    $17,673,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $89,528,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (5) Committee on government reform and oversight.--(A) The 
    House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall report 
    changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct 
    spending such that the total level of direct spending for that 
    committee does not exceed: $68,975,000,000 in outlays for fiscal 
    year 1998, $81,896,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $375,722,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (B) The House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
    shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that would 
    reduce the deficit by: $0 in fiscal year 1998, $621,000,000 in 
    fiscal year 2002, and $1,829,000,000 in fiscal years 1998 through 
    2002.
        (6) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--The House 
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure shall report changes 
    in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending such 
    that the total level of direct spending for that committee does not 
    exceed: $18,087,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    $17,283,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $88,711,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (7) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The House Committee on 
    Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its 
    jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total level 
    of direct spending for that committee does not exceed: 
    $22,444,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, $24,563,000,000 in 
    outlays for fiscal year 2002, and $117,959,000,000 in outlays in 
    fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (8) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The House Committee on 
    Ways and Means shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
    such that the total level of direct spending for that committee 
    does not exceed: $397,581,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    $506,522,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $2,257,912,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (B) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report changes 
    in laws within its jurisdiction such that the total level of 
    revenues for that committee is not less than: $1,172,136,000,000 in 
    revenues for fiscal year 1998, $1,382,679,000,000 in revenues for 
    fiscal year 2002, and $6,358,388,000,000 in revenues in fiscal 
    years 1998 through 2002.
        (C) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report changes 
    in laws within its jurisdiction to increase the statutory limit on 
    the public debt to not more than $5,950,000,000,000.
    (d) Instructions Relating to Tax Relief and Miscellaneous 
Reforms.--
        (1) Committee on agriculture.--The House Committee on 
    Agriculture shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
    that provide direct spending such that the total level of direct 
    spending for that committee does not exceed: $34,571,000,000 in 
    outlays for fiscal year 1998, $37,008,000,000 in outlays for fiscal 
    year 2002, and $179,884,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 
    through 2002.
        (2) Committee on banking and financial services.--The House 
    Committee on Banking and Financial Services shall report changes in 
    laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that 
    the total level of direct spending for that committee does not 
    exceed: -$8,435,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    -$5,091,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    -$32,743,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (3) Committee on commerce.--The House Committee on Commerce 
    shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide 
    direct spending such that the total level of direct spending for 
    that committee does not exceed: $393,533,000,000 in outlays for 
    fiscal year 1998, $507,150,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, 
    and $2,259,294,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 
    2002.
        (4) Committee on education and the workforce.--The House 
    Committee on Education and the Workforce shall report changes in 
    laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that 
    the total level of direct spending for that committee does not 
    exceed: $17,222,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    $17,673,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $89,528,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (5) Committee on government reform and oversight.--(A) The 
    House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight shall report 
    changes in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct 
    spending such that the total level of direct spending for that 
    committee does not exceed: $68,975,000,000 in outlays for fiscal 
    year 1998, $81,896,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $375,722,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (B) The House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
    shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction that would 
    reduce the deficit by: $0 in fiscal year 1998, $621,000,000 in 
    fiscal year 2002, and $1,829,000,000 in fiscal years 1998 through 
    2002.
        (6) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--The House 
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure shall report changes 
    in laws within its jurisdiction that provide direct spending such 
    that the total level of direct spending for that committee does not 
    exceed: $18,087,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    $17,283,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $88,711,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (7) Committee on veterans' affairs.--The House Committee on 
    Veterans' Affairs shall report changes in laws within its 
    jurisdiction that provide direct spending such that the total level 
    of direct spending for that committee does not exceed: 
    $22,444,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, $24,563,000,000 in 
    outlays for fiscal year 2002, and $117,959,000,000 in outlays in 
    fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (8) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The House Committee on 
    Ways and Means shall report changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
    such that the total level of direct spending for that committee 
    does not exceed: $397,581,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998, 
    $506,522,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $2,257,912,000,000 in outlays in fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
        (B) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report changes 
    in laws within its jurisdiction such that the total level of 
    revenues for that committee is not less than: $1,164,736,000,000 in 
    revenues for fiscal year 1998, $1,362,179,000,000 in revenues for 
    fiscal year 2002, and $6,273,388,000,000 in revenues in fiscal 
    years 1998 through 2002.
        (C) The House Committee on Ways and Means shall report changes 
    in laws within its jurisdiction to increase the statutory limit on 
    the public debt to not more than $5,950,000,000,000.
    (e) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``direct 
spending'' has the meaning given to such term in section 250(c)(8) of 
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    (f) Children's Health Initiative.--If the Committees on Commerce 
and Ways and Means report recommendations pursuant to their 
reconciliation instructions that, combined, provide an initiative for 
children's health that would increase the deficit by more than $2.3 
billion for fiscal year 1998, by more than $3.9 billion for fiscal year 
2002, and by more than $16 billion for the period of fiscal years 1998 
through 2002, the committees shall be deemed to not have complied with 
their reconciliation instructions pursuant to section 310(d) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

             TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

SEC. 201. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.

    (a) Discretionary Limits.--In the Senate, in this section and for 
the purposes of allocations made for the discretionary category 
pursuant to section 302(a) or 602(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the term ``discretionary spending limit'' means--
        (1) with respect to fiscal year 1998--
            (A) for the defense category $269,000,000,000 in new budget 
        authority and $266,823,000,000 in outlays; and
            (B) for the nondefense category $257,857,000,000 in new 
        budget authority and $286,445,000,000 in outlays;
        (2) with respect to fiscal year 1999--
            (A) for the defense category $271,500,000,000 in new budget 
        authority and $266,518,000,000 in outlays; and
            (B) for the nondefense category $261,499,000,000 in new 
        budget authority and $292,803,000,000 in outlays;
        (3) with respect to fiscal year 2000, for the discretionary 
    category $537,193,000,000 in new budget authority and 
    $564,265,000,000 in outlays;
        (4) with respect to fiscal year 2001, for the discretionary 
    category $542,032,000,000 in new budget authority and 
    $564,396,000,000 in outlays; and
        (5) with respect to fiscal year 2002, for the discretionary 
    category $551,074,000,000 in new budget authority and 
    $560,799,000,000 in outlays;
as adjusted for changes in concepts and definitions and emergency 
appropriations.
    (b) Point of Order in the Senate.--
        (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall 
    not be in order in the Senate to consider--
            (A) a revision of this resolution or any concurrent 
        resolution on the budget for fiscal years 1999, 2000, 2001, or 
        2002 (or amendment, motion, or conference report on such a 
        resolution) that provides discretionary spending in excess of 
        the discretionary spending limit or limits for such fiscal 
        year; or
            (B) any bill or resolution (or amendment, motion, or 
        conference report on such bill or resolution) for fiscal year 
        1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, or 2002 that would cause any of the 
        limits in this section (or suballocations of the discretionary 
        limits made pursuant to section 602(b) of the Congressional 
        Budget Act of 1974) to be exceeded.
        (2) Exception.--
            (A) In general.--This section shall not apply if a 
        declaration of war by the Congress is in effect or if a joint 
        resolution pursuant to section 258 of the Balanced Budget and 
        Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 has been enacted.
            (B) Enforcement of discretionary limits in fiscal year 
        1998.--Until the enactment of reconciliation legislation 
        pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of section 104 of this 
        resolution--
                (i) subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) shall not apply; 
            and
                (ii) subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) shall apply only 
            with respect to fiscal year 1998.
    (c) Waiver.--This section may be waived or suspended in the Senate 
only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly 
chosen and sworn.
    (d) Appeals.--Appeals in the Senate from the decisions of the Chair 
relating to any provision of this section shall be limited to 1 hour, 
to be equally divided between, and controlled by, the appellant and the 
manager of the concurrent resolution, bill, or joint resolution, as the 
case may be. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members of the 
Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to 
sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised 
under this section.
    (e) Determination of Budget Levels.--For purposes of this section, 
the levels of new budget authority, outlays, new entitlement authority, 
revenues, and deficits for a fiscal year shall be determined on the 
basis of estimates made by the Committee on the Budget of the Senate.

SEC. 202. ALLOWANCE FOR THE IMF.

    (a) Adjustments.--In the Senate, for fiscal year 1998, 1999, 2000, 
2001, or 2002, and in the House of Representatives, for fiscal year 
1998 or 1999, after the reporting of an appropriations measure (or 
after the submission of a conference report thereon) that includes an 
appropriation with respect to paragraph (1) or (2), the chairman of the 
Committee on the Budget shall increase the appropriate allocations, 
budgetary aggregates, and, in the Senate only, discretionary limits, by 
the amount of budget authority in that measure that is the dollar 
equivalent, in terms of Special Drawing Rights, of--
        (1) an increase in the United States quota as part of the 
    International Monetary Fund Eleventh General Review of Quotas 
    (United States Quota); or
        (2) any increase in the maximum amount available to the 
    Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to section 17 of the Bretton 
    Woods Agreement Act, as amended from time to time (New Arrangements 
    to Borrow).
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations may 
report to its House appropriately revised suballocations pursuant to 
sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 following the adjustments made pursuant to subsection (a).

SEC. 203. ALLOWANCE FOR SECTION 8 HOUSING ASSISTANCE.

    (a) Adjustment for Discretionary Spending.--For fiscal year 1998, 
after the reporting of an appropriation measure (or after the 
submission of a conference report thereon) that includes an 
appropriation for the renewal of expiring contracts for tenant- and 
project-based housing assistance under section 8 of the United States 
Housing Act of 1937, the chairman of the Committee on the Budget may 
increase the appropriate allocations in this resolution by the amount 
provided in that appropriation measure for that purpose, but not to 
exceed $9,200,000,000 in budget authority and the appropriate amount of 
outlays.
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations may 
report to its House appropriately revised suballocations pursuant to 
sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 following the adjustments made pursuant to subsection (a).

SEC. 204. SEPARATE ENVIRONMENTAL ALLOCATION.

    (a) Committee Allocations.--After the Committee on Commerce and the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure report a bill (or after 
the submission of a conference report thereon) or in the Senate, after 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works reports a bill (or after 
the submission of a conference report thereon) to reform the Superfund 
program to facilitate the cleanup of hazardous waste sites that does 
not exceed--
        (1) $200,000,000 in budget authority for fiscal year 1998,
        (2) $200,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 2002, and
        (3) $1,000,000,000 in budget authority for the period of fiscal 
    years 1998 through 2002,
the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of that House may increase 
the appropriate allocations of budget authority in this resolution by 
the amounts provided in that bill for that purpose and the outlays 
flowing in all years from such budget authority.
    (b) Prior Surplus.--In the Senate, for the purposes of section 202 
of House Concurrent Resolution 67 (104th Congress), legislation 
reported (or the submission of a conference report thereon) pursuant to 
subsection (a) shall be taken together with all other legislation 
passed pursuant to section 104 of this resolution.

SEC. 205. PRIORITY FEDERAL LAND ACQUISITIONS AND EXCHANGES.

    (a) Adjustment for Discretionary Spending.--For fiscal year 1998, 
after the reporting of an appropriation measure (or after the 
submission of a conference report thereon) that provides $700 million 
in budget authority for fiscal year 1998 for Federal land acquisitions 
and to finalize priority Federal land exchanges, the Chairman of the 
Committee on the Budget of each House shall increase the appropriate 
allocations by that amount of budget authority and the outlays flowing 
from such budget authority to the Committee on Appropriations of that 
House.
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations may 
report to its House appropriately revised suballocations pursuant to 
sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 following the adjustments made pursuant to subsection (a).

SEC. 206. ALLOWANCE FOR ARREARAGES.

    (a) Adjustment for Discretionary Spending.--(1) In the Senate, for 
the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002, or in the House of 
Representatives, for the period of fiscal years 1998 and 1999, after 
the reporting of an appropriations measure (or after the submission of 
a conference report thereon) that includes an appropriation for 
arrearages for international organizations, international peacekeeping, 
and multilateral development banks during that fiscal year, the 
Chairman of the Committee on the Budget shall increase the appropriate 
allocations, aggregates, and, in the Senate only, discretionary 
spending limits, in this resolution by an amount provided for that 
purpose in that appropriation measure.
    (2) In the Senate, the adjustments described in paragraph (1) for 
the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002 may not exceed 
$1,884,000,000 in budget authority and the outlays flowing in all years 
from such budget authority.
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations 
shall report to its House appropriately revised suballocations pursuant 
to sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 following the adjustments made pursuant to subsection (a).

SEC. 207. INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL RESERVE FUND FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998-
              2002.

    (a) In General.--If legislation is enacted which generates revenue 
increases or direct spending reductions to finance an intercity 
passenger rail fund and to the extent that such increases or reductions 
are not included in this concurrent resolution on the budget, the 
appropriate budgetary levels and limits may be adjusted if such 
adjustments do not cause an increase in the deficit in this resolution. 
Necessary authorizing reforms and additional funding contained in this 
reserve fund for intercity passenger rail should both occur in this 
Session, and if such funds are appropriated before the enactment of 
such reforms, such appropriated funds shall not be made available until 
the enactment of such reforms.
    (b) Establishing a Reserve.--
        (1) Adjustments to capture savings.--After the enactment of 
    legislation described in subsection (a), the Chairman of the 
    Committee on the Budget may submit revisions to the appropriate 
    allocations and aggregates by the amount that provisions in such 
    legislation generates revenue increases or direct spending 
    reductions.
        (2) Determination of maximum discretionary allowance.--Upon the 
    submission of such revisions, the Chairman of the Committee on the 
    Budget shall also submit the amount of revenue increases or direct 
    spending reductions such legislation generates and the maximum 
    amount available each year for adjustments pursuant to subsection 
    (c).
    (c) Adjustments for Discretionary Spending.--
        (1) Revisions to allocations and aggregates.--After either--
            (A) the reporting of an appropriations measure, or after a 
        conference committee submits a conference report thereon, that 
        appropriates funds for the National Railroad Passenger 
        Corporation and funds from the intercity passenger rail fund; 
        or
            (B) the reporting of an appropriations measure, or after a 
        conference committee submits a conference report thereon, that 
        appropriates funds from the intercity passenger rail fund 
        (funds having previously been appropriated for the National 
        Railroad Passenger Corporation for that same fiscal year),
    the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget may submit increased 
    budget authority allocations, aggregates, and, in the Senate only, 
    discretionary limits, for the amount appropriated for authorized 
    expenditures from the intercity passenger rail fund and the outlays 
    in all years flowing from such budget authority.
        (2) Revisions to suballocations.--The Committee on 
    Appropriations may submit appropriately revised suballocations 
    pursuant to sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the Congressional 
    Budget Act of 1974.
    (d) Limitations.--
        (1) In general.--The revisions made pursuant to subsection (b) 
    shall not be made--
            (A) with respect to direct spending reductions, unless the 
        committee that generates the direct spending reductions is 
        within its allocations under sections 302(a) and 602(a) of the 
        Budget Act in this resolution (not including the direct 
        spending reductions envisioned in subsection (b)); and
            (B) with respect to revenue increases, unless revenues are 
        at or above the revenue aggregates in this resolution (not 
        including the revenue increases envisioned in subsection (b)).
        (2) Budget authority.--The budget authority adjustments made 
    pursuant to subsection (c) shall not exceed the amounts specified 
    in subsection (b)(2) for a fiscal year.

SEC. 207A. INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE FOR 
              FISCAL YEARS 1998-2002.

    (a) In General.--In the Senate, if legislation is enacted which 
generates revenue increases or direct spending reductions to finance an 
intercity passenger rail fund and to the extent that such increases or 
reductions are not included in this concurrent resolution on the 
budget, the appropriate budgetary levels and limits may be adjusted if 
such adjustments do not cause an increase in the deficit in this 
resolution.
    (b) Establishing a Reserve.--
        (1) Adjustments to capture savings.--After the enactment of 
    legislation described in subsection (a), the Chairman of the 
    Committee on the Budget of the Senate may submit revisions to the 
    appropriate allocations and aggregates by the amount that 
    provisions in such legislation generates revenue increases or 
    direct spending reductions.
        (2) Determination of maximum discretionary allowance.--Upon the 
    submission of such revisions, the Chairman of the Committee on the 
    Budget of the Senate shall also submit the amount of revenue 
    increases or direct spending reductions such legislation generates 
    and the maximum amount available each year for adjustments pursuant 
    to subsection (c).
    (c) Adjustments for Discretionary Spending.--
        (1) Revisions to allocations and aggregates.--After either--
            (A) the reporting of an appropriations measure, or after a 
        conference committee submits a conference report thereon, that 
        appropriates funds for the National Railroad Passenger 
        Corporation and funds from the intercity passenger rail fund; 
        or
            (B) the reporting of an appropriations measure, or after a 
        conference committee submits a conference report thereon, that 
        appropriates funds from the intercity passenger rail fund 
        (funds having previously been appropriated for the National 
        Railroad Passenger Corporation for that same fiscal year),
    the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may 
    submit increased budget authority allocations, aggregates, and 
    discretionary limits, for the amount appropriated for authorized 
    expenditures from the intercity passenger rail fund and the outlays 
    in all years flowing from such budget authority.
        (2) Revisions to suballocations.--The Committee on 
    Appropriations of the Senate may submit appropriately revised 
    suballocations pursuant to sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the 
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (d) Limitations.--
        (1) In general.--The revisions made pursuant to subsection (b) 
    shall not be made--
            (A) with respect to direct spending reductions, unless the 
        committee that generates the direct spending reductions is 
        within its allocations under sections 302(a) and 602(a) of the 
        Budget Act in this resolution (not including the direct 
        spending reductions envisioned in subsection (b)); and
            (B) with respect to revenue increases, unless revenues are 
        at or above the revenue aggregates in this resolution (not 
        including the revenue increases envisioned in subsection (b)).
        (2) Budget authority.--The budget authority adjustments made 
    pursuant to subsection (c) shall not exceed the amounts specified 
    in subsection (b)(2) for a fiscal year.

SEC. 208. MASS TRANSIT RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE FOR FISCAL YEARS 
              1998-2002.

    (a) In General.--In the Senate, if legislation generates revenue 
increases or direct spending reductions to finance mass transit and to 
the extent that such increases or reductions are not included in this 
concurrent resolution on the budget, the appropriate budgetary levels 
and limits may be adjusted if such adjustments do not cause an increase 
in the deficit in this resolution.
    (b) Adjustment for Budget Authority.--After the reporting of 
legislation (the offering of an amendment thereto or conference report 
thereon) that reduces non-mass transit direct spending or increases 
revenues for a fiscal year or years, the Chairman of the Committee on 
the Budget of the Senate may submit appropriately revised allocations 
and aggregates by an amount that equals the amount such legislation 
reduces direct spending or increases revenues for a fiscal year or 
years.
    (c) Establishing a Reserve.--
        (1) Revisions.--After the enactment of legislation described in 
    subsection (a), the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
    Senate may submit revisions to the appropriate allocations and 
    aggregates by the amount that provisions in such legislation 
    generates revenue increases or direct nonhighway spending 
    reductions.
        (2) Revenue increases or direct spending reductions.--After the 
    submission of such revisions, the Chairman of the Committee on the 
    Budget of the Senate shall also submit the amount of revenue 
    increases or non-mass transit direct spending reductions such 
    legislation generates and the maximum amount available each year 
    for adjustments pursuant to subsection (d).
    (d) Adjustments for Discretionary Spending.--
        (1) Revisions to allocations and aggregates.--After the 
    reporting of an appropriations measure, or after a conference 
    committee submits a conference report thereon, that makes available 
    funds for mass transit, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget 
    of the Senate shall submit increased outlay allocations, 
    aggregates, and discretionary limits for the amount of outlays 
    flowing from the additional obligational authority provided in such 
    bill.
        (2) Revisions to suballocations.--The Committee on 
    Appropriations of the Senate may submit appropriately revised 
    suballocations pursuant to sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the 
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (e) Limitations.--
        (1) In general.--The revisions made pursuant to subsection (c) 
    shall not be made--
            (A) with respect to non-mass transit direct spending 
        reductions, unless the committee that generates the direct 
        spending reductions is within its allocations under sections 
        302(a) and 602(a) of the Budget Act in this resolution (not 
        including the non-mass transit direct spending reductions 
        envisioned in subsection (c)); and
            (B) with respect to revenue increases, unless revenues are 
        at or above the revenue aggregates in this resolution (not 
        including the revenue increases envisioned in subsection (c)).
        (2) Outlays.--The outlay adjustments made pursuant to 
    subsection (d) shall not exceed the amounts specified in subsection 
    (c)(2) for a fiscal year.

SEC. 209. HIGHWAY RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998-
              2002.

    (a) In General.--In the Senate, if legislation generates revenue 
increases or direct spending reductions to finance highways and to the 
extent that such increases or reductions are not included in this 
concurrent resolution on the budget, the appropriate budgetary levels 
and limits may be adjusted if such adjustments do not cause an increase 
in the deficit in this resolution.
    (b) Adjustments for Budget Authority.--After the reporting of 
legislation (the offering of an amendment thereto or conference report 
thereon) that reduces nonhighway direct spending or increases revenues 
for a fiscal year or years, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget 
of the Senate may submit appropriately revised allocations and 
aggregates by an amount that equals the amount such legislation reduces 
direct spending or increases revenues for a fiscal year or years.
    (c) Establishing a Reserve.--
        (1) Revisions.--After the enactment of legislation described in 
    subsection (a), the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
    Senate may submit revisions to the appropriate allocations and 
    aggregates by the amount that provisions in such legislation 
    generates revenue increases or non-highway direct spending 
    reductions.
        (2) Revenue increases or direct spending reductions.--Upon the 
    submission of such revisions, the Chairman of the Committee on the 
    Budget of the Senate shall also submit the amount of revenue 
    increases or direct nonhighway spending reductions such legislation 
    generates and the maximum amount available each year for 
    adjustments pursuant to subsection (d).
    (d) Adjustments for Discretionary Spending.--
        (1) Revisions to allocations and aggregates.--After the 
    reporting of an appropriations measure, or after a conference 
    committee submits a conference report thereon, that makes available 
    funds for highways, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of 
    the Senate shall submit increased outlay allocations, aggregates, 
    and discretionary limits for the amount of outlays flowing from the 
    additional obligational authority provided in such measure.
        (2) Revisions to suballocations.--The Committee on 
    Appropriations of the Senate may submit appropriately revised 
    suballocations pursuant to sections 302(b)(1) and 602(b)(1) of the 
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (e) Limitations.--
        (1) In general.--The revisions made pursuant to subsection (c) 
    shall not be made--
            (A) with respect to nonhighway direct spending reductions, 
        unless the committee that generates the direct spending 
        reductions is within its allocations under section 302(a) and 
        602(a) of the Budget Act in this resolution (not including the 
        nonhighway direct spending reductions envisioned in subsection 
        (c)); and
            (B) with respect to revenue increases, unless revenues are 
        at or above the revenue aggregates in this resolution (not 
        including the revenue increases envisioned in subsection (c)).
        (2) Outlays.--The outlay adjustments made pursuant to 
    subsection (d) shall not exceed the amounts specified in subsection 
    (c)(2) for a fiscal year.

SEC. 210. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND IN THE HOUSE FOR SURFACE 
              TRANSPORTATION.

    (a) Purpose.--In the House, the purpose of this section is to 
adjust the appropriate budgetary levels to accommodate legislation 
increasing spending from the highway trust fund on surface 
transportation and highway safety above the levels assumed in this 
resolution if such legislation is deficit neutral.
    (b) Deficit Neutrality Requirement.--(1) In order to receive the 
adjustments specified in subsection (c), a bill reported by the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House that 
provides new budget authority above the levels assumed in this 
resolution for programs authorized out of the highway trust fund must 
be deficit neutral.
    (2) A deficit-neutral bill must meet the following conditions:
        (A) The amount of new budget authority provided for programs 
    authorized out of the highway trust fund must be in excess of 
    $25.949 billion in new budget authority for fiscal year 1998, 
    $25.464 billion in new budget authority for fiscal year 2002, and 
    $127.973 billion in new budget authority for the period of fiscal 
    years 1998 through 2002.
        (B) The outlays estimated to flow from the excess new budget 
    authority set forth in subparagraph (A) must be offset for fiscal 
    year 1998, fiscal year 2002, and for the period of fiscal years 
    1998 through 2002. For the sole purpose of estimating the amount of 
    outlays flowing from excess new budget authority under this 
    section, it shall be assumed that such excess new budget authority 
    would have an obligation limitation sufficient to accommodate that 
    new budget authority.
        (C) The outlays estimated to flow from the excess new budget 
    authority must be offset by (i) other direct spending or revenue 
    provisions within that transportation bill, (ii) the net reduction 
    in other direct spending and revenue legislation (for purposes of 
    such offset) that is enacted during this Congress after the date of 
    adoption of this resolution and before such transportation bill is 
    reported (in excess of the levels assumed in this resolution), or 
    (iii) a combination of the offsets specified in clauses (i) and 
    (ii).
        (D) As used in this section, the term ``direct spending'' has 
    the meaning given to such term in section 250(c)(8) of the Balanced 
    Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    (c) Revised Levels.--(1) After the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure of the House reports a bill (or after the submission of 
a conference report thereon) meeting the conditions set forth in 
subsection (b)(2), the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
House shall increase the allocation of new budget authority to that 
committee by the amount of new budget authority provided in that bill 
(and that is above the levels set forth in subsection (b)(2)(A)) for 
programs authorized out of the highway trust fund.
    (2) After the enactment of the transportation bill described in 
paragraph (1) and after the reporting of a general, supplemental, or 
continuing resolution making appropriations by the Committee on 
Appropriations of the House (or after the submission of a conference 
report thereon) establishing an obligation limitation above the levels 
specified in subsection (b)(2)(A) (at a level sufficient to obligate 
some or all of the budget authority specified in paragraph (1)), the 
chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the House shall increase the 
allocation and aggregate levels of outlays to that committee for the 
appropriate fiscal years.
    (d) Offsetting Adjustments.--Upon the enactment of legislation 
providing offsets pursuant to subsection (c), the chairman of the 
Committee on the Budget shall make offsetting adjustments in the 
appropriate allocations and aggregates.
    (e) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``highway trust 
fund'' refers to the following budget accounts (or any successor 
accounts):
        (1) 69-8083-0-7-401 (Federal-Aid Highways).
        (2) 69-8191-0-7-401 (Mass Transit Capital Fund).
        (3) 69-8350-0-7-401 (Mass Transit Formula Grants).
        (4) 69-8016-0-7-401 (National Highway Traffic Safety 
    Administration-Operations and Research).
        (5) 69-8020-0-7-401 (Highway Traffic Safety Grants).
        (6) 69-8048-0-7-401 (National Motor Carrier Safety Program).

SEC. 211. SALE OF GOVERNMENT ASSETS.

    (a) Limitation.--Subsections (b) through (d) of this section shall 
not apply to the sale of any asset resulting from the enactment of any 
reconciliation bill referred to in section 104 or 105 of this 
resolution.
    (b) Budgetary Treatment.--
        (1) In general.--For the purpose of this concurrent resolution 
    on the budget and the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, no amounts 
    realized from the sale of an asset shall be scored with respect to 
    the level of budget authority, outlays, or revenues if such sale 
    would cause an increase in the deficit as calculated pursuant to 
    paragraph (2).
        (2) Calculation of net present value.--The deficit estimate of 
    an asset sale shall be the net present value of the cash flow 
    from--
            (A) proceeds from the asset sale;
            (B) future receipts that would be expected from continued 
        ownership of the asset by the Government; and
            (C) expected future spending by the Government at a level 
        necessary to continue to operate and maintain the asset to 
        generate the receipts estimated pursuant to subparagraph (B).
    (c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``sale of 
an asset'' shall have the same meaning as under section 250(c)(21) of 
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    (d) Treatment of Loan Assets.--For the purposes of this section, 
the sale of loan assets or the prepayment of a loan shall be governed 
by the terms of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990.
    (e) Intent.--The asset sale rule may be revisited when the Budget 
Enforcement Act of 1990 is extended.

SEC. 212. DETERMINATIONS OF BUDGETARY LEVELS; REVERSALS.

    (a) Determinations.--For purposes of this title, budgetary levels 
shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the Committee on 
the Budget.
    (b) Reversals and Adjustments.--(1) In the House of 
Representatives, if any legislation referred to in this title is not 
enacted into law, then the chairman of the Committee on the Budget 
shall, as soon as practicable, reverse adjustments made under this 
title for such legislation and have such adjustments published in the 
Congressional Record.
    (2) In the Senate, the adjustments and revisions to allocations, 
aggregates, and limits made by the Chairman of the Committee on the 
Budget pursuant to this title for legislation shall only apply while 
such legislation is under consideration in the Senate and shall only 
permanently take effect upon the enactment of such legislation.
    (c) Effect of Revisions.--Any revisions made by the chairman of the 
Committee on the Budget under this title, and in the Senate, under 
section 104(d), shall be considered for purposes of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974 as the allocations and aggregates, and in the 
Senate, the discretionary spending limits, contained in this 
resolution, and the chairman shall have such revisions published in the 
Congressional Record.

SEC. 213. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

    The Congress adopts the provisions of this title--
        (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate and 
    the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such they shall 
    be considered as part of the rules of each House, or of that House 
    to which they specifically apply, and such rules shall supersede 
    other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent 
    therewith; and
        (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of either 
    House to change those rules (so far as they relate to that House) 
    at any time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as in the 
    case of any other rule of that House.

       TITLE III--SENSE OF CONGRESS, HOUSE, AND SENATE PROVISIONS
                   Subtitle A--Sense of the Congress

SEC. 301. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS ON REPAYMENT OF THE FEDERAL DEBT.

    (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
        (1) The Congress and the President have a basic moral and 
    ethical responsibility to future generations to repay the Federal 
    debt, including the money borrowed from the Social Security Trust 
    Fund.
        (2) The Congress and the President should enact a law which 
    creates a regimen for paying off the Federal debt within 30 years.
        (3) If spending growth were held to a level one percentage 
    point lower than projected growth in revenues, then the Federal 
    debt could be repaid within 30 years.
    (b) Sense of the Congress Regarding President's Submission to 
Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress that--
        (1) the President's annual budget submission to Congress should 
    include a plan for repayment of Federal debt beyond the year 2002, 
    including the money borrowed from the Social Security Trust Fund; 
    and
        (2) the plan should specifically explain how the President 
    working with Congress would cap spending growth at a level one 
    percentage point lower than projected growth in revenues.

SEC. 302. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS ON TAX CUTS.

    It is the sense of the Congress that this resolution assumes that--
        (1) a substantial majority of the tax cut benefits provided in 
    the tax reconciliation bill will go to middle class working 
    families earning less than approximately $100,000 per year; and
        (2) the tax cuts in the tax reconciliation bill will not cause 
    revenue losses to increase significantly in years after 2007.

SEC. 303. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS THAT THE 10-YEAR REVENUE LOSS FROM THE 
              TAX RELIEF PACKAGE SHALL NOT EXCEED $250,000,000,000.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
        (1) a May 15, 1997 letter from the Speaker of the House of 
    Representatives and the Majority Leader of the Senate to the 
    President of the United States, representing the agreement on the 
    tax package in the Bipartisan Budget Agreements, states that, ``It 
    was agreed that the net tax cut shall be $85 billion through 2002 
    and not more than $250 billion through 2007.'';
        (2) a May 15, 1997 letter from the Speaker of the House of 
    Representatives and the Majority Leader of the Senate to the Chief 
    of Staff to the President, contained in the same Bipartisan Budget 
    Agreement and referring to the tax package, states that ``The 
    proposal shall not cause costs to explode in the outyears.''; and
        (3) the text of the Bipartisan Budget Agreement issued on May 
    15, 1997 states that ``If bills, resolutions or conference reports 
    are deemed to be inconsistent, remedial efforts shall be made by 
    all parties to assure consistency. Such efforts shall include 
    bipartisan Leadership consultation and concurrence on amendments 
    and scheduling as necessary.''.
    (b) Sense of Congress.--
        (1) 10-year cost.--The 10-year cost of the tax reconciliation 
    bill resulting from this resolution shall not exceed 
    $250,000,000,000 and any revenue loss shall be certified by the 
    Joint Committee on Taxation in consultation and cooperation with 
    the Office of Tax Analysis of the Department of Treasury.
        (2) 5-year cost.--The 5-year cost of the tax reconciliation 
    bill resulting from this resolution shall be $85,000,000,000 and 
    any revenue loss shall be certified by the Joint Committee on 
    Taxation in consultation and cooperation with the Office of Tax 
    Analysis of the Department of Treasury.

                     Subtitle B--Sense of the House

SEC. 306. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON COMMISSION ON LONG-TERM BUDGETARY 
              PROBLEMS.

    (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
        (1) achieving a balanced budget by fiscal year 2002 is only the 
    first step necessary to restore our Nation's economic prosperity;
        (2) the imminent retirement of the baby-boom generation will 
    greatly increase the demand for government services;
        (3) this burden will be borne by a relatively smaller work 
    force resulting in an unprecedented intergenerational transfer of 
    financial resources;
        (4) the rising demand for retirement and medical benefits will 
    quickly jeopardize the solvency of the Medicare, Social Security, 
    and Federal Retirement Trust Funds; and
        (5) the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that marginal 
    tax rates would have to increase by 50 percent over the next 5 
    years to cover the long-term projected costs of retirement and 
    health benefits.
    (b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that 
legislation should be enacted to create a commission to assess long-
term budgetary problems, their implications for both the baby-boom 
generation and tomorrow's workforce, and make such recommendations as 
it deems appropriate to ensure our Nation's future prosperity.

SEC. 307. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON CORPORATE WELFARE.

    (a) Findings.--The House finds that the functional levels and 
aggregates in this budget resolution assume that--
        (1) the Federal Government supports profit-making enterprises 
    and industries through billions of dollars in payments, benefits, 
    and programs;
        (2) many of these subsidies do not serve a clear and compelling 
    public interest;
        (3) corporate subsidies frequently provide unfair competitive 
    advantages to certain industries and industry segments; and
        (4) at a time when millions of Americans are being asked to 
    sacrifice in order to balance the budget, the corporate sector 
    should bear its share of the burden.
    (b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that 
legislation should be enacted to--
        (1) eliminate the most egregious corporate subsidies; and
        (2) create a commission to recommend the elimination of Federal 
    payments, benefits, and programs which predominantly benefit a 
    particular industry or segment of an industry, rather than provide 
    a clear and compelling public benefit, and include a fast-track 
    process for the consideration of those recommendations.

SEC. 308. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON BASELINES.

    (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
        (1) baselines are projections of future spending if existing 
    policies remain unchanged;
        (2) under baseline assumptions, spending automatically rises 
    with inflation even if such increases are not mandated under 
    existing law;
        (3) baseline budgeting is inherently biased against policies 
    that would reduce the projected growth in spending because such 
    policies are portrayed as spending reductions from an increasing 
    baseline; and
        (4) the baseline concept has encouraged Congress to abdicate 
    its constitutional obligation to control the public purse for those 
    programs which are automatically funded.
    (b) Sense of House.--It is the sense of the House that baseline 
budgeting should be replaced with a budgetary model that requires 
justification of aggregate funding levels and maximizes congressional 
and executive accountability for Federal spending.

SEC. 309. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON FAMILY VIOLENCE OPTION CLARIFYING 
              AMENDMENT.

    (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
        (1) Domestic violence is the leading cause of physical injury 
    to women. The Department of Justice estimates that over 1,000,000 
    violent crimes against women are committed by intimate partners 
    annually.
        (2) Domestic violence dramatically affects the victim's ability 
    to participate in the workforce. A University of Minnesota survey 
    reported that one quarter of battered women surveyed had lost a job 
    partly because of being abused and that over half of these women 
    had been harassed by their abuser at work.
        (3) Domestic violence is often intensified as women seek to 
    gain economic independence through attending school or training 
    programs. Batterers have been reported to prevent women from 
    attending these programs or sabotage their efforts at self-
    improvement.
        (4) Nationwide surveys of service providers prepared by the 
    Taylor Institute of Chicago, Illinois, document, for the first 
    time, the interrelationship between domestic violence and welfare 
    by showing that from 34 percent to 65 percent of AFDC recipients 
    are current or past victims of domestic violence.
        (5) Over half of the women surveyed stayed with their batterers 
    because they lacked the resources to support themselves and their 
    children. The surveys also found that the availability of economic 
    support is a critical factor in poor women's ability to leave 
    abusive situations that threaten them and their children.
        (6) The restructuring of the welfare programs may impact the 
    availability of the economic support and the safety net necessary 
    to enable poor women to flee abuse without risking homelessness and 
    starvation for their families.
        (7) In recognition of this finding, the House Committee on the 
    Budget unanimously passed a sense of Congress amendment on domestic 
    violence and Federal assistance to the fiscal year 1997 budget 
    resolution. Subsequently, Congress passed the family violence 
    option amendment to last year's welfare reform reconciliation bill.
        (8) The family violence option gives States the flexibility to 
    grant temporary waivers from time limits and work requirements for 
    domestic violence victims who would suffer extreme hardship from 
    the application of these provisions. These waivers were not 
    intended to be included as part of the permanent 20 percent 
    hardship exemption.
        (9) The Department of Health and Human Services has been slow 
    to issue regulations regarding this provision. As a result, States 
    are hesitant to fully implement the family violence option fearing 
    it will interfere with the 20 percent hardship exemption.
        (10) Currently 15 States have opted to include the family 
    violence option in their welfare plans, and 13 other States have 
    included some type of domestic violence provisions in their plans.
    (b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that--
        (1) States should not be subject to any numerical limits in 
    granting domestic violence good cause waivers to individuals 
    receiving assistance for all requirements where compliance with 
    such requirements would make it more difficult for individuals 
    receiving assistance to escape domestic violence; and
        (2) any individuals granted a domestic violence good cause 
    waiver by States should not be included in the States' 20 percent 
    hardship exemption.

                    Subtitle B--Sense of the Senate

SEC. 311. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON LONG TERM ENTITLEMENT REFORMS, 
              INCLUDING ACCURACY IN DETERMINING CHANGES IN THE COST OF 
              LIVING.

    (a) Findings.--
        (1) Entitlement reforms.--The Senate finds that with respect to 
    long term entitlement reforms--
            (A) entitlement spending continues to grow dramatically as 
        a percent of total Federal spending, rising from fifty-six 
        percent of the budget in 1987 to an estimated seventy-three 
        percent of the budget in 2007;
            (B) this growth in mandatory spending poses a long-term 
        threat to the United States economy because it crowds out 
        spending for investments in education, infrastructure, defense, 
        law enforcement and other programs that enhance economic 
        growth;
            (C) in 1994, the Bipartisan Commission on Entitlement and 
        Tax Reform concluded that if no changes are made to current 
        entitlement laws, all Federal revenues will be spent on 
        entitlement programs and interest on the debt by the year 2012;
            (D) the Congressional Budget Office has also recently 
        issued a report that found that pressure on the budget from 
        demographics and rising health care costs will increase 
        dramatically after 2002; and
            (E) making significant entitlement changes will 
        significantly benefit the economy, and will forestall the need 
        for more drastic tax and spending decisions in future years.
        (2) CPI.--The Senate finds that with respect to accuracy in 
    determining changes in the cost of living--
            (A) the Final Report of the Senate Finance Committee's 
        Advisory Commission to study the CPI has concluded that the 
        Consumer Price Index overstates the cost of living in the 
        United States by 1.1 percentage points;
            (B) the overstatement of the cost of living by the Consumer 
        Price Index has been recognized by economists since at least 
        1961, when a report noting the existence of the overstatement 
        was issued by a National Bureau of Economic Research Committee, 
        chaired by Professor George J. Stigler;
            (C) Congress and the President, through the indexing of 
        Federal tax brackets, Social Security benefits, and other 
        Federal program benefits, have undertaken to protect taxpayers 
        and beneficiaries of such programs from the erosion of 
        purchasing power due to inflation; and
            (D) the overstatement of the cost of living increases the 
        deficit and undermines the equitable administration of Federal 
        benefits and tax policies.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions in this resolution assume that--
        (1) Congress and the President should continue working to enact 
    structural entitlement reforms in the 1997 budget agreement and in 
    subsequent legislation;
        (2) Congress and the President must find the most accurate 
    measure of the change in the cost of living in the United States, 
    and should work in a bipartisan manner to implement any changes 
    that are necessary to achieve an accurate measure; and
        (3) Congress and the President must work to ensure that the 
    1997 budget agreement not only keeps the unified budget in balance 
    after 2002, but that additional measures should be taken to begin 
    to achieve substantial surpluses which will improve the economy and 
    allow our nation to be ready for the retirement of the baby boom 
    generation in the year 2012.

SEC. 312. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON TACTICAL FIGHTER AIRCRAFT PROGRAMS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) the Department of Defense has proposed to modernize the 
    United States tactical fighter aircraft force through three 
    tactical fighter procurement programs, including the F/A-18 E/F 
    aircraft program of the Navy, the F-22 aircraft program of the Air 
    Force, and the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft program for the Navy, 
    Air Force, and Marine Corps;
        (2) the General Accounting Office, the Congressional Budget 
    Office, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Under 
    Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, and several 
    Members of Congress have publicly stated that, given the current 
    Department of Defense budget for procurement, the Department of 
    Defense's original plan to buy over 4,400 F/A-18 E/F aircraft, F-22 
    aircraft, and Joint Strike Fighter aircraft at a total program cost 
    in excess of $350,000,000,000 was not affordable;
        (3) the F/A-18 E/F, F-22, and the Joint Strike Fighter tactical 
    fighter programs will be competing for a limited amount of 
    procurement funding with numerous other aircraft acquisition 
    programs, including the Comanche helicopter program, the V-22 
    Osprey aircraft program, and the C-17 aircraft program, as well as 
    for the necessary replacement of other aging aircraft such as the 
    KC-135, the C-5A, the F-117, and the EA-6B aircraft; and
        (4) the 1997 Department of Defense Quadrennial Defense Review 
    has recommended reducing the F/A-18 E/F program buy from 1,000 
    aircraft to 548, and reducing the F-22 program buy from 438 to 339.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that, within 30 days, the 
Department of Defense should transmit to Congress detailed information 
pertaining to the implementation of this revised acquisition strategy 
so that the Congress can adequately evaluate the extent to which the 
revised acquisition strategy is tenable and affordable given the 
projected spending levels contained in this budget resolution.

SEC. 313. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING CHILDREN'S HEALTH COVERAGE.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) of the estimated 10 million uninsured children in the 
    United States, over 1.3 million have at least one parent who is 
    self-employed and all other uninsured children are dependents of 
    persons who are employed by another, or unemployed;
        (2) these 1.3 million uninsured kids comprise approximately 22 
    percent of all children with self-employed parents, and they are a 
    significant 13 percent of all uninsured children;
        (3) the remaining uninsured children are in families where 
    neither parent is self-employed and comprise 13 percent of all 
    children in families where neither parent is self-employed;
        (4) children in families with a self-employed parent are 
    therefore more likely to be uninsured than children in families 
    where neither parent is self-employed; and
        (5) the current disparity in the tax law reduces the 
    affordability of health insurance for the self-employed and their 
    families, hindering the ability of children to receive essential 
    primary and preventive care services.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that from resources available in 
this budget resolution, a portion should be set aside for an immediate 
100 percent deductibility of health insurance costs for the self-
employed. Full-deductibility of health expenses for the self-employed 
would make health insurance more attractive and affordable, resulting 
in more dependents being covered. The government should not encourage 
parents to forgo private insurance for a government-run program.

SEC. 314. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON A MEDICAID PER CAPITA CAP.

    It is the sense of the Senate that in order to meet deficit 
reduction targets in this resolution with respect to Medicaid--
        (1) the per capita cap will not be used as a method for meeting 
    spending targets; and
        (2) the per capita cap could represent a significant structural 
    change that might jeopardize the quality of care for children, the 
    disabled, and senior citizens.

SEC. 315. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT ADDED SAVINGS GO TO DEFICIT 
              REDUCTION.

    (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
        (1) balancing the budget will bring numerous economic benefits 
    for the United States economy and American workers and families, 
    including improved economic growth and lower interest rates;
        (2) the fiscal year 1998 budget resolution crafted pursuant to 
    an agreement reached between the Congress and the Administration 
    purports to achieve balance in the year 2002;
        (3) the deficit estimates contained in this resolution may not 
    conform to the actual deficits in subsequent years, which make it 
    imperative that any additional savings are realized be devoted to 
    deficit reduction;
        (4) the Senate's ``pay-as-you-go'' point of order prohibits 
    crediting savings from updated economic or technical data as an 
    offset for legislation that increases the deficit, and ensures 
    these savings are devoted to deficit reduction; and
        (5) Congress and the Administration must ensure that the 
    deficit levels contained in this budget are met and, if actual 
    deficits prove to be lower than projected, the additional savings 
    are used to balance the budget on or before the year 2002.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that--
        (1) legislation enacted pursuant to this resolution must ensure 
    that the goal of a balanced budget is achieved on or before fiscal 
    year 2002; and
        (2) if the actual deficit is lower than the projected deficit 
    in any upcoming fiscal year, the added savings should be devoted to 
    further deficit reduction.

SEC. 316. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FAIRNESS IN MEDICARE.

    (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
        (1) the Trustees of the Medicare Trust Funds recently announced 
    that Medicare's Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund is headed for 
    bankruptcy in 2001, and in 1997, HI will run a deficit of 
    $26,000,000,000 and add $56,000,000,000 annually to the Federal 
    deficit by 2001;
        (2) the Trustees also project that Supplementary Medical 
    Insurance (SMI), will grow twice as fast as the economy and the 
    taxpayers' subsidy to keep the SMI from bankruptcy will grow from 
    $58,000,000,000 to $89,000,000,000 annually from 1997 through 2001;
        (3) the Congressional Budget Office reports that when the baby-
    boom generation begins to receive Social Security benefits and is 
    eligible for Medicare in 2008, the Federal budget will face intense 
    pressure, resulting in mounting deficits and erosion of future 
    economic growth;
        (4) long-term solutions to address the financial and 
    demographic problems of Medicare are urgently needed to preserve 
    and protect the Medicare Trust Funds;
        (5) these solutions to address the financial and demographic 
    problems of Medicare are urgently needed to preserve and protect 
    the Medicare Trust Funds;
        (6) reform of the Medicare Program should ensure equity and 
    fairness for all Medicare beneficiaries, and offer beneficiaries 
    more choice of private health plans, to promote efficiency and 
    enhance the quality of health care;
        (7) all Americans pay the same payroll tax of 2.9 percent to 
    the Medicare Trust Funds, and they deserve the same choices and 
    services regardless of where they retire;
        (8) however, under the currently adjusted-average-per- capita 
    cost (AAPCC), some counties receive 2.5 times more in Medicare 
    reimbursements than others;
        (9) this inequity in Medicare reimbursement jeopardizes the 
    quality of Medicare services of rural beneficiaries and penalizes 
    the most efficient and effective Medicare service providers;
        (10) in some states, the result has been the absence of health 
    care choices beyond traditional, fee-for-service medicine for 
    Medicare beneficiaries, which in other counties and states plan 
    providers may be significantly over-compensated, adding to 
    Medicare's fiscal instability; and
        (11) ending the practice of basing payments to risk contract 
    plans on local fee-for-service medical costs will help correct 
    these inequities, mitigate unnecessary cost in the program, and 
    begin the serious, long-term restructuring of Medicare.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that the Finance Committee should 
strongly consider the following elements for Medicare reform--
        (1) any Medicare reform package should include measures to 
    address the inequity in Medicare reimbursement to risk contract 
    plans;
        (2) Medicare should use a national update framework rather than 
    local fee-for-service spending increases to determine the annual 
    changes in risk plan payment rates;
        (3) an adequate minimum payment rate should be provided for 
    health plans participating in Medicare risk contract programs;
        (4) the geographic variation in Medicare payment rates must be 
    reduced over time to raise the lower payment areas closer to the 
    average while taking into account actual differences in input costs 
    that exist from region to regional;
        (5) Medicare managers in consultation with plan providers and 
    patient advocates should pursue competitive bidding programs in 
    communities where data indicate risk contract payments are 
    substantially excessive and when plan choices would not diminish by 
    such a bidding process; and
        (6) Medicare should phase in the use of risk adjusters which 
    take account of health status so as to address overpayment to some 
    plans.

SEC. 317. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING ASSISTANCE TO LITHUANIA AND 
              LATVIA.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) Lithuania and Latvia reestablished democracy and free 
    market economies when they regained their freedom from the Soviet 
    Union;
        (2) Lithuania and Latvia, which have made significant progress 
    since regaining their freedom, are still struggling to recover from 
    the devastation of 50 years of communist domination;
        (3) the United States, which never recognized the illegal 
    incorporation of Lithuania and Latvia into the Soviet Union, has 
    provided assistance to strengthen democratic institutions and free 
    market reforms in Lithuania and Latvia since 1991;
        (4) the people of the United States enjoy close and friendly 
    relations with the people of Lithuania and Latvia;
        (5) the success of democracy and free market reform in 
    Lithuania and Latvia is important to the security and economic 
    progress of the United States; and
        (6) the United States as well as Lithuania and Latvia would 
    benefit from the continuation of assistance which helps Lithuania 
    and Latvia to implement commercial and trade law reform, sustain 
    private sector development, and establish well-trained judiciaries.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that--
        (1) adequate assistance should be provided to Lithuania and 
    Latvia in fiscal year 1998 to continue the progress they have made; 
    and
        (2) assistance to Lithuania and Latvia should be continued 
    beyond fiscal year 1998 as they continue to build democratic and 
    free market institutions.

SEC. 318. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING A NATIONAL COMMISSION ON HIGHER 
              EDUCATION.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this 
resolution assure that a national commission should be established to 
study and make specific recommendations regarding the extent to which 
increases in student financial aid, and the extent to which Federal, 
State, and local laws and regulations, contribute to increases in 
college and university tuition.

SEC. 319. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON LOCKBOX.

    It is the Sense of the Senate that the provisions of this 
resolution assume that to ensure all savings from Medicare reform are 
used to keep the Medicare Program solvent, the Treasury Secretary 
should credit the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund (Part A) with 
government securities equal to any savings from Medicare Supplemental 
Medical Insurance (Part B) reforms enacted pursuant to the 
reconciliation instructions contained in this budget resolution.

SEC. 320. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE EARNED INCOME CREDIT.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) an April 1997 study by the Internal Revenue Service of 
    Earned Income Credit (EIC) filers for tax year 1994 revealed that 
    over $4,000,000,000 of the $17,000,000,000 spent on the EIC for 
    that year was erroneously claimed and paid by the IRS, resulting in 
    a fraud and error rate of 25.8 percent;
        (2) the IRS study further concluded that EIC reforms enacted by 
    the One Hundred Fourth Congress will only lower the fraud error 
    rate to 20.7 percent, meaning over $23,000,000,000 will be wasted 
    over the next five years; and
        (3) the President's recent proposals to combat EIC fraud and 
    error contained within this budget resolution are estimated to save 
    $124,000,000 in scoreable savings over the next five years and 
    additional savings from deterrent effects.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that the President should propose 
and Congress should enact additional programmatic changes sufficient to 
ensure that the primary purpose of the EIC to encourage work over 
welfare is achieved without wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on 
fraud and error.

SEC. 321. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING LONG-TERM ENTITLEMENT REFORMS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that this resolution assumes that--
        (1) entitlement spending has risen dramatically over the last 
    thirty-five years;
        (2) in 1963, mandatory spending (i.e., entitlement spending and 
    interest on the debt) made up 29.6 percent of the budget, this 
    figure rose to 61.4 percent by 1993 and is expected to reach 70 
    percent shortly after the year 2000;
        (3) this mandatory spending is crowding out spending for the 
    traditional ``discretionary'' functions of Government like clean 
    air and water, a strong national defense, parks and recreation, 
    education, our transportation system, law enforcement, research and 
    development and other infrastructure spending; and
        (4) taking significant steps sooner rather than later to reform 
    entitlement spending will not only boost economic growth in this 
    country, it will also prevent the need for drastic tax and spending 
    decisions in the next century.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the Sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this budget resolution assume that Congress and the President 
should work to enact structural reforms in entitlement spending in 1997 
and beyond which sufficiently restrain the growth of mandatory spending 
in order to keep the budget in balance over the long term, extend the 
solvency of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds, avoid 
crowding out funding for basic Government functions and that every 
effort should be made to hold mandatory spending to no more than 70 
percent of the budget.

SEC. 322. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON DISASTER ASSISTANCE FUNDING.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) emergency spending adds to the deficit and total spending;
        (2) the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 exempts emergency 
    spending from the discretionary spending caps and pay-go 
    requirements;
        (3) the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 expires in 1998 and 
    needs to be extended;
        (4) since the enactment of the Budget Enforcement Act, Congress 
    and the President have approved an average of $5,800,000,000 per 
    year in emergency spending; and
        (5) a natural disaster in any particular State is 
    unpredictable, by the United States is likely to experience a 
    natural disaster almost every year.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
functional totals underlying this concurrent resolution on the budget 
assume that the Congress should consider in the extension of the Budget 
Enforcement Act and in appropriations Acts--
        (1) provisions that budget for emergencies or that require 
    emergency spending to be offset;
        (2) provisions that provide flexibility to meet emergency 
    funding requirements associated with natural disasters;
        (3) Congress and the President should consider appropriating at 
    least $5,000,000,000 every year to provide for natural disaster 
    relief; and
        (4) Congress and the President should not designate any 
    emergency spending for natural disaster relief until such amounts 
    provided in regular appropriations are exhausted.

SEC. 323. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ENFORCEMENT OF BIPARTISAN BUDGET 
              AGREEMENT.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) the bipartisan budget agreement is contingent upon--
            (A) favorable economic conditions for the next 5 years;
            (B) accurate estimates of the fiscal impacts of assumptions 
        in this resolution; and
            (C) enactment of legislation to reduce the deficit; and
        (2) if any of the conditions in paragraph (1) are not met, our 
    ability to achieve a balanced budget by 2002 will be jeopardized.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
functional totals and limits in this resolution assume that--
        (1) reconciliation legislation should include legislation to 
    enforce the targets set forth in the bipartisan budget agreement 
    and to ensure the balanced budget goal is met; and
        (2) such legislation shall--
            (A) establish procedures to ensure the agreement is 
        enforced in every year;
            (B) require that the President's annual budget and annual 
        Congressional concurrent resolutions on the budget comply the 
        agreement in every year;
            (C) consider provisions which provide that if the deficit 
        is below or the surplus is above the deficits projected in the 
        agreement in any year, such savings are locked in for deficit 
        and debt reduction; and
            (D) consider provisions which budget for and control 
        emergency spending in order to prevent the use of emergencies 
        to evade the budget agreement.

SEC. 324. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF 
              HEALTH.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
        (1) heart disease was the leading cause of death for both men 
    and women in every year from 1970 to 1993;
        (2) mortality rates for individuals suffering from prostate 
    cancer, skin cancer, and kidney cancer continue to rise;
        (3) the mortality rate for African American women suffering 
    from diabetes is 134 percent higher than the mortality rate of 
    Caucasian women suffering from diabetes;
        (4) asthma rates for children increased 58 percent from 1982 to 
    1992;
        (5) nearly half of all American women between the ages of 65 
    and 75 reported having arthritis;
        (6) AIDS is the leading cause of death for Americans between 
    the ages of 24 and 44;
        (7) the Institute of Medicine has described United States 
    clinical research to be ``in a state of crisis'' and the National 
    Academy of Sciences concluded in 1994 that ``the present cohort of 
    clinical investigators is not adequate'';
        (8) biomedical research has been shown to be effective in 
    saving lives and reducing health care expenditures;
        (9) research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health has 
    contributed significantly to the first overall reduction in cancer 
    death rates since record keeping was instituted;
        (10) research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health 
    has resulted in the identification of genetic mutations for 
    osteoporosis; Lou Gehrig's Disease, cystic fibrosis, and 
    Huntington's Disease; breast, skin and prostate cancer; and a 
    variety of other illnesses;
        (11) research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health 
    has been key to the development of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) 
    and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanning technologies;
        (12) research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health 
    has developed effective treatments for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia 
    (ALL). Today, 80 percent of children diagnosed with Acute 
    Lymphoblastic Leukemia are alive and free of the disease after 5 
    years; and
        (13) research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health 
    contributed to the development of a new, cost-saving cure for 
    peptic ulcers.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that this 
Resolution assumes that--
        (1) appropriations for the National Institutes of Health should 
    be increased by 100 percent over the next 5 fiscal years; and
        (2) appropriations for the National Institutes of Health should 
    be increased by $2,000,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 over the amount 
    appropriated in fiscal year 1997.

SEC. 325. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING CERTAIN ELDERLY LEGAL ALIENS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this 
resolution assume that--
        (1) the Committee on Finance will include in its 
    recommendations to the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
    changes in laws within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Finance 
    that allow certain elderly, legal immigrants who will cease to 
    receive benefits under the supplemental security income program as 
    a result of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
    Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193; 110 Stat. 2105) to 
    continue to receive benefits during a redetermination or 
    reapplication period to determine if such aliens would qualify for 
    such benefits on the basis of being disabled; and
        (2) the Committee on Finance in developing these 
    recommendations should offset the additional cost of this proposal 
    out of other programs within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
    Finance.

SEC. 326. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING RETROACTIVE TAXES.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) in general, the practice of increasing a tax retroactively 
    is fundamentally unfair to taxpayers; and
        (2) retroactive taxation is disruptive to families and small 
    business in their ability to plan and budget.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this budget resolution assume that--
        (1) except for closing tax loopholes, no revenues should be 
    generated from any retroactively increased tax; and
        (2) the Congress and the President should work together to 
    ensure that any revenue generating proposal contained within 
    reconciliation legislation pursuant to this concurrent resolution 
    proposal, except those proposals closing tax loopholes, should take 
    effect prospectively.

SEC. 327. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND BALANCING THE 
              BUDGET.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) this budget resolution is projected to balance the unified 
    budget of the United States in fiscal year 2002;
        (2) section 13301 of the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 
    requires that the deficit be computed without counting the annual 
    surpluses of the Social Security Trust Funds; and
        (3) if the deficit were calculated according to the 
    requirements of section 13301, this budget resolution would be 
    projected to result in a deficit of $108,700,000,000 in fiscal year 
    2002.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
assumptions underlying this budget resolution assume that after 
balancing the unified Federal budget, the Congress should continue 
efforts to reduce the on-budget deficit, so that the Federal budget 
will be balanced without counting Social Security surpluses.

SEC. 328. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR 
              VETERANS PROGRAMS AND BENEFITS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) veterans and their families represent approximately 27 
    percent of the United States population;
        (2) more than 20 million of our 26 million living veterans 
    served during wartime, sacrificing their freedom so that we may 
    have ours; and
        (3) veterans have earned the benefits promised to them.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
        (1) the assumptions underlying this Budget Resolution assume 
    that the 602(b) allocation to the Department of Veterans Affairs 
    will be sufficient in fiscal year 1998 to fully fund all 
    discretionary veterans programs, including medical care; and
        (2) funds collected from legislation to improve the Department 
    of Veterans Affairs' ability to collect and retain reimbursement 
    from third-party payers ought to be used to supplement, not 
    supplant, an adequate appropriation for medical care.

SEC. 329. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FAMILY VIOLENCE OPTION CLARIFYING 
              AMENDMENT.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
        (1) Domestic violence is the leading cause of physical injury 
    to women. The Department of Justice estimates that over 1,000,000 
    violent crimes against women are committed by intimate partners 
    annually.
        (2) Domestic violence dramatically affects the victim's ability 
    to participate in the workforce. A University of Minnesota survey 
    reported that \1/4\ of battered women surveyed had lost a job 
    partly because of being abused and that over \1/2\ of these women 
    had been harassed by their abuser at work.
        (3) Domestic violence is often intensified as women seek to 
    gain economic independence through attending school or training 
    programs. Batterers have been reported to prevent women from 
    attending these programs or sabotage their efforts at self-
    improvement.
        (4) Nationwide surveys of service providers prepared by the 
    Taylor Institute of Chicago, Illinois, document, for the first 
    time, the interrelationship between domestic violence and welfare 
    by showing that from 34 percent to 65 percent of AFDC recipients 
    are current or past victims of domestic violence.
        (5) Over \1/2\ of the women surveyed stayed with their 
    batterers because they lacked the resources to support themselves 
    and their children. The surveys also found that the availability of 
    economic support is a critical factor in poor women's ability to 
    leave abusive situations that threaten them and their children.
        (6) The restructuring of the welfare programs may impact the 
    availability of the economic support and the safety net necessary 
    to enable poor women to flee abuse without risking homelessness and 
    starvation for their families.
        (7) In recognition of this finding, the Committee on the Budget 
    of the Senate in considering the 1997 Resolution on the budget of 
    the United States unanimously adopted a sense of the Congress 
    amendment concerning domestic violence and Federal assistance. 
    Subsequently, Congress adopted the family violence option amendment 
    as part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
    Reconciliation Act of 1996.
        (8) The family violence option gives States the flexibility to 
    grant temporary waivers from time limits and work requirements for 
    domestic violence victims who would suffer extreme hardship from 
    the application of these provisions. These waivers were not 
    intended to be included as part of the permanent 20 percent 
    hardship exemption.
        (9) The Department of Health and Human Services has been slow 
    to issue regulations regarding this provision. As a result, States 
    are hesitant to fully implement the family violence option fearing 
    that it will interfere with the 20 percent hardship exemption.
        (10) Currently 15 States have opted to include the family 
    violence option in their welfare plans, and 13 other States have 
    included some type of domestic violence provisions in their plans.
    (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that--
        (1) States should not be subject to any numerical limits in 
    granting domestic violence good cause waivers under section 
    402(a)(7)(A)(iii) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
    602(a)(7)(A)(iii)) to individuals receiving assistance, for all 
    requirements where compliance with such requirements would make it 
    more difficult for individuals receiving assistance to escape 
    domestic violence; and
        (2) any individual who is granted a domestic violence good 
    cause waiver by a State shall not be included in the States' 20 
    percent hardship exemption under section 408(a)(7) of the Social 
    Security Act (42 U.S.C. 608(a)(7)).

SEC. 330. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING ASSISTANCE TO AMTRAK.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) Amtrak is in a financial crisis, with growing and 
    substantial debt obligations approaching $2,000,000,000;
        (2) Amtrak has not been authorized since 1994;
        (3) the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
    Transportation favorably reported legislation to reform Amtrak 
    during the last two Congresses, but no legislation was enacted;
        (4) the Finance Committee favorably reported legislation in the 
    last Congress that created a dedicated trust fund for Amtrak, but 
    no legislation was enacted;
        (5) in 1997 Amtrak testified before the Congress that it cannot 
    survive beyond 1998 without comprehensive legislative reforms and a 
    dedicated source of capital funding; and
        (6) Congress is obligated to invest Federal tax dollars 
    responsibly and to reduce waste and inefficiency in Federal 
    programs, including Amtrak.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that--
        (1) legislative reform is urgently needed to address Amtrak's 
    financial and operational problems;
        (2) Congress should allocate additional Federal dollars to 
    Amtrak in conjunction with reforms requested by Amtrak to address 
    its precarious financial situation; and
        (3) the distribution of money from any new fund to finance an 
    intercity rail passenger fund should be implemented in conjunction 
    with legislation to reauthorize and reform the National Rail 
    Passenger Corporation.

SEC. 331. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN'S 
              HEALTH.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
        (1) Today's children and the next generation of children are 
    the prime beneficiaries of a balanced Federal budget. Without a 
    balanced budget, today's children will bear the increasing burden 
    of the Federal debt. Continued deficit spending would doom future 
    generations to slower economic growth, higher taxes, and lower 
    living standards.
        (2) The health of children is essential to the future economic 
    and social well-being of the Nation.
        (3) The Medicaid Program provides health coverage for over 
    17,000,000 children, or 1 out of every 4 children.
        (4) While children represent \1/2\ of all individuals eligible 
    for Medicaid, children account for less than 25 percent of 
    expenditures under the Medicaid Program.
        (5) Disproportionate share hospital (DSH) funding under the 
    Medicaid Program has allowed States to provide health care services 
    to thousands of uninsured pregnant women and children. DSH funding 
    under the Medicaid Program is critical for these populations.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that the health care needs of low-
income pregnant women and children should be a top priority. Careful 
study must be made of the impact of Medicaid disproportionate share 
hospital (DSH) reform proposals on children's health and on vital 
sources of care, including children's hospitals. Any restrictions on 
DSH funding under the Medicaid Program should not harm State Medicaid 
coverage of children and pregnant women.

SEC. 332. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON DEPOSITING ALL FEDERAL GASOLINE TAXES 
              INTO THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
        (1) Since 1956, Federal gasoline excise tax revenues have 
    generally been deposited in the Highway Trust Fund and reserved for 
    transportation uses.
        (2) In 1993, Congress and the President enacted the first 
    permanent increase in the Federal gasoline excise tax which was 
    dedicated to general revenues, not the Highway Trust Fund.
        (3) Over the next five years, approximately $7,000,000,000 per 
    year in Federal gasoline excise tax revenues will be deposited in 
    the general fund of the Treasury, rather than the Highway Trust 
    Fund.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions in this resolution assume that Congress should in the 
extension of the Budget Enforcement Act, ISTEA reauthorization, 
appropriations Acts, and in any revenue bills, consider dedicating all 
revenues from Federal gasoline excise taxes, including amounts 
dedicated to general revenues in 1993, to the Highway Trust Fund so 
that such taxes may be used for the purpose to which they have 
historically been dedicated, promoting transportation infrastructure 
and building roads.

SEC. 333. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
        (1) Scientific research on the development of the brain has 
    confirmed that the early childhood years, particularly from birth 
    to the age of 3, are critical to children's development.
        (2) Studies repeatedly have shown that good quality child care 
    helps children develop well, enter school ready to succeed, improve 
    their skills, cognitive abilities and socioemotional development, 
    improve classroom learning behavior, and stay safe while their 
    parents work. Further, quality early childhood programs can 
    positively affect children's long-term success in school 
    achievement, higher earnings as adults, decrease reliance on public 
    assistance and decrease involvement with the criminal justice 
    system.
        (3) The first of the National Education Goals, endorsed by the 
    Nation's governors, passed by Congress and signed into law by 
    President Bush, stated that by the year 2000, every child should 
    enter school ready to learn and that access to a high quality early 
    childhood education program was integral to meeting this goal.
        (4) According to data compiled by the RAND Corporation, while 
    90 percent of human brain growth occurs by the age of 3, public 
    spending on children in that age range equals only 8 percent of 
    spending on all children. A vast majority of public spending on 
    children occurs after the brain has gone through its most dramatic 
    changes, often to correct problems that should have been addressed 
    during early childhood development.
        (5) According to the Department of Education, of 
    $29,400,000,000 in current estimated education expenditures, only 
    $1,500,000,000, or 5 percent, is spent on children from birth to 
    age 5. The vast majority is spent on children over age 5.
        (6) A new commitment to quality child care and early childhood 
    education is a necessary response to the fact that children from 
    birth to the age of 3 are spending more time in care away from 
    their homes. Almost 60 percent of women in the workforce have 
    children under the age of 3 requiring care.
        (7) Many States and communities are currently experimenting 
    with innovative programs directed at early childhood care and 
    education in a variety of care settings, including the home. States 
    and local communities are best able to deliver efficient, cost-
    effective services, but while such programs are long on demand, 
    they are short on resources. Additional Federal resources should 
    not create new bureaucracy, but build on successful locally driven 
    efforts.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
budget totals and levels in this resolution assume that funds ought to 
be directed toward increasing the supply of quality child care, early 
childhood education, and teacher and parent training for children from 
birth through age 3.

SEC. 334. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) there is no direct linkage between the fuel taxes deposited 
    in the Highway Trust Fund and the transportation spending from the 
    Highway Trust Fund;
        (2) the Federal budget process has severed this linkage by 
    dividing revenues and spending into separate budget categories 
    with--
            (A) fuel taxes deposited in the Highway Trust Fund as 
        revenues; and
            (B) most spending from the Highway Trust Fund in the 
        discretionary category;
        (3) each budget category referred to in paragraph (2) has its 
    own rules and procedures; and
        (4) under budget rules in effect prior to the date of adoption 
    of this resolution, an increase in fuel taxes permits increased 
    spending to be included in the budget, but not for increased 
    Highway Trust Fund spending.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
        (1) in this session of Congress, Congress should, within a 
    unified budget, consider changing the Federal budget process to 
    establish a linkage between the fuel taxes deposited in the Highway 
    Trust Fund, including any fuel tax increases that may be enacted 
    into law after the date of adoption of this resolution, and the 
    spending from the Highway Trust Fund; and
        (2) changes to the budgetary treatment of the Highway Trust 
    Fund should not result in total program levels for highways or mass 
    transit that is inconsistent with those assumed under the 
    resolution.

SEC. 335. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING TAX INCENTIVES FOR THE COST OF 
              POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this 
resolution assume that any revenue reconciliation bill should include 
tax incentives for the cost of post-secondary education, including 
expenses of workforce education and training at vocational schools and 
community colleges.

SEC. 336. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ADDITIONAL TAX CUTS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that nothing in this resolution shall 
be construed as prohibiting Congress in future years from providing 
additional tax relief if the cost of such tax relief is offset by 
reductions in spending or increases in revenue from alternative 
sources.

SEC. 337. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING TRUTH IN BUDGETING AND SPECTRUM 
              AUCTIONS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) the electromagnetic spectrum is the property of the 
    American people and is managed on their behalf by the Federal 
    Government;
        (2) the spectrum is a highly valuable and limited natural 
    resource;
        (3) the auctioning of spectrum has raised billions of dollars 
    for the Treasury;
        (4) the estimates made regarding the value of spectrum in the 
    past have proven unreliable, having previously understated and now 
    overstating its worth; and
        (5) because estimates of spectrum value depend on a number of 
    technological, economic, market forces, and other variables that 
    cannot be predicted or completely controlled, it is not possible to 
    reliably estimate the value of a given segment of spectrum.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that as 
auctions occur as assumed by this resolution, the Congress shall take 
such steps as necessary to reconcile the difference between actual 
revenues raised and estimates made and shall reduce spending and make 
other appropriate adjustments accordingly if such auctions raise less 
revenue than projected.

SEC. 338. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON HIGHWAY DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
        (1) 10 demonstration projects totaling $362,000,000 were listed 
    for special line-item funding in the Surface Transportation 
    Assistance Act of 1982;
        (2) 152 demonstration projects totaling $1,400,000,000 were 
    named in the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation 
    Assistance Act of 1987;
        (3) 64 percent of the funding for the 152 projects had not been 
    obligated after 5 years and State transportation officials 
    determined the projects added little, if any, to meeting their 
    transportation infrastructure priorities;
        (4) 538 location specific projects totaling $6,230,000,000 were 
    included in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 
    1991;
        (5) more than $3,300,000,000 of the funds authorized for the 
    538 location-specific projects remained unobligated as of January 
    31, 1997;
        (6) the General Accounting Office determined that 31 States 
    plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico would have received 
    more funding if the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
    Act location-specific project funds were redistributed as Federal-
    aid highway program apportionments;
        (7) this type of project funding diverts Highway Trust Fund 
    money away from State transportation priorities established under 
    the formula allocation process and under the Intermodal Surface 
    Transportation and Efficiency Act of 1991;
        (8) on June 20, 1995, by a vote of 75 yeas to 21 nays, the 
    Senate voted to prohibit the use of Federal Highway Trust Fund 
    money for future demonstration projects;
        (9) the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act of 
    1991 expires at the end of fiscal year 1997; and
        (10) hundreds of funding requests for specific transportation 
    projects in Congressional Districts have been submitted in the 
    House of Representatives.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
        (1) notwithstanding different views on existing Highway Trust 
    Fund distribution formulas, funding for demonstration projects or 
    other similarly titled projects diverts Highway Trust Fund money 
    away from State priorities and deprives States of the ability to 
    adequately address their transportation needs;
        (2) States are best able to determine the priorities for 
    allocating Federal-Aid-To-Highway monies within their jurisdiction;
        (3) Congress should not divert limited Highway Trust Fund 
    resources away from State transportation priorities by authorizing 
    new highway projects; and
        (4) Congress should not authorize any new demonstration 
    projects or other similarly-titled projects.

SEC. 339. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE USE OF BUDGET SAVINGS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
        (1) Poverty rates among the elderly are at the lowest level 
    since our Nation began to keep poverty statistics, due in large 
    part to the Social Security system and the Medicare Program.
        (2) Twenty-two percent of every dollar spent by the Federal 
    Government goes to the Social Security system.
        (3) Eleven percent of every dollar spent by the Federal 
    Government goes to the Medicare Program.
        (4) Currently, spending on the elderly accounts for \1/3\ of 
    the Federal budget and more than \1/2\ of all domestic spending 
    other than interest on the national debt.
        (5) Future generations of Americans must be guaranteed the same 
    value from the Social Security system as past covered recipients.
        (6) According to the 1997 report of the Managing Trustee for 
    the Social Security Trust Funds, the accumulated balance in the 
    Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund is estimated to 
    fall to zero by 2029, and the estimated payroll tax at that time 
    will be sufficient to cover only 75 percent of the benefits owed to 
    retirees at that time.
        (7) The accumulated balance in the Federal Hospital Insurance 
    Trust Fund is estimated to fall to zero by 2001.
        (8) While the Federal budget deficit has shrunk for the fourth 
    straight year to $67,000,000,000 in 1997, measures need to be taken 
    to ensure that trend continues.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that budget savings in the 
mandatory spending area should be used--
        (1) to protect and enhance the retirement security of the 
    American people by ensuring the long-term future of the Social 
    Security system;
        (2) to protect and enhance the health care security of senior 
    citizens by ensuring the long-term future of the Medicare Program 
    under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et 
    seq.); and
        (3) to restore and maintain Federal budget discipline to ensure 
    that the level of private investment necessary for long-term 
    economic growth and prosperity is available.

SEC. 340. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE VALUE OF THE SOCIAL 
              SECURITY SYSTEM FOR FUTURE RETIREES.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
        (1) The Social Security system has allowed a generation of 
    Americans to retire with dignity. Today, 13 percent of the 
    population is 65 or older and by 2030, 20 percent of the population 
    will be 65 or older. More than \1/2\ of the elderly do not receive 
    private pensions and more than \1/3\ have no income from assets.
        (2) For 60 percent of all senior citizens, Social Security 
    benefits provide almost 80 percent of their retirement income. For 
    80 percent of all senior citizens, Social Security benefits provide 
    over 50 percent of their retirement income.
        (3) Poverty rates among the elderly are at the lowest level 
    since the United States began to keep poverty statistics, due in 
    large part to the Social Security system.
        (4) Seventy-eight percent of Americans pay more in payroll 
    taxes than they do in income taxes.
        (5) According to the 1997 report of the Managing Trustee for 
    the Social Security Trust Funds, the accumulated balance in the 
    Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund is estimated to 
    fall to zero by 2029, and the estimated payroll tax at that time 
    will be sufficient to cover only 75 percent of the benefits owed to 
    retirees at that time.
        (6) The average American retiring in the year 2015 will pay 
    $250,000 in payroll taxes over the course of his or her working 
    career.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that no change in the Social 
Security system should be made that would reduce the value of the 
Social Security system for future generations of retirees.

SEC. 341. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ECONOMIC GROWTH DIVIDEND PROTECTION.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that with respect to the revenue 
levels established under this resolution--
        (1) according to the President's own economists, the tax burden 
    on Americans is the highest ever at 31.7 percent;
        (2) according to the National Taxpayers Union, the average 
    American family now pays almost 40 percent of their income in 
    State, local, and Federal taxes;
        (3) between 1978 and 1985, while the top marginal rate on 
    capital gains was cut almost in half--from 35 to 20 percent--total 
    annual Federal receipts from the tax almost tripled from 
    $9,100,000,000 annually to $26,500,000,000 annually;
        (4) conversely, when Congress raised the rate in 1986, revenues 
    actually fell well below what was anticipated;
        (5) economists across-the-board predict that cutting the 
    capital gains rate will result in a revenue windfall for the 
    Treasury; and
        (6) while a USA Today poll from this March found 70 percent of 
    the American people believe that they need a tax cut, under this 
    resolution Federal spending will grow 17 percent over five years 
    while the net tax cuts are less than 1 percent of the total tax 
    burden.
    (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that with 
respect to the revenue levels established under this resolution, to the 
extent that actual revenues exceed the revenues projected under this 
resolution due to higher than anticipated economic growth, that revenue 
windfall should be reserved exclusively for additional tax cuts and/or 
deficit reduction.

SEC. 342. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAW 
              ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
        (1) Our Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers 
    provide essential services that preserve and protect our freedoms 
    and security, and with the support of Federal assistance, State and 
    local law enforcement officers have succeeded in reducing the 
    national scourge of violent crime, as illustrated by a murder rate 
    in 1996 that is projected to be the lowest since 1971 and a violent 
    crime total in 1996 that is the lowest since 1990.
        (2) Through a comprehensive effort to attack violence against 
    women mounted by State and local law enforcement, and dedicated 
    volunteers and professionals who provide victim services, shelter, 
    counseling, and advocacy to battered women and their children, 
    important strides have been made against the national scourge of 
    violence against women, illustrated by the decline in the murder 
    rate for wives, ex-wives, and girlfriends at the hands of their 
    ``intimates'' fell to a 19-year low in 1995.
        (3) Federal, State, and local law enforcement efforts need 
    continued financial commitment from the Federal Government for 
    funding and financial assistance to continue their efforts to 
    combat violent crime and violence against women.
        (4) Federal, State and local law enforcement also face other 
    challenges which require continued financial commitment from the 
    Federal Government, including regaining control over the Southwest 
    Border, where drug trafficking and illegal immigration continue to 
    threaten public safety and menace residents on the border and 
    throughout the Nation.
        (5) The Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund established in 
    section 310001 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 
    1994 (42 U.S.C. 14211) fully funds the Violent Crime Control and 
    Law Enforcement Act of 1994, including the Violence Against Women 
    Act, without adding to the Federal budget deficit.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions and the functional totals underlying this resolution assume 
that--
        (1) the Federal Government's commitment to fund Federal law 
    enforcement programs and programs to assist State and local efforts 
    to combat violent crime, including violence against women, will be 
    maintained; and
        (2) funding for the Violent Crime Reduction program will 
    continue as authorized by the Violent Crime Control and Law 
    Enforcement Act of 1994.

SEC. 343. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN 
              PREVENTION OF DRUG USE BY CHILDREN.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the provisions of this 
resolution assume that, from resources available in this budget 
resolution, a portion should be set aside for a national grassroots 
volunteer effort to encourage parental education and involvement in 
youth drug prevention and to create a drug-intolerant culture for our 
children.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```