HCON 68 EAS1S
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$184,679,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $185,330,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$197,893,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $198,499,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$212,821,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $212,637,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$228,379,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $228,323,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$246,348,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $245,472,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$265,160,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $264,420,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$285,541,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $284,941,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$208,652,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $208,698,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$222,104,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $222,252,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$230,593,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $230,222,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$250,743,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $250,871,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$268,558,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $268,738,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$295,574,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $295,188,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$306,772,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $306,929,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$337,566,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $337,761,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$365,642,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $365,225,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$394,078,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $394,249,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$244,390,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $248,088,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$251,873,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $257,750,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$264,620,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $267,411,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$277,386,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $277,175,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$286,576,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $286,388,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$298,942,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $299,128,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$305,655,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $305,943,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$312,047,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $312,753,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$325,315,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $326,666,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$335,562,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $337,102,000,000.
(14) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$46,724,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,064,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$44,255,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,980,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$44,728,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,117,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$45,536,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,024,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$45,862,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,327,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$48,341,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,844,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$46,827,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,373,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$47,377,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,803,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$47,959,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,505,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$48,578,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $49,150,000,000.
(15) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$23,434,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $25,349,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,656,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $25,117,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,657,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,932,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,561,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,425,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,467,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,356,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,355,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,242,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,242,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $24,121,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$24,114,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,996,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$23,989,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,885,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$23,833,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $23,720,000,000.
(16) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,339,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $13,476,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$11,916,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,605,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,080,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,282,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,083,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,150,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,099,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,186,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,112,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,906,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,134,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,839,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,150,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,873,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,169,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $12,064,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$12,178,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $11,931,000,000.
(17) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$275,682,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $275,682,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$271,443,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $271,443,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$267,855,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $267,855,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$265,573,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $265,573,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$263,835,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $263,835,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$261,411,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $261,411,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$259,195,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $259,195,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$257,618,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $257,618,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$255,177,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $255,177,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
$253,001,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $253,001,000,000.
(18) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$10,033,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$10,094,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$8,480,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$12,874,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$6,437,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$19,976,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$4,394,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$4,835,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$4,481,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$5,002,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$4,515,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$5,067,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$4,619,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$5,192,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$5,210,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$5,780,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$5,279,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$5,851,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$5,316,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$5,889,000,000.
(19) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 2000:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$34,260,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$34,260,000,000.
Fiscal year 2001:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$36,876,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$36,876,000,000.
Fiscal year 2002:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$43,626,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$43,626,000,000.
Fiscal year 2003:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$37,464,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$37,464,000,000.
Fiscal year 2004:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$37,559,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$37,559,000,000.
Fiscal year 2005:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$38,497,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$38,497,000,000.
Fiscal year 2006:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$39,178,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$39,178,000,000.
Fiscal year 2007:
HCON 68 EAS1S
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$40,426,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$40,426,000,000.
Fiscal year 2008:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$41,237,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$41,237,000,000.
Fiscal year 2009:
(A) 
New 
budget 
authority,
¥$42,084,000,000.
(B) Outlays, ¥$42,084,000,000.
SEC. 104. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN
THE SENATE.
Not later than June 18, 1999, the Senate Committee
on Finance shall report to the Senate a reconciliation bill
proposing changes in laws within its jurisdiction
necessary—
(1) to reduce revenues by not more than $0 in
fiscal year 2000, $138,485,000,000 for the period of
fiscal years 2000 through 2004, and $765,985,000,000
for the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2009; and
(2) to decrease the statutory limit on the public
debt to not more than $5,865,000,000,000 for fiscal
year 2000.
HCON 68 EAS1S
SEC. 105. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Not later than June 11, 1999, the Committee on Ways
and Means shall report to the House of Representatives a
reconciliation bill proposing changes in laws within its ju-
risdiction necessary—
(1) to reduce revenues by not more than $0 in
fiscal year 2000, $142,034,000,000 for the period of
fiscal years 2000 through 2004, and $777,587,000,000
for the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2009; and
(2) to decrease the statutory limit on the public
debt to not more than $5,865,000,000,000 for fiscal
year 2000.
TITLE II—BUDGETARY
RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING
SEC. 201. RESERVE FUND FOR AGRICULTURE.
(a) ADJUSTMENT.—If legislation is reported by the
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
that provides risk management and income assistance for
agriculture producers, the Chairman of the Senate Com-
mittee on the Budget may increase the allocation of budget
authority and outlays to that Committee by an amount that
does not exceed—
(1) $500,000,000 in budget authority and in out-
lays for fiscal year 2000; and
HCON 68 EAS1S
(2) $6,000,000,000 in budget authority and
$5,165,000,000 in outlays for the period of fiscal
years 2000 through 2004; and
(3) $6,000,000,000 in budget authority and in
outlays for the period of fiscal years 2000 through
2009.
(b) LIMITATION.—The Chairman shall not make the
adjustments authorized in this section if legislation de-
scribed in subsection (a) would cause an on-budget deficit
when taken with all other legislation enacted for—
(1) fiscal year 2000;
(2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004;
or
(3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
(c) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—Revised allocations
under subsection (a) shall be considered for the purposes
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations con-
tained in this resolution.
SEC. 202. TAX REDUCTION RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, the Chairman of the
Committee on the Budget of the Senate may reduce the
spending and revenue aggregates and may revise committee
allocations for legislation that reduces revenues if such legis-
lation will not increase the deficit for—
(1) fiscal year 2000;
HCON 68 EAS1S
(2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004;
or
(3) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2009.
(b) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—Revised allocations
and aggregates under subsection (a) shall be considered for
the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as
allocations and aggregates contained in this resolution.
(c) LIMITATION.—This reserve fund will give priority
to the following types of tax relief—
(1) tax relief to help working families afford
child care, including assistance for families with a
parent staying out of the workforce in order to care
for young children;
(2) tax relief to help individuals and their fami-
lies afford the expense of long-term health care;
(3) tax relief to ease the tax code’s marriage pen-
alties on working families;
(4) any other individual tax relief targeted ex-
clusively for families in the bottom 90 percent of the
family income distribution;
(5) the extension of the Research and Experimen-
tation tax credit, the Work Opportunity tax credit,
and other expiring tax provisions, a number of which
are important to help American businesses compete in
the modern international economy and to help bring
HCON 68 EAS1S
the benefits of a strong economy to disadvantaged in-
dividuals and communities;
(6) tax incentives to help small businesses; and
(7) tax relief provided by accelerating the in-
crease in the deductibility of health insurance pre-
miums for the self-employed.
SEC. 203. CLARIFICATION ON THE APPLICATION OF SEC-
TION 202 OF H. CON. RES. 67.
Section 202(b) of H. Con. Res. 67 (104th Congress)
is amended—
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘the deficit’’
and inserting ‘‘the on-budget deficit or cause an on-
budget deficit’’; and
(2) in paragraph (6), by—
(A) striking ‘‘increases the deficit’’ and in-
serting ‘‘increases the on-budget deficit or causes
an on-budget deficit’’; and
(B) striking ‘‘increase the deficit’’ and in-
serting ‘‘increase the on-budget deficit or cause
an on-budget deficit’’.
SEC. 204. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION POINT OF ORDER.
(a) DESIGNATIONS.—
(1) GUIDANCE.—In making a designation of a
provision of legislation as an emergency requirement
under section 251(b)(2)(A) or 252(e) of the Balanced
HCON 68 EAS1S
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985,
the committee report and any statement of managers
accompanying that legislation shall analyze whether
a proposed emergency requirement meets all the cri-
teria in paragraph (2).
(2) CRITERIA.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The criteria to be con-
sidered in determining whether a proposed ex-
penditure or tax change is an emergency require-
ment are whether it is—
(i) necessary, essential, or vital (not
merely useful or beneficial);
(ii) sudden, quickly coming into being,
and not building up over time;
(iii) an urgent, pressing, and compel-
ling need requiring immediate action;
(iv) subject to subparagraph (B), un-
foreseen, unpredictable, and unanticipated;
and
(v) not permanent, temporary in na-
ture.
(B) UNFORESEEN.—An emergency that is
part of an aggregate level of anticipated emer-
gencies, particularly when normally estimated in
advance, is not unforeseen.
HCON 68 EAS1S
(3) JUSTIFICATION FOR FAILURE TO MEET CRI-
TERIA.—If the proposed emergency requirement does
not meet all the criteria set forth in paragraph (2),
the committee report or the statement of managers, as
the case may be, shall provide a written justification
of why the requirement should be accorded emergency
status.
(b) POINT OF ORDER.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—When the Senate is consid-
ering a bill, resolution, amendment, motion, or con-
ference report, upon a point of order being made by
a Senator against any provision in that measure des-
ignated as an emergency requirement pursuant to sec-
tion 251(b)(2)(A) or 252(e) of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 and the
Presiding Officer sustains that point of order, that
provision along with the language making the des-
ignation shall be stricken from the measure and may
not be offered as an amendment from the floor.
(2) GENERAL
POINT
OF
ORDER.—A point of
order under this subsection may be raised by a Sen-
ator as provided in section 313(e) of the Congres-
sional Budget Act of 1974.
(3) CONFERENCE REPORTS.—If a point of order
is sustained under this subsection against a con-
HCON 68 EAS1S
ference report the report shall be disposed of as pro-
vided in section 313(d) of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974.
SEC. 205. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE COMMITTEE ALLOCA-
TIONS.
In the event there is no joint explanatory statement
accompanying a conference report on the concurrent resolu-
tion on the budget for fiscal year 2000, and in conformance
with section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974,
the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the House
of Representatives and of the Senate shall submit for print-
ing in the Congressional Record allocations consistent with
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2000,
as passed by the House of Representatives and of the Senate.
SEC. 206. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR USE OF
OCS RECEIPTS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, spending aggregates
and other appropriate budgetary levels and limits may be
adjusted and allocations may be revised for legislation that
would use proceeds from Outer Continental Shelf leasing
and production to fund historic preservation, recreation
and land, water, fish, and wildlife conservation efforts and
to support coastal needs and activities, provided that, to
the extent that this concurrent resolution on the budget does
not include the costs of that legislation, the enactment of
HCON 68 EAS1S
that legislation will not increase (by virtue of either contem-
poraneous or previously passed deficit reduction) the deficit
in this resolution for—
(1) fiscal year 2000;
(2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004;
or
(3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
(b) REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—
(1) ADJUSTMENTS FOR LEGISLATION.—Upon the
consideration of legislation pursuant to subsection
(a), the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of
the Senate may file with the Senate appropriately re-
vised allocations under section 302(a) of the Congres-
sional Budget Act of 1974 and revised functional lev-
els and aggregates to carry out this section. These re-
vised allocations, functional levels, and aggregates
shall be considered for the purposes of the Congres-
sional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations, functional
levels, and aggregates contained in this resolution.
(2) ADJUSTMENTS
FOR
AMENDMENTS.—If the
Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Sen-
ate submits an adjustment under this section for leg-
islation in furtherance of the purpose described in
subsection (a), upon the offering of an amendment to
that legislation that would necessitate such submis-
HCON 68 EAS1S
sion, the Chairman shall submit to the Senate appro-
priately revised allocations under section 302(a) of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised
functional levels and aggregates to carry out this sec-
tion. These revised allocations, functional levels, and
aggregates shall be considered for the purposes of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations,
functional levels, and aggregates contained in this res-
olution.
(c) REPORTING REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—The appro-
priate committees shall report appropriately revised alloca-
tions pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congressional Budg-
et Act of 1974 to carry out this section.
SEC. 207. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR MANAGED
CARE PLANS THAT AGREE TO PROVIDE ADDI-
TIONAL SERVICES TO THE ELDERLY.
(a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, spending aggregates
and other appropriate budgetary levels and limits may be
adjusted and allocations may be revised for legislation to
provide: additional funds for medicare managed care plans
agreeing to serve elderly patients for at least 2 years and
whose reimbursement was reduced because of the risk ad-
justment regulations, provided that to the extent that this
concurrent resolution on the budget does not include the
costs of that legislation, the enactment of that legislation
HCON 68 EAS1S
will not increase (by virtue of either contemporaneous or
previously passed deficit reduction) the deficit in this reso-
lution for—
(1) fiscal year 2000;
(2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004;
or
(3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
(b) REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—
(1) ADJUSTMENTS FOR LEGISLATION.—Upon the
consideration of legislation pursuant to subsection
(a), the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of
the Senate may file with the Senate appropriately re-
vised allocations under section 302(a) of the Congres-
sional Budget Act of 1974 and revised functional level
and spending aggregates to carry out this section.
These revised allocations, functional levels, and spend-
ing aggregates shall be considered for the purposes of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations,
functional levels, and aggregates contained in this res-
olution.
(2) ADJUSTMENTS
FOR
AMENDMENTS.—If the
Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Sen-
ate submits an adjustment under this section for leg-
islation in furtherance of the purpose described in
subsection (a), upon the offering of an amendment to
HCON 68 EAS1S
that legislation that would necessitate such submis-
sion, the Chairman shall submit to the Senate appro-
priately revised allocations under section 302(a) of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised
functional levels and spending aggregates to carry out
this section. These revised allocations, functional lev-
els, and aggregates shall be considered for the pur-
poses of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allo-
cations, functional levels, and aggregates contained in
this resolution.
(d) REPORTING REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—The appro-
priate committees shall report appropriately revised alloca-
tions pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congressional Budg-
et Act of 1974 to carry out this section.
SEC. 208. RESERVE FUND FOR MEDICARE AND PRESCRIP-
TION DRUGS.
(a) ADJUSTMENT.—If legislation is reported by the
Senate Committee on Finance that significantly extends the
solvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund
without the use of transfers of new subsidies from the gen-
eral fund, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget
may change committee allocations and spending aggregates
if such legislation will not cause an on-budget deficit for—
(1) fiscal year 2000;
HCON 68 EAS1S
(2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004;
or
(3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
(b) PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT.—The adjustments
made pursuant to subsection (a) may be made to address
the cost of the prescription drug benefit.
(c) BUDGETARY ENFORCEMENT.—The revision of allo-
cations and aggregates made under this section shall be con-
sidered for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974 as allocations and aggregates contained in this reso-
lution.
SEC. 209. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.
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 incon-
sistent 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.
HCON 68 EAS1S
SEC. 210. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND TO FOSTER
THE EMPLOYMENT AND INDEPENDENCE OF
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—In the Senate, revenue and spend-
ing aggregates and other appropriate budgetary levels and
limits may be adjusted and allocations may be revised for
legislation that finances disability programs designed to
allow individuals with disabilities to become employed and
remain independent: Provided, That, to the extent that this
concurrent resolution on the budget does not include the
costs of that legislation, the enactment of that legislation
will not increase (by virtue of either contemporaneous or
previously-passed deficit reduction) the deficit in this reso-
lution for—
(1) fiscal year 2000;
(2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004;
or
(3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
(b) REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—
(1) ADJUSTMENTS FOR LEGISLATION.—Upon the
consideration of legislation pursuant to subsection
(a), the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of
the Senate may file with the Senate appropriately-re-
vised allocations under section 302(a) of the Congres-
sional Budget Act of 1974 and revised functional lev-
els and aggregates to carry out this section. These re-
HCON 68 EAS1S
vised allocations, functional levels, and aggregates
shall be considered for the purposes of the Congres-
sional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations, functional
levels, and aggregates contained in this resolution.
(2) ADJUSTMENTS
FOR
AMENDMENTS.—If the
chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Sen-
ate submits an adjustment under this section for leg-
islation in furtherance of the purpose described in
subsection (a), upon the offering of an amendment to
that legislation that would necessitate such submis-
sion, the Chairman shall submit to the Senate appro-
priately-revised allocations under section 302(a) of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised
functional levels and aggregates to carry out this sec-
tion. These revised allocations, functional levels, and
aggregates shall be considered for the purposes of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations,
functional levels, and aggregates contained in this res-
olution.
(c) REPORTING REVISED ALLOCATIONS.—The appro-
priate committees shall report appropriately-revised alloca-
tions pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congressional Budg-
et Act of 1974 to carry out this section.
HCON 68 EAS1S
TITLE III—SENSE OF THE
CONGRESS AND THE SENATE
SEC. 301. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON MARRIAGE PENALTY.
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—
(1) differences in income tax liabilities caused by
marital status are embodied in a number of tax code
provisions including separate rate schedules and
standard deductions for married couples and single
individuals;
(2) according to the Congressional Budget Office
(CBO), 42 percent of married couples incurred ‘‘mar-
riage penalties’’ under the tax code in 1996, aver-
aging nearly $1,400;
(3) measured as a percent of income, marriage
penalties are largest for low-income families, as cou-
ples with incomes below $20,000 who incurred a mar-
riage penalty in 1996 were forced to pay nearly 8
percent more of their income in taxes than if they had
been able to file individual returns;
(4) empirical evidence indicates that the mar-
riage penalty may affect work patterns, particularly
for a couple’s second earner, because higher rates re-
duce after-tax wages and may cause second earners to
work fewer hours or not at all, which, in turn, re-
duces economic efficiency; and
HCON 68 EAS1S
(5) the tax code should not improperly influence
the choice of couples with regard to marital status by
having the combined Federal income tax liability of
a couple be higher if they are married than if they
are single.
(b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen-
ate that the levels in this resolution and legislation enacted
pursuant to this resolution assume that significantly reduc-
ing or eliminating the marriage penalty should be a compo-
nent of any tax cut package reported by the Finance Com-
mittee and passed by Congress during the fiscal year 2000
budget reconciliation process.
SEC. 302. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPROVING SECURITY
FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC MISSIONS.
It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this reso-
lution assume that there is an urgent and ongoing require-
ment to improve security for United States diplomatic mis-
sions and personnel abroad, which should be met without
compromising existing budgets for International Affairs
(function 150).
SEC. 303. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ACCESS TO MEDICARE
HOME HEALTH SERVICES.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
(1) medicare home health services provide a vi-
tally important option enabling homebound individ-
HCON 68 EAS1S
uals to stay in their own homes and communities
rather than go into institutionalized care; and
(2) implementation of the Interim Payment Sys-
tem and other changes to the medicare home health
benefit have exacerbated inequalities in payments for
home health services between regions, limiting access
to these services in many areas and penalizing effi-
cient, low-cost providers.
(b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen-
ate the levels in this resolution assume that the Senate
should act to ensure fair and equitable access to high qual-
ity home health services.
SEC. 304. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE DEDUCT-
IBILITY OF HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS
OF THE SELF-EMPLOYED.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
(1) under current law, the self-employed do not
enjoy parity with their corporate competitors with re-
spect to the tax deductibility of their health insurance
premiums;
(2) this April, the self-employed will only be able
to deduct only 45 percent of their health insurance
premiums for the tax year 1998;
HCON 68 EAS1S
(3) the following April, the self-employed will be
able to take a 60-percent deduction for their health
insurance premiums for the tax year 1999;
(4) it will not be until 2004 that the self-em-
ployed will be able to take a full 100-percent deduc-
tion for their health insurance premiums for the tax
year 2003;
(5) the self-employed’s health insurance pre-
miums are generally over 30 percent higher than the
health insurance premiums of group health plans;
(6) the increased cost coupled with the less favor-
able tax treatment makes health insurance less afford-
able for the self-employed;
(7) these disadvantages are reflected in the higher
rate of uninsured among the self-employed which
stands at 24.1 percent compared with 18.2 percent for
all wage and salaried workers, for self-employed liv-
ing at or below the poverty level the rate of uninsured
is 53.1 percent, for self-employed living at 100
through 199 percent of poverty the rate of uninsured
is 47 percent, and for self-employed living at 200 per-
cent of poverty and above the rate of uninsured is
17.8 percent;
(8) for some self-employed, such as farmers who
face significant occupational safety hazards, this lack
HCON 68 EAS1S
of health insurance affordability has even greater
ramifications; and
(9) this lack of full deductibility is also adversely
affecting the growing number of women who own
small businesses.
(b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen-
ate that the levels in this resolution assume that tax relief
legislation should include parity between the self-employed
and corporations with respect to the tax treatment of health
insurance premiums.
SEC. 305. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT TAX REDUCTIONS
SHOULD GO TO WORKING FAMILIES.
It is the sense of the Senate that this concurrent resolu-
tion on the budget assumes any reductions in taxes should
be structured to benefit working families by providing fam-
ily tax relief and incentives to stimulate savings, invest-
ment, job creation, and economic growth.
SEC. 306. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE NATIONAL
GUARD.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
(1) the Army National Guard relies heavily
upon thousands of full-time employees, Military Tech-
nicians and Active Guard/Reserves, to ensure unit
readiness throughout the Army National Guard;
HCON 68 EAS1S
(2) these employees perform vital day-to-day
functions, ranging from equipment maintenance to
leadership and staff roles, that allow the drill week-
ends and annual active duty training of the tradi-
tional Guardsmen to be dedicated to preparation for
the National Guard’s warfighting and peacetime mis-
sions;
(3) when the ability to provide sufficient Active
Guard/Reserves and Technicians end strength is re-
duced, unit readiness, as well as quality of life for sol-
diers and families is degraded;
(4) the Army National Guard, with agreement
from the Department of Defense, requires a minimum
essential requirement of 23,500 Active Guard/Reserves
and 25,500 Technicians; and
(5) the fiscal year 2000 budget request for the
Army National Guard provides resources sufficient
for approximately 21,807 Active Guard/Reserves and
22,500 Technicians, end strength shortfalls of 3,000
and 1,693, respectively.
(b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen-
ate that the functional totals in the budget resolution as-
sume that the Department of Defense will give priority to
providing adequate resources to sufficiently fund the Active
HCON 68 EAS1S
Guard/Reserves and Military Technicians at minimum re-
quired levels.
SEC. 307. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON EFFECTS OF SOCIAL
SECURITY REFORM ON WOMEN.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
(1) the Social Security benefit structure is of
particular importance to low-earning wives and wid-
ows, with 63 percent of women beneficiaries aged 62
or older receiving wife’s or widow’s benefits;
(2) three-quarters of unmarried and widowed el-
derly women rely on Social Security for more than
half of their income;
(3) without Social Security benefits, the elderly
poverty rate among women would have been 52.2 per-
cent, and among widows would have been 60.6 per-
cent;
(4) women tend to live longer and tend to have
lower lifetime earnings than men do;
(5) women spend an average of 11.5 years out of
their careers to care for their families, and are more
likely to work part-time than full-time; and
(6) during these years in the workforce, women
earn an average of 70 cents for every dollar men earn.
(b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Sen-
ate that the levels in this resolution assume that—
HCON 68 EAS1S
(1) women face unique obstacles in ensuring re-
tirement security and survivor and disability sta-
bility;
(2) Social Security plays an essential role in
guaranteeing inflation-protected financial stability
for women throughout their entire old age; and
(3) the Congress and the President should take
these factors into account when considering proposals
to reform the Social Security system.
SEC. 308. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INCREASED FUNDING
FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—
(1) the National Institutes of Health is the Na-
tion’s foremost research center;
(2) the Nation’s commitment to and investment
in biomedical research has resulted in better health
and an improved quality of life for all Americans;
(3) continued biomedical research funding must
be ensured so that medical doctors and scientists have
the security to commit to conducting long-term re-
search studies;
(4) funding for the National Institutes of Health
should continue to increase in order to prevent the
cessation of biomedical research studies and the loss