[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 84 Engrossed Amendment Senate (EAS)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

                  In the Senate of the United States,

                                                          May 23, 1997.
      Resolved, That the resolution from the House of Representatives 
(H. Con. Res. 84) entitled ``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.'', do pass with the following

                               AMENDMENT:

        Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert:

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.

             TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

Sec. 201. Discretionary spending limits.
Sec. 202. Allowance in the Senate.
Sec. 203. Allowance in the Senate for section 8 housing assistance.
Sec. 204. Environmental reserve.
Sec. 205. Priority Federal land acquisitions and exchanges.
Sec. 206. Allowance in the Senate for arrearages.
Sec. 207. Intercity passenger rail reserve fund for fiscal years 1998-
                            2002.
Sec. 208. Mass transit reserve fund for fiscal years 1998-2002.
Sec. 209. Highway reserve fund for fiscal years 1998-2002.
Sec. 210. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

                     TITLE III--SENSE OF THE SENATE

Sec. 301. Sense of the Senate on long term entitlement reforms, 
                            including accuracy in determining changes 
                            in the cost of living.
Sec. 302. Sense of the Senate on tactical fighter aircraft programs.
Sec. 303. Sense of the Senate regarding children's health coverage.
Sec. 304. Sense of the Senate on a medicaid per capita cap.
Sec. 305. Sense of the Senate that added savings go to deficit 
                            reduction.
Sec. 306. Sense of the Senate on fairness in medicare.
Sec. 307. Sense of the Senate regarding assistance to Lithuania and 
                            Latvia.
Sec. 308. Sense of the Senate regarding a national commission on higher 
                            education.
Sec. 309. Sense of the Senate on lockbox.
Sec. 310. Sense of the Senate on the earned income credit.
Sec. 311. Sense of the Senate on repayment of the Federal debt.
Sec. 312. Sense of the Senate supporting long-term entitlement reforms.
Sec. 313. Sense of the Senate on disaster assistance funding.
Sec. 314. Sense of the Senate on enforcement of bipartisan budget 
                            agreement.
Sec. 315. Sense of the Senate regarding the National Institutes of 
                            Health.
Sec. 316. Sense of the Senate regarding certain elderly legal aliens.
Sec. 317. Sense of the Senate regarding retroactive taxes.
Sec. 318. Sense of the Senate on social security and balancing the 
                            budget
Sec. 319. Sense of the Senate supporting sufficient funding for 
                            veterans programs and benefits.
Sec. 320. Sense of Congress on family violence option clarifying 
                            amendment.
Sec. 321. Sense of the Senate on tax cuts.
Sec. 322. Sense of the Senate regarding assistance to Amtrak.
Sec. 323. Sense of the Senate regarding the protection of children's 
                            health.
Sec. 324. Deposit of all Federal gasoline taxes into the Highway Trust 
                            Fund.
Sec. 325. Sense of the Senate early childhood education.
Sec. 326. Highway Trust Fund not taken into account for deficit 
                            purposes.
Sec. 327. Airport and Airway Trust Fund not taken into account for 
                            deficit purposes.
Sec. 328. Military Retirement Trust Funds not taken into account for 
                            deficit purposes.
Sec. 329. Civil Service Retirement Trust Funds not taken into account 
                            for deficit purposes.
Sec. 330. Unemployment Compensation Trust Fund not taken into account 
                            for deficit purposes.
Sec. 331. Sense of the Senate concerning Highway Trust Fund.
Sec. 332. Sense of the Senate concerning tax incentives for the cost of 
                            post-secondary education.
Sec. 333. Sense of the Senate on additional tax cuts.
Sec. 334. Sense of the Senate regarding truth in budgeting and spectrum 
                            auctions
Sec. 335. Highway demonstration projects.
Sec. 336. Sense of the Senate regarding the use of budget savings.
Sec. 337. Sense of the Senate regarding the value of the social 
                            security system for future retirees.
Sec. 338. Sense of the Senate on economic growth dividend protection.
Sec. 339. Deficit-neutral reserve fund in the Senate.
Sec. 340. Support for Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
                            officers.
Sec. 341. Sense of Congress 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: $1,488,939,000,000.
                    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, $64,239,000,000.
                    (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, $304,900,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $304,900,000,000.
                    (C) New direct loan obligations, $0.
                    (D) New primary loan guarantee commitments, $0.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (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.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (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.
    (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.

    (a) Reconciliation of Spending Reductions.--Not later than June 20, 
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 increase 
        outlays by $300,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 and $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 to the Senate 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 27, 
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 and $250,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 1998 
through 2007.
    (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 enacted pursuant to the reconciliation 
instructions contained in this resolution when determining the deficit 
effect of such legislation.
    (d) Adjustments.--
            (1) Deficit neutral adjustments.--Upon the reporting of 
        reconciliation legislation pursuant to subsection (a), or upon 
        the submission of a conference report thereon, and if the 
        Committee on Finance reduces the deficit by an amount equal to 
        or greater than the outlay reduction that would be achieved 
        pursuant to subsection (a)(5)(A), the Chairman of the Committee 
        on the Budget, with the concurrence and agreement of the 
        ranking minority member, may submit appropriately revised 
        reconciliation instructions to the Committee on Finance to 
        reduce the deficit, allocations, limits, and aggregates if such 
        revisions do not cause an increase in the deficit for fiscal 
        year 1998 and for the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
            (2) Flexibility on adjustments.--
                    (A) In general.--If the adjustments authorized by 
                paragraph (1) involve a reduction in the revenue 
                aggregates set forth in this resolution, in lieu of 
                revenue reductions, the Chairman of the Committee on 
                the Budget may make upward adjustments to the 
                discretionary spending limits in this resolution, or 
                any combination thereof.
                    (B) Limit.--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.

             TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

SEC. 201. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.

    (a) Discretionary Limits.--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, and 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 fy 
                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 IN THE SENATE.

    (a) Adjustments.--In the Senate, for fiscal year 1998, 1999, 2000, 
2001, or 2002, upon the reporting of an appropriations measure (or 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 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 of 
the Senate may report 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 IN THE SENATE FOR SECTION 8 HOUSING ASSISTANCE.

    (a) Adjustment for Discretionary Spending.--In the Senate, for 
fiscal year 1998, upon the reporting of an appropriations measure (or 
upon the submission of a conference report thereon) that includes an 
appropriation for Section 8 Housing Assistance which fully funds all 
contract renewal obligations during that fiscal year, the Chairman of 
the Committee on the Budget may increase the appropriate allocations in 
this resolution by an amount that does not exceed $9,200,000,000 in 
budget authority and the amount of outlays flowing from such budget 
authority.
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations of 
the Senate may report 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. ENVIRONMENTAL RESERVE.

    (a) Adjustments for Mandatory Spending.--
            (1) Allocations.--In the Senate, upon the reporting of 
        legislation (or upon the submission of a conference report 
        thereon) pursuant to subsection (b), the Chairman of the 
Committee on the Budget may increase the allocation pursuant to 
sections 302(a) and 602(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to 
the Committee on Environment and Public Works by an amount that does 
not exceed--
                    (A) $200,000,000 in budget authority and 
                $200,000,000 in outlays for fiscal year 1998; and
                    (B) $1,000,000,000 in budget authority and 
                $1,000,000,000 in outlays for the period of fiscal 
                years 1998 through 2002.
            (2) Prior surplus.--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 paragraph (1) shall be taken together with all 
        other legislation enacted pursuant to section 104 of this 
        resolution.
    (b) Limitations.--The adjustments made pursuant to this section 
shall only be made for legislation that provides funding to reform the 
Superfund program to facilitate the cleanup of hazardous waste sites.

SEC. 205. PRIORITY FEDERAL LAND ACQUISITIONS AND EXCHANGES.

    (a) Adjustment for Discretionary Spending.--In the Senate, for 
fiscal year 1998, upon the reporting of an appropriations measure (or 
upon the submission of a conference report thereon) that includes an 
appropriation for the National Park Service's Land Acquisition and 
State Assistance account at the fiscal year 1998 request level (as 
submitted on February 6, 1997) and up to an additional $700,000,000 in 
budget authority for priority Federal land acquisitions and exchanges 
during that fiscal year, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget 
may increase the appropriate allocations by an amount that does not 
exceed $700,000,000 in budget authority and the amount of outlays 
flowing from such budget authority.
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations of 
the Senate may report 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 IN THE SENATE FOR ARREARAGES.

    (a) Adjustment for Discretionary Spending.--In the Senate, for 
fiscal year 1998, 1999, and 2000, upon the reporting of an 
appropriations measure (or upon 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 may increase the appropriate allocations, 
aggregates, and discretionary spending limits in this resolution by an 
amount that does not exceed--
            (1) $415,000,000 in budget authority and the amount of 
        outlays flowing from such budget authority for fiscal year 
        1998;
            (2) $1,227,000,000 in budget authority and the amount of 
        outlays flowing from such budget authority for fiscal year 
        1999; and
            (3) $242,000,000 in budget authority and the amount of 
        outlays flowing from such budget authority for fiscal year 
        2000.
    (b) Committee Suballocations.--The Committee on Appropriations of 
the Senate may report 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.
    (b) Establishing a Reserve.--
            (1) Revisions.--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) Revenue increases or direct spending reductions.--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.--Upon either--
                    (A) the reporting of an appropriations measure, or 
                when 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 
                when 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 Budget Committee shall 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 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. 208. MASS TRANSIT RESERVE FUND FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998-2002.

    (a) In General.--If legislation is enacted which 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) Establishing a Reserve.--
            (1) Revisions.--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) Revenue increases or direct spending reductions.--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.--Upon the 
        reporting of an appropriations measure, or when a conference 
        committee submits a conference report thereon, that 
        appropriates funds for mass transit, the Chairman of the Budget 
        Committee shall submit increased budget authority allocations, 
        aggregates, and discretionary limits for the amount 
        appropriated for authorized expenditures from the mass transit 
        fund and the outlays 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. 209. HIGHWAY RESERVE FUND FOR FISCAL YEARS 1998-2002.

    (a) In General.--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.--Upon the reporting of 
legislation (the offering of an amendment thereto or conference report 
thereon) that reduces direct non-highway spending or increases revenues 
for a fiscal year or years, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget 
shall submit revised budget authority allocations and aggregates by an 
amount that equals the amount such legislation reduces direct spending 
or increases revenues.
    (c) Establishing a Reserve.--
            (1) Revisions.--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 non-highway 
        spending reductions.
            (2) Revenue increases or direct spending reductions.--Upon 
        the submission of such revisions, the Chairman of the Committee 
        on the Budget shall also submit the amount of revenue increases 
        or direct non-highway 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.--Upon the 
        reporting of an appropriations measure, or when a conference 
        committee submits a conference report thereon, that 
        appropriates funds for highways, the Chairman of the Committee 
        on the Budget 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 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 direct non-highway 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 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. 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 THE SENATE

SEC. 301. 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. 302. 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. 303. 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. 304. 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 represents a significant structural 
        change that could jeopardize the quality of care for children, 
        the disabled, and senior citizens.

SEC. 305. 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. 306. 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. 307. 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. 308. 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. 309. 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. 310. 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. 311. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON REPAYMENT OF THE FEDERAL DEBT.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) Congress and the President have a basic moral and 
        ethical responsibility to future generations to repay the 
        Federal debt, including money borrowed from the Social Security 
        Trust Fund;
            (2) the Congress and the President should enact a law that 
        creates a regimen for paying off the Federal debt within 30 
        years; and
            (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 Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions of this resolution assume that--
            (1) the President's annual budget submission to Congress 
        should include a plan for repayment of the 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 
        would cap spending growth at a level one percentage point lower 
        than projected growth in revenues.

SEC. 312. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING LONG-TERM ENTITLEMENT REFORMS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that the resolution assumes the 
following--
            (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;
            (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. 313. 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;
            (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 within 
        discretionary limits to provide natural disaster relief;
            (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. 314. 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; and
                    (B) accurate estimates of the fiscal impacts of 
                assumptions in this resolution; and
                    (C) enactment of legislation to reduce the deficit;
            (2) if either 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 budget process 
        description included in the agreement and to ensure the 
        balanced budget goal is met; and
            (2) such legislation shall--
                    (A) establish procedures to ensure those targets 
                are met every year;
                    (B) require that the President's annual budget and 
                annual Congressional concurrent resolutions on the 
                budget comply with those targets 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 include a provision 
                to budget for and control emergency spending in order 
                to prevent the use of emergencies to evade the budget 
                targets.

SEC. 315. 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 recordkeeping 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. 316. 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. 317. 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. 318. 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. 319. 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. 320. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON FAMILY VIOLENCE OPTION CLARIFYING 
              AMENDMENT.

    (a) Findings.--Congress 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 Congress.--It is the sense of Congress 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. 321. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON TAX CUTS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the Concurrent Resolution on the 
Budget 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. 322. 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) It is fiscally irresponsible for Congress to allocate 
        additional Federal dollars to Amtrak, and to distribute money 
        from a new trust fund, without providing reforms requested by 
        Amtrak to address its precarious financial situation.
            (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. 323. 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. 324. DEPOSIT OF 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, that all revenues from 
Federal gasoline excise taxes, including amounts dedicated to general 
revenues in 1993, should be dedicated 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. 325. SENSE OF THE SENATE 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. 326. HIGHWAY TRUST FUND NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR DEFICIT 
              PURPOSES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions underlying this 
budget resolution assume that the Congress should consider legislation 
to exclude the receipts and disbursements of the Highway Trust Fund 
from the totals of the Budget of the United States Government.

SEC. 327. AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR 
              DEFICIT PURPOSES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions underlying the 
budget resolution that the Congress should consider legislation to 
exclude the receipts and disbursements of the Airport and Airway Trust 
Fund from the totals of the Budget of the United States Government.

SEC. 328. MILITARY RETIREMENT TRUST FUNDS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR 
              DEFICIT PURPOSES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions underlying this 
budget resolution assume that the Congress should consider legislation 
to exclude the receipts and disbursements of the retirement and 
disability trust funds for members of the Armed Forces of the United 
States from the totals of the Budget of the United States Government.

SEC. 329. CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT TRUST FUNDS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT 
              FOR DEFICIT PURPOSES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions underlying this 
budget resolution assume that the Congress should consider legislation 
to exclude the receipts and disbursements of the retirement and 
disability trust funds for civilian employees of the United States from 
the totals of the Budget of the United States Government.

SEC. 330. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION TRUST FUND NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT 
              FOR DEFICIT PURPOSES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions underlying this 
budget resolution assume that the Congress should consider legislation 
to exclude the receipts and disbursements of the Federal Unemployment 
Compensation Trust Fund from the totals of the Budget of the United 
States Government.

SEC. 331. 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, change 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. 332. 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. 333. 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 discretionary or mandatory spending, or increases in 
revenue from alternative sources.

SEC. 334. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING TRUTH IN BUDGETING AND SPECTRUM 
              AUCTIONS.

    (a) 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;
            (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; therefore,
    (b) 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 accordingly if such auctions raise less 
revenue than projected.

SEC. 335. 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. 336. 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 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. 337. 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.
            (7) Future generations of Americans must be guaranteed the 
        same value from the social security system as past covered 
        recipients.
    (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. 338. SENSE OF 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.
            (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. 339. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE.

    (a) In General.--In the Senate, revenue and spending aggregates may 
be changed and allocations may be revised for legislation that provides 
funding for early childhood development programs for children ages zero 
to six provided that the legislation which changes revenues or changes 
spending will not increase the deficit for--
            (1) fiscal year 1998;
            (2) the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2002; or
            (3) the period of fiscal years 2002 through 2007.
    (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 revised allocations under sections 302(a) and 
        602(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised 
        functional levels and aggregates to carry out this section. 
        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 resolution.
            (2) Adjustments for amendments.--If the chairman of the 
        Committee on the Budget submits an adjustment under this 
        section for legislation in furtherance of the purpose described 
        in subsection (a) upon the offering of an amendment to that 
        legislation that would necessitate such a submission, the 
        chairman shall submit to the Senate appropriately revised 
        allocations under sections 302(a) and 602(a) of the 
        Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised functional levels 
        and aggregates to carry out this section. 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 resolution.
    (c) Reporting Revised Allocations.--The appropriate committee shall 
report appropriately revised allocations pursuant to sections 302(b) 
and 602(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to carry out this 
section.

SEC. 340. SUPPORT FOR 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 Trust Fund will 
        continue in its current form at least through fiscal year 2002.

SEC. 341. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN 
              PREVENTION OF DRUG USE BY CHILDREN.

    It is the sense of the Congress 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:

                                                             Secretary.
105th CONGRESS

  1st Session 

                            H. CON. RES. 84

_______________________________________________________________________

                               AMENDMENT

HCON 84 EAS----2
HCON 84 EAS----3
HCON 84 EAS----4
HCON 84 EAS----5
HCON 84 EAS----6
HCON 84 EAS----7
HCON 84 EAS----8
HCON 84 EAS----9
HCON 84 EAS----10