On May 19, the House approved, 216-213, the conference report for the FY2005 budget resolution (S. Con. Res. 95). The Senate has postponed action on the conference report until after the Memorial Day recess.
Under the resolution, $818.9 billion would be provided for discretionary spending in FY2005, $4.1 billion below the administration’s request.
The resolution proposes to extend for one year several provisions included in the 2003 tax law (P.L. 108-27) that are set to expire on December 31, 2004. These include: the accelerated increase in the child tax credit, the expansion of the 10 percent income tax bracket, and the expansions of the standard deduction and 15 percent income tax bracket for married taxpayers filing jointly.
The resolution also directs the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee to find $22.9 billion in mandatory spending cuts over five years.
The resolution would reinstate through April 2005 the pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rule requiring that any spending increases be offset with spending cuts. A 60-vote majority in the Senate would be required to override the PAYGO rule. The budget resolution approved by the Senate on March 11 would have instituted the PAYGO rule for five years and applied the rule to all tax cuts and mandatory spending increases (see The Source, 3/12/04).
The resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that Congress and the administration “should work together to enact budget process reform legislation that would include mechanisms to restrain Government spending.” Such legislation could include deficit targets that would result in across-the-board reductions in federal spending, discretionary spending limits, pay-as-you-go rules, explicit committee allocations, and limitations on unauthorized appropriations.
The resolution would establish a reserve for FY2005 through FY2009 for legislation that addresses access to health care services and health insurance for the uninsured.
In addition, the resolution also would establish a reserve for the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965. The resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee may report a bill with up to $5 million in new spending for higher education programs “provided that provisions necessary to achieve deficit neutrality may be offered as amendments on the Senate floor.”
The resolution would establish a reserve for the Family Opportunity Act (H.R. 2000) to provide Medicaid coverage for children with special needs.
In addition, the resolution would establish a reserve for legislation to limit noneconomic medical malpractice awards and attorneys’ fees.
In FY2005, the resolution would provide $28.9 billion for international programs. The resolution also expresses the sense of the Senate that appropriations bills “should provide sufficient funds to continue matching contributions from other sources to The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria on a 1 to 2 basis.”
The resolution would provide $92.8 billion for education, training, employment, and social services in FY2005 “to accommodate increases in priority programs, such as special education State grants, Title I grants to local education agencies, and Pell Grants to low-income college students.”
The resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that the levels in the budget resolution “assume additional funds for the reauthorization of child nutrition programs.”
In FY2005, health programs would receive $252.4 billion. In addition, the Medicare program would receive $287.8 billion in FY2005.
To address the ongoing costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the resolution would include a $50 billion reserve for supplemental appropriations.
Arguing that the national deficit “will seriously tax our children and grandchildren,” Rep. Darlene Hooley (D-OR) said that the FY2005 budget resolution “shows that we have no commitment to our future generations. In addition to passing on massive deficits, this budget underfunds education programs and cuts investments in our future, like scientific and medical research.”
Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT) disagreed. “I have…heard too frequently that my side of the aisle is cutting spending for important programs, like education, veterans, and health care. The fact is when you look at Federal spending for the last few years, you will see few programs that have not received significant increases, in most cases very significant increases. Only in Washington do we call a spending increase a cut.”
