[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 101 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]





                                                       Calendar No. 482

106th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            S. CON. RES. 101

                          [Report No. 106-251]

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government 
 for fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and revising the budgetary levels 
                         for fiscal year 2000.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 31, 2000

Reported, under authority of the order of the Senate of March 30, 2000, 
                       and placed on the calendar





                                                       Calendar No. 482
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 101

                          [Report No. 106-251]

Setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government 
 for fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and revising the budgetary levels 
                         for fiscal year 2000.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 31, 2000

    Mr. Domenici, from the Committee on the Budget, reported, under 
 authority of the order of the Senate of March 30, 2000, the following 
    original concurrent resolution; which was placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
Setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government 
 for fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and revising the budgetary levels 
                         for fiscal year 2000.

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

SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001.

    (a) Declaration.--Congress determines and declares that this 
resolution is the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 
2001 including the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2002, 
2003, 2004, and 2005 as authorized by section 301 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974 and the revised budgetary levels for fiscal year 
2000 as authorized by section 304 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 2001.
                      TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Social Security.
Sec. 103. Major functional categories.
Sec. 104. Reconciliation of revenue reductions in the Senate.
             TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

Sec. 201. Congressional lock box for Social Security surpluses.
Sec. 202. Reserve fund for Medicare.
Sec. 203. Reserve fund for stabilization of payments to counties in 
                            support of education.
Sec. 204. Reserve fund for agriculture.
Sec. 205. Tax reduction reserve fund in the Senate.
Sec. 206. Reserve fund for additional surpluses.
Sec. 207. Mechanism for additional debt reduction.
Sec. 208. Emergency designation point of order in the Senate.
Sec. 209. Reserve fund pending increase of fiscal year 2001 
                            discretionary spending limits.
Sec. 210. Congressional firewall for defense and non-defense spending.
Sec. 211. Mechanisms for strengthening budgetary integrity.
Sec. 212. Prohibition on use of Federal Reserve surpluses.
Sec. 213. Reaffirming the prohibition on the use of revenue offsets for 
                            discretionary spending.
Sec. 214. Application and effect of changes in allocations and 
                            aggregates.
Sec. 215. Reserve fund to foster the health of children with 
                            disabilities and the employment and 
                            independence of their families.
Sec. 216. Exercise of rulemaking powers.
               TITLE III--SENSE OF THE SENATE PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Sense of the Senate on controlling and eliminating the 
                            growing international problem of 
                            tuberculosis.
Sec. 302. Sense of the Senate on increased funding for the Child Care 
                            and Development Block Grant.
Sec. 303. Sense of the Senate on tax relief for college tuition paid 
                            and for interest paid on student loans.
Sec. 304. Sense of the Senate on increased funding for the National 
                            Institutes of Health.
Sec. 305. Sense of the Senate supporting funding levels in Educational 
                            Opportunities Act.
Sec. 306. Sense of the Senate on additional budgetary resources.
Sec. 307. Sense of the Senate on regarding the inadequacy of the 
                            payments for skilled nursing care.
Sec. 308. Sense of the Senate on the CARA programs.
Sec. 309. Sense of the Senate on veteran's medical care.
Sec. 310. Sense of the Senate on Impact Aid.
Sec. 311. Sense of the Senate on funding for increased acreage under 
                            the Conservation Reserve Program and the 
                            Wetlands Reserve Program.
Sec. 312. Sense of the Senate on tax simplification.
Sec. 313. Sense of the Senate on antitrust enforcement by the 
                            Department of Justice and Federal Trade 
                            Commission regarding agriculture mergers 
                            and anticompetitive activity.
Sec. 314. Sense of the Senate regarding fair markets for American 
                            farmers.
Sec. 315. Sense of the Senate on women and Social Security reform.
Sec. 316. Protection of battered women and children.
Sec. 317. Use of False Claims Act in combatting medicare fraud.
Sec. 318. Sense of the Senate regarding the National Guard.
Sec. 319. Sense of the Senate regarding military readiness.
Sec. 320. Sense of the Senate on compensation for the Chinese Embassy 
                            bombing in Belgrade.
Sec. 321. Sense of the Senate supporting funding of digital opportunity 
                            initiatives.
Sec. 322. Sense of the Senate regarding immunization funding.
Sec. 323. Sense of the Senate regarding tax credits for small 
                            businesses providing health insurance to 
                            low-income employees.
Sec. 324. Sense of the Senate on funding for criminal justice.
Sec. 325. Sense of the Senate regarding the Pell Grant.
Sec. 326. Sense of the Senate regarding comprehensive public education 
                            reform.
Sec. 327. Sense of the Senate on providing adequate funding for United 
                            States international leadership.
Sec. 328. Sense of the Senate concerning the HIV/AIDS crisis.
Sec. 329. Sense of the Senate regarding tribal colleges.

                      TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

    The following budgetary levels are the revised levels for fiscal 
year 2000 and the appropriate levels for the fiscal years 2001 through 
2005:
    (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
resolution--
            (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
        follows:
                    Fiscal year 2000: $1,464,604,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $1,501,658,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $1,546,533,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $1,598,771,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $1,655,093,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $1,720,654,000,000.
            (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
        revenues should be changed are as follows:
                    Fiscal year 2000: -$877,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: -$13,157,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: -$24,854,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: -$30,752,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: -$37,550,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: -$43,448,000,000.
    (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 2000: $1,467,257,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $1,471,817,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $1,502,777,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $1,614,195,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $1,670,329,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $1,730,514,000,000.
    (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
resolution and the revised fiscal year 2000 resolution, the appropriate 
levels of total budget outlays are as follows:
                    Fiscal year 2000: $1,441,459,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $1,447,795,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $1,469,962,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $1,589,699,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $1,644,120,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $1,705,698,000,000.
    (4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this resolution, 
the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
                    Fiscal year 2000: $23,145,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $53,863,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $76,571,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $9,072,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $10,973,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $14,956,000,000.
    (5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt are as 
follows:
                    Fiscal year 2000: $5,625,962,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $5,667,144,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $5,681,983,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $5,768,762,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $5,849,465,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $5,923,674,000,000.
    (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of the debt 
held by the public are as follows:
                    Fiscal year 2000: $3,455,362,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $3,248,659,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $2,995,663,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $2,802,939,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $2,594,260,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $2,364,124,000,000.

SEC. 102. SOCIAL SECURITY.

    (a) Social Security Revenues.--For purposes of Senate enforcement 
under section 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 2000: $479,648,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $501,533,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $524,854,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $547,179,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $569,907,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $597,326,000,000.
    (b) Social Security Outlays.--For purposes of Senate enforcement 
under section 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 2000: $322,545,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2001: $331,869,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2002: $339,068,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2003: $347,733,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2004: $357,737,000,000.
                    Fiscal year 2005: $368,976,000,000.
    (c) Social Security Administrative Expenses.--In the Senate, the 
amounts of new budget authority and budget outlays of the Federal Old-
Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability 
Insurance Trust Fund for administrative expenses are as follows:
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $3,160,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3,187,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $3,429,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3,378,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $3,471,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3.438,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $3,505,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3,473,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $3,541,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3,507,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $3,576,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3,543,000,000.

SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

    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 year 2000 (as revised) 
and fiscal years 2001 through 2005 for each major functional category 
are:
    (1) National Defense (050):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $291,583,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $288,112,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $305,833,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $294,064,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $309,085,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $302,272,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $315,485,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $309,362,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $323,191,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $317,461,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $331,532,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $327,948,000,000.
    (2) International Affairs (150):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $21,967,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $16,019,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $20,139,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $18,625,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $20,868,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $17,932,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $21,420,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $17,573,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $21,907,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $17,741,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $22,645,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $17,892,000,000.
    (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $19,267,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $18,418,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $19,703,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $19,245,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $19,877,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $19,593,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $19,806,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $19,515,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $20,069,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $19,655,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $20,337,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $19,900,000,000.
    (4) Energy (270):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $1,081,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$607,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $1,475,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $172,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$264,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$1,366,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $1,202,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$43,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $1,238,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$124,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $1,210,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$85,000,000.
    (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $24,487,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $24,245,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $24,936,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $24,905,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $25,023,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $25,045,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $25,019,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $25,203,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $25,066,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $25,065,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $25,059,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $24,876,000,000.
    (6) Agriculture (350):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $35,257,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $33,916,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $20,894,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $18,779,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $18,950,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $17,235,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $17,965,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $16,366,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $17,354,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $15,910,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $16,092,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $14,593,000,000.
    (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $7,594,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $3,141,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $6,117,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $1,977,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $8,608,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $4,864,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $9,356,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $4,677,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,413,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $8,391,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,368,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $9,331,000,000.
    (8) Transportation (400):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $54,352,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $46,656,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $59,247,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $50,822,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $57,536,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $53,486,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $59,101,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $55,516,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $59,135,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $56,138,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $59,174,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $56,418,000,000.
    (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $11,336,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $10,725,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $9,021,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $10,386,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $8,822,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $9,815,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $8,665,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $8,749,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $8,657,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $8,255,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $8,744,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $7,886,000,000.
    (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services (500):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $57,688,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $61,904,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $74,977,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $68,648,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $75,744,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $72,570,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $76,636,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $75,430,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $77,751,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $76,766,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $79,128,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $78,033,000,000.
    (11) Health (550):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $159,224,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $153,473,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $169,215,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $165,836,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $178,911,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $177,766,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $190,951,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $190,300,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $205,181,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $204,835,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $221,484,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $220,329,000,000.
    (12) Medicare (570):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $199,601,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $199,507,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $218,751,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $219,005,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $228,635,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $228,604,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $249,762,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $249,520,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $265,318,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $265,546,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $288,730,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $288,681,000,000.
    (13) Income Security (600):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $238,891,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $248,071,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $253,236,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $255,424,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $264,844,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $267,252,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $274,789,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $278,452,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $284,929,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $288,367,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $297,669,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $301,202,000,000.
    (14) Social Security (650):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $11,532,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $11,533,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $9,728,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $9,727,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $11,572,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $11,572,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $12,271,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $12,271,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,020,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $13,020,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,841,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $13,841,000,000.
    (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $46,010,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $45,130,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $47,568,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $47,141,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $48,823,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $48,704,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $50,838,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $50,513,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $52,119,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $51,842,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $55,517,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $55,194,000,000.
    (16) Administration of Justice (750):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $27,370,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $28,013,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $27,927,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $28,224,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $28,520,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $28,698,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $29,157,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $29,123,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $31,283,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $31,012,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $32,124,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $31,863,000,000.
    (17) General Government (800):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,670,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $14,727,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $14,427,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $14,291,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,605,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $13,883,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,578,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $13,768,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,570,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $13,882,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $13,595,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $13,604,000,000.
    (18) Net Interest (900):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, $284,491,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $284,493,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, $286,920,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $286,920,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, $285,291,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $285,290,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $279,465,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $279,465,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $275,502,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $275,502,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $270,951,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, $270,951,000,000.
    (19) Allowances (920):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$3,829,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$11,702,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$59,931,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$48,031,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$59,729,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$71,311,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, $0.
                    (B) Outlays, -$790,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, $0.
                    (B) Outlays, -$6,770,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, $0.
                    (B) Outlays, -$6,072,000,000.
    (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$34,315,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$34,315,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$38,366,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$38,366,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$41,943,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$41,943,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$41,270,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$41,270,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$38,374,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$38,374,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                    (A) New budget authority, -$40,686,000,000.
                    (B) Outlays, -$40,686,000,000.

SEC. 104. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN THE SENATE.

    Not later than September 22, 2000, 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 $13,157,000,000 in fiscal year 2001 and $149,761,000,000 for the 
period of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.

             TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

SEC. 201. CONGRESSIONAL LOCK BOX FOR SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUSES.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
            (1) under the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, the Social 
        Security trust funds are off-budget for purposes of the 
        President's budget submission and the concurrent resolution on 
        the budget;
            (2) the Social Security trust funds have been running 
        surpluses for 18 years;
            (3) these surpluses have been used to implicitly finance 
        the general operations of the Federal Government;
            (4) in fiscal year 2001, the Social Security surplus will 
        reach $166,000,000,000;
            (5) in fiscal year 1999, the Federal budget was balanced 
        without using Social Security;
            (6) the only way to ensure that Social Security surpluses 
        are not diverted for other purposes is to balance the budget 
        exclusive of such surpluses; and
            (7) Congress and the President should take such steps as 
        are necessary to ensure that future budgets continue to be 
        balanced excluding the surpluses generated by the Social 
        Security trust funds.
    (b) Point of Order.--
            (1) In general.--It shall not be in order in the House of 
        Representatives or the Senate to consider any revision to this 
        concurrent resolution, or any other concurrent resolution on 
        the budget, or any amendment thereto or conference report 
        thereon, that sets forth a deficit for any fiscal year.
            (2) Deficit levels.--For purposes of this subsection, a 
        deficit shall be the level (if any) set forth in the most 
        recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for that 
        fiscal year pursuant to section 301(a)(3) of the Congressional 
        Budget Act of 1974.
    (c) Budget Committee Determinations.--For purposes of this section, 
the levels of new budget authority, outlays, direct spending, new 
entitlement authority, revenues, deficits, and surpluses for a fiscal 
year shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the 
Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives or the Senate, 
as applicable.
    (d) Exception.--Subsection (b) shall not apply if--
            (1) the most recent of the Department of Commerce's 
        advance, preliminary, or final reports of actual real economic 
        growth indicate that the rate of real economic growth for each 
        of the most recently reported quarter and the immediately 
        preceding quarter is less than 1 percent; or
            (2) a declaration of war is in effect.
    (e) Social Security Look-Back.--If in any fiscal year the social 
security surplus is used to finance general operations of the Federal 
Government, an amount equal to the amount used shall be deducted from 
the available amount of discretionary spending for the following fiscal 
year for purposes of any concurrent resolution on the budget.
    (f) Waiver and Appeal.--Subsection (b) may be waived or suspended 
in the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
Members, duly chosen and sworn. 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.

SEC. 202. RESERVE FUND FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

    (a) Allocation.--In the Senate, spending aggregates and other 
appropriate budgetary levels and limits may be adjusted and allocations 
may be revised for legislation reported by the Committee on Finance to 
provide a prescription drug benefit for fiscal years 2001, 2002, and 
2003, provided that this legislation will not reduce the on-budget 
surplus by more than $20,000,000,000 total during these 3 fiscal years, 
and provided that the enactment of this legislation will not cause an 
on-budget deficit in any of these 3 fiscal years.
    (b) Exception.--The adjustments provided in subsection (a) shall be 
made for a bill or joint resolution, or an amendment that is offered 
(in the Senate), that provides coverage for prescription drugs, if the 
Senate Committee on Finance has not reported such legislation on or 
before September 1, 2000.
    (c) Adjustment.--If legislation is reported by the Senate Committee 
on Finance that extends the solvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance 
Trust Fund without the use of transfers of new subsidies from the 
general fund, without decreasing beneficiaries' access to health care, 
and excluding the cost of extending and modifying the prescription drug 
benefit crafted purusuant to section (a) or (b), then the Chairman of 
the Committee on the Budget may change committee allocations and 
spending aggregates by no more than $20,000,000,000 total for fiscal 
years 2004 and 2005 to fund the prescription drug benefit if such 
legislation will not cause an on-budget deficit in either of these 2 
fiscal years.
    (d) Budgetary Enforcement.--The revision of allocations and 
aggregates made under this section shall be considered for the purposes 
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as allocations and aggregates 
contained in this resolution.

SEC. 203. RESERVE FUND FOR STABILIZATION OF PAYMENTS TO COUNTIES IN 
              SUPPORT OF EDUCATION.

    (a) Adjustment.--
            (1) In general.--Whenever the Committee on Energy and 
        Natural Resources of the Senate reports a bill, or an amendment 
        thereto is offered, or a conference report thereon is 
        submitted, that provides additional resources for counties and 
        complies with paragraph (2), the chairman of the Committee on 
        the Budget may increase the allocation of budget authority and 
        outlays to that committee by the amount of budget authority 
        (and the outlays resulting therefrom) provided by that 
        legislation for such purpose in accordance with subsection (b).
            (2) Condition.--Legislation complies with this paragraph if 
        it provides for the stabilization of receipt-based payments to 
        counties that support school and road systems and also provides 
        that a portion of those payments would be dedicated toward 
        local investments in Federal lands within the counties.
    (b) Limitations.--The adjustments to the allocations required by 
subsection (a) shall not exceed $200,000,000 in budget authority (and 
the outlays resulting therefrom) for fiscal year 2001 and shall not 
exceed $1,100,000,000 in budget authority (and the outlays resulting 
therefrom) for the period of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.

SEC. 204. RESERVE FUND FOR AGRICULTURE.

    (a) Adjustment.--
            (1) In general.--If the Committee on Agriculture, 
        Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate reports a bill on or 
        before June 29, 2000, or an amendment thereto is offered, or a 
        conference report thereon is submitted that provides assistance 
        for producers of program crops and specialty crops, and 
        enhancements for agriculture conservation programs that 
        complies with paragraph (2), the appropriate chairman of the 
        Committee on the Budget may increase the allocation of budget 
        authority and outlays to that committee by the amount of budget 
        authority (and the outlays resulting therefrom) provided by 
        that legislation for such purpose in accordance with subsection 
        (b).
            (2) Conditions.--Legislation complies with this paragraph 
        if it does not cause a net increase in budget authority and 
        outlays of greater than $1,640,000,000 for fiscal year 2001.
    (b) Limitations.--The adjustments to the allocations required by 
subsection (a) shall not exceed $5,500,000,000 in budget authority and 
outlays for fiscal year 2000, and $3,000,000,000 in budget authority 
(and the outlays resulting therefrom) for the period of fiscal years 
2001 through 2005.

SEC. 205. TAX REDUCTION RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE.

    In the Senate, the chairman of the Committee on the Budget may 
reduce the spending and revenue aggregates and may revise committee 
allocations for legislation that reduces revenues if such legislation 
will not increase the deficit or decrease the surplus for--
            (1) fiscal year 2001; or
            (2) the period of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.

SEC. 206. RESERVE FUND FOR ADDITIONAL SURPLUSES.

    (a) Congressional Budget Office Updated Budget Forecast.--Pursuant 
to section 202(e)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Congressional Budget Office shall update its economic and budget 
outlook for fiscal years 2001 through 2010 by July 1, 2000.
    (b) Reporting a Surplus.--If the report provided pursuant to 
subsection (a) estimates an on-budget surplus for any fiscal year that 
exceeds the on-budget surplus set forth in the Congressional Budget 
Office's March 2000 economic and budget outlook, the appropriate 
chairman of the Committee on the Budget may make the adjustments as 
provided in subsection (c).
    (c) Adjustments.--The appropriate chairman of the Committee on the 
Budget may make the following adjustments in an amount equal to the 
difference between the on-budget surpluses set forth in the March 
report and the on-budget surplus contained in the July report:
            (1) Reduce the on-budget revenue aggregate by that amount 
        for such fiscal year.
            (2) Increase the on-budget surplus levels used for 
        determining compliance with the pay-as-you-go requirements of 
        section 207 of H. Con. Res. 68 (106th Cong., 1st Sess.).
            (3) Adjust the instruction in section 104 to--
                    (A) increase the reduction in revenues by that 
                amount for fiscal year 2001; and
                    (B) increase the reduction in revenues by the sum 
                of the amounts for the period of fiscal years 2001 
                through 2005.

SEC. 207. MECHANISM FOR ADDITIONAL DEBT REDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--If any of the legislation described in subsection 
(b) does not become law on or before October 1, 2000, then the Chairman 
of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall adjust the levels in 
this concurrent resolution as provided in subsection (c).
    (b) Legislation.--The adjustment required by subsection (a) shall 
be made with respect to--
            (1) the reconciliation legislation required by section 104; 
        or
            (2) the Medicare legislation provided for in section 202.
    (c) Adjustments To Be Made.--The adjustment required in subsection 
(a) shall be--
            (1) with respect to the legislation required by section 
        104, to decrease the balance displayed on the Senate's pay-as-
        you-go scorecard and increase the revenue aggregate by the 
        amount set forth in section 104 (as adjusted, if adjusted, 
        pursuant to section 205) and to decrease the level of debt held 
        by the public as set forth in section 101(6) by that same 
        amount; or
            (2) with respect to the legislation provided for in section 
        202, to decrease the balance displayed on the Senate's pay-as-
        you-go scorecard by the amount set forth in section 202 and to 
        decrease the level of debt held by the public as set forth in 
        section 101(6) by that same amount and make the corresponding 
        adjustments to the revenue and spending aggregates and 
        allocations (as adjusted by section 202).

SEC. 208. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.

    (a) Designations.--
            (1) Guidance.--In making a designation of a provision of 
        legislation as an emergency requirement under section 
        251(b)(2)(A) or 252(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
        Deficit Control Act of 1985, the committee report and any 
        statement of managers accompanying that legislation shall 
        analyze whether a proposed emergency requirement meets all the 
        criteria in paragraph (2).
            (2) Criteria.--
                    (A) In general.--The criteria to be considered in 
                determining whether a proposed expenditure or tax 
                change is an emergency requirement are--
                            (i) necessary, essential, or vital (not 
                        merely useful or beneficial);
                            (ii) sudden, quickly coming into being, and 
                        not building up over time;
                            (iii) an urgent, pressing, and compelling 
                        need requiring immediate action;
                            (iv) subject to subparagraph (B), 
                        unforeseen, unpredictable, and unanticipated; 
                        and
                            (v) not permanent, temporary in nature.
                    (B) Unforeseen.--An emergency that is part of an 
                aggregate level of anticipated emergencies, 
                particularly when normally estimated in advance, is not 
                unforeseen.
            (3) Justification for failure to meet criteria.--If the 
        proposed emergency requirement does not meet all the criteria 
        set forth in paragraph (2), the committee report or the 
        statement of managers, as the case may be, shall provide a 
        written justification of why the requirement should be accorded 
        emergency status.
    (b) Point of Order.--When the Senate is considering a bill, 
resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report, a point of order 
may be made by a Senator against an emergency designation in that 
measure and if the Presiding Officer sustains that point of order, that 
provision making such a designation shall be stricken from the measure 
and may not be offered as an amendment from the floor.
    (c) Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be waived or suspended in 
the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, 
duly chosen and sworn. 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.
    (d) Definition of an Emergency Requirement.--A provision shall be 
considered an emergency designation if it designates any item an 
emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) or 252(e) of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    (e) Form of the Point of Order.--A point of order under this 
section may be raised by a Senator as provided in section 313(e) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (f) Conference Reports.--If a point of order is sustained under 
this section against a conference report the report shall be disposed 
of as provided in section 313(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.

SEC. 209. RESERVE FUND PENDING INCREASE OF FISCAL YEAR 2001 
              DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) The functional totals with respect to discretionary 
        spending set forth in this concurrent resolution, if 
        implemented, would result in legislation which exceeds the 
        limit on discretionary spending for fiscal year 2001 set out in 
        section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
        Control Act of 1985. Nonetheless, the allocation pursuant to 
        section 302 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 
        Act of 1974 to the Committee on Appropriations is in compliance 
        with current law spending limits.
            (2) Consequently unless and until the discretionary 
        spending limit for fiscal year 2001 is increased, aggregate 
        appropriations which exceed the current law limits would still 
        be out of order in the Senate and subject to a supermajority 
        vote.
            (3) The functional totals contained in this concurrent 
        resolution envision a level of discretionary spending for 
        fiscal year 2001 as follows:
                    (A) For the discretionary category: 
                $596,579,000,000 in new budget authority and 
                $590,326,000,000 in outlays.
                    (B) For the highway category: $26,920,000,000 in 
                outlays.
                    (C) For the mass transit category: $4,639,000,000 
                in outlays.
            (4) To facilitate the Senate completing its legislative 
        responsibilities for the 106th Congress in a timely fashion, it 
        is imperative that the Senate consider legislation which 
        increases the discretionary spending limit for fiscal year 2001 
        as soon as possible.
    (b) Adjustment to Allocations.--Whenever a bill or joint resolution 
becomes law that increases the discretionary spending limit for fiscal 
year 2001 set out in section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the appropriate chairman of the 
Committee on the Budget shall increase the allocation called for in 
section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to the 
appropriate Committee on Appropriations.
    (c) Limitation on Adjustment.--An adjustment made pursuant to 
subsection (b) shall not result in an allocation under section 302(a) 
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 that exceeds the total budget 
authority and outlays set forth in subsection (a)(3).

SEC. 210. CONGRESSIONAL FIREWALL FOR DEFENSE AND NON-DEFENSE SPENDING.

    (a) Definition.--In this section, for fiscal year 2001 the term 
``discretionary spending limit'' means--
            (1) for the defense category, $306,819,000,000 in new 
        budget authority and $295,050,000,000 in outlays; and
            (2) for the nondefense category, $289,760,000,000 in new 
        budget authority and $327,583,000,000 in outlays.
    (b) Point of Order in the Senate.--
            (1) In general.--After the adjustment to the section 302(a) 
        allocation to the Appropriations Committee is made pursuant to 
        section 208 and except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall 
        not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill, joint 
        resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that 
        exceeds any discretionary spending limit set forth in this 
        section.
            (2) Exception.--This subsection shall not apply if a 
        declaration of war by Congress is in effect.
    (c) Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be waived or suspended in 
the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, 
duly chosen and sworn. 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.

SEC. 211. MECHANISMS FOR STRENGTHENING BUDGETARY INTEGRITY.

    (a) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``budget 
year'' means with respect to a session of Congress, the fiscal year of 
the Government that starts on October 1 of the calendar year in which 
that session begins.
    (b) Point of Order With Respect to Advanced Appropriations.--
            (1) In general.--It shall not be in order in the Senate to 
        consider any bill, resolution, amendment, motion or conference 
        report that--
                    (A) provides an appropriation of new budget 
                authority for any fiscal year after the budget year 
                that is in excess of the amounts provided in paragraph 
                (2); and
                    (B) provides an appropriation of new budget 
                authority for any fiscal year subsequent to the year 
                after the budget year.
            (2) Limitation on amounts.--The total amount, provided in 
        appropriations legislation for the budget year, of 
        appropriations for the subsequent fiscal year shall not exceed 
        $14,200,000,000.
    (c) Point of Order With Respect to Delayed Obligations.--
            (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), it 
        shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill, 
        resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that 
        contains an appropriation of new budget authority for any 
        fiscal year which does not become available upon enactment of 
        such legislation or on the first day of that fiscal year 
        (whichever is later).
            (2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect 
        to appropriations for the following programs provided that such 
        appropriation is not delayed beyond the specified date and does 
        not exceed the specified amount:
                    (A) Department of the interior.--Operation of 
                Indian Programs School Operation Costs (Bureau of 
                Indian Affairs Funded Schools and Other Education 
                Programs): July 1 not to exceed $401,000,000.
                    (B) Department of labor.--
                            (i) Training and Employment Service: July 1 
                        not to exceed $1,650,000,000.
                            (ii) State Unemployment Insurance: July 1 
                        not to exceed $902,000,000.
                    (C) Department of education.--
                            (i) Education Reform: July 1 not to exceed 
                        $512,000,000.
                            (ii) Education for the Disadvantaged: July 
                        1 not to exceed $2,462,000,000.
                            (iii) School Improvement Program: July 1 
                        not to exceed $975,000,000.
                            (iv) Special Education: July 1 not to 
                        exceed $2,048,000,000.
                            (v) Vocational Education: July 1 not to 
                        exceed $858,000,000.
                    (D) Department of transportation.--Grants to the 
                National Railroad Passenger Corporation: September 30 
                not to exceed $343,000,000.
                    (E) Department of veterans' affairs.--Medical Care 
                (equipment-land-structures): August 1 not to exceed 
                $900,000,000.
                    (F) Environmental protection agency.--Hazardous 
                Substance Superfund: September 1 not to exceed 
                $100,000,000.
    (d) Waiver and Appeal.--Subsections (b) and (c) may be waived or 
suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of 
the Members, duly chosen and sworn. 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) Form of the Point of Order.--A point of order under this 
section may be raised by a Senator as provided in section 313(e) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
    (f) Conference Reports.--If a point of order is sustained under 
this section against a conference report, the report shall be disposed 
of as provided in section 313(d) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
    (g) Precatory Amendments.--For purposes of interpreting section 
305(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, an amendment is not 
germane if it contains only precatory language.
    (h) Sunset.--Except for subsection (g), this section shall expire 
effective October 1, 2002.

SEC. 212. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FEDERAL RESERVE SURPLUSES.

    (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to ensure that 
transfers from nonbudgetary governmental entities such as the Federal 
reserve banks shall not be used to offset increased on-budget spending 
when such transfers produce no real budgetary or economic effects.
    (b) Budgetary Rule.--For purposes of points of order under this 
resolution and the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 
1974, provisions contained in any bill, resolution, amendment, motion, 
or conference report that affects any surplus funds of the Federal 
reserve banks shall not be scored with respect to the level of budget 
authority, outlays, or revenues contained in such legislation.

SEC. 213. REAFFIRMING THE PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF REVENUE OFFSETS FOR 
              DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.

    (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to reaffirm Congress' 
belief that the discretionary spending limits should be adhered to and 
not circumvented by increasing taxes.
    (b) Restatement of Budgetary Rule.--For purposes of points of order 
under this resolution and the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act of 1974, provisions contained in an appropriations bill (or 
an amendment thereto or a conference report thereon) resulting in 
increased revenues shall continue not to be scored with respect to the 
level of budget authority or outlays contained in such legislation.

SEC. 214. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS AND 
              AGGREGATES.

    (a) Application.--Any adjustments of allocations and aggregates 
made pursuant to this concurrent resolution for any measure shall--
            (1) apply while that measure is under consideration;
            (2) take effect upon the enactment of that measure; and
            (3) be published in the Congressional Record as soon as 
        practicable.
    (b) Effect of Changed Allocations and Aggregates.--Revised 
allocations and aggregates resulting from these adjustments shall be 
considered for the purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 as 
allocations and aggregates contained in this concurrent resolution.

SEC. 215. RESERVE FUND TO FOSTER THE HEALTH OF CHILDREN WITH 
              DISABILITIES AND THE EMPLOYMENT AND INDEPENDENCE OF THEIR 
              FAMILIES.

    (a) Adjustment.--
            (1) In general.--Whenever the Committee on Finance of the 
        Senate reports a bill, or an amendment thereto is offered, or a 
        conference report thereon is submitted, that facilitates 
        children with disabilities receiving needed health care at home 
        and complies with paragraph (2), the chairman of the Committee 
        on the Budget may increase the spending aggregate and 
        allocation of budget authority and outlays to that committee by 
        the amount of budget authority (and the outlays resulting 
        therefrom) provided by that legislation for such purpose in 
        accordance with subsection (b).
            (2) Condition.--Legislation complies with this paragraph if 
        it finances health programs designed to allow children with 
        disabilities to access the health services they need to remain 
        at home with their families while allowing their families to 
        become or remain employed.
    (b) Limitations.--The adjustments to the spending aggregates and 
allocations required by subsection (a) shall not exceed $50,000,000 in 
budget authority (and the outlays resulting therefrom) for fiscal year 
2001 and shall not exceed $300,000,000 in budget authority (and the 
outlays resulting therefrom) for the period of fiscal years 2001 
through 2005.

SEC. 216. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

    Congress adopts the provisions of this title--
            (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate 
        and the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such 
        they shall be considered as part of the rules of each House, or 
        of that House to which they specifically apply, and such rules 
        shall supersede other rules only to the extent that they are 
        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 PROVISIONS

SEC. 301. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON CONTROLLING AND ELIMINATING THE 
              GROWING INTERNATIONAL PROBLEM OF TUBERCULOSIS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) According to the World Health Organization--
                    (A) nearly 2,000,000 people worldwide die each year 
                of tuberculosis-related illnesses;
                    (B) one-third of the world's total population is 
                infected with tuberculosis; and
                    (C) tuberculosis is the world's leading killer of 
                women between 15- and 44-years old and is a leading 
                cause of children becoming orphans.
            (2) Because of the ease of transmission of tuberculosis, 
        its international persistence and growth pose a direct public 
        health threat to those nations that had previously largely 
        controlled the disease. This is complicated in the United 
        States by the growth of the homeless population, the rate of 
        incarceration, international travel, immigration, and HIV/AIDS.
            (3) With nearly 40 percent of the tuberculosis cases in the 
        United States attributable to foreign-born persons, 
        tuberculosis will never be eliminated in the United States 
        until it is controlled abroad.
            (4) The means exist to control tuberculosis through 
        screening, diagnosis, treatment, patient compliance, 
        monitoring, and ongoing review of outcomes.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assumes that additional resources should be 
provided to fund international tuberculosis control efforts at 
$60,000,000 in fiscal year 2001, consistent with authorizing 
legislation approved by the Committee on Foreign Relations of the 
Senate.

SEC. 302. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE CHILD CARE 
              AND DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) in 1998, 33.2 percent of women in the labor force have 
        children under 14;
            (2) in 1998, 65.2 percent of women with children younger 
        than age 6, and 78.4 percent of women with children ages 6 
        through 17 were in the labor force, and 41.6 percent of women 
        with children younger than 3 were employed full-time;
            (3) 1,920,000 couples both working and with children under 
        18 had family incomes of under $30,000 (10.3 percent);
            (4)(A) in 1998, 11,700,000 children out of 21,300,000 (55.1 
        percent) under the age of 5 have employed mothers;
            (B) 18.4 percent of children under 6 are cared for by their 
        fathers at home;
            (C) another 5.5 percent (562,000) are looked after by their 
        mother either at home or away from home; and
            (D) in other words, less than a quarter (23.9 percent) of 
        these children are taken care of by 1 parent;
            (5) a 1997 General Accounting Office study found that the 
        increased work participation requirement of the welfare reform 
        law will cause the need for child care to exceed the known 
        supply;
            (6) a 1995 study by the Urban Institute of child care 
        prices in 6 cities found that the average cost of daycare for a 
        2-year-old in a child care center ranged from $3,100 to $8,100;
            (7) for an entry-level worker, the family's child care 
        costs at the average price of care for an infant in a child 
        care center would be at least 50 percent of family income in 5 
        of the 6 cities examined;
            (8) a large number of low- and middle-income families 
        sacrifice a second full-time income so that a parent may be at 
        home with the child;
            (9) the average income of 2-parent families with a single 
        income (a family with children, wife does not work) is $13,566 
        less than the average income of 2-parent families with 2 
        incomes;
            (10) a recent National Institute for Child Health and 
        Development study found that the greatest factor in the 
        development of a young child is ``what is happening at home and 
        in families''; and
            (11) increased tax relief directed at making child care 
        more affordable, and increased funding for the Child Care and 
        Development Block Grant, would take significant steps toward 
        bringing quality child care within the reach of many parents, 
        and would increase the options available to parents in deciding 
        how best to care for their children.
    (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the levels 
in this resolution and legislation enacted pursuant to this resolution 
assume--
            (1) that tax relief should be directed to parents who are 
        struggling to afford quality child care, including those who 
        wish to stay home to care for a child, and should be included 
        in any tax cut package; and
            (2) a total of $4,567,000,000 in funding for the Child Care 
        and Development Block Grant in fiscal year 2001.

SEC. 303. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON TAX RELIEF FOR COLLEGE TUITION PAID 
              AND FOR INTEREST PAID ON STUDENT LOANS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) in our increasingly competitive global economy, the 
        attainment of a higher education is critical to the economic 
        success of an individual, as evidenced by the fact that, in 
        1975, college graduates earned an average of 57 percent more 
        than those who just finished high school, compared to 76 
        percent more today;
            (2) the cost of attaining a higher education has outpaced 
        both inflation and median family incomes;
            (3) specifically, over the past 20 years, the cost of 
        college tuition has quadrupled (growing faster than any 
        consumer item, including health care and nearly twice as fast 
        as inflation) and 8 times as fast as median household incomes;
            (4) despite recent increases passed by Congress, the value 
        of the maximum Pell Grant has declined 23 percent since 1975 in 
        inflation-adjusted terms, forcing more students to rely on 
        student loans to finance the cost of a higher education;
            (5) from 1992 to 1998, the demand for student loans soared 
        82 percent and the average student loan increased 367 percent;
            (6) according to the Department of Education, there is 
        approximately $150,000,000,000 in outstanding student loan 
        debt, and students borrowed more during the 1990's than during 
        the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's combined; and
            (7) in Congress, proposals have been made to address the 
        rising cost of tuition and mounting student debt, including a 
        bipartisan proposal to provide a deduction for tuition paid and 
        a credit for interest paid on student loans.
    (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the levels 
in this resolution and legislation enacted pursuant to this resolution 
assume that any tax cut package reported by the Finance Committee and 
passed by Congress during the fiscal year 2001 budget reconciliation 
process include tax relief for college tuition paid and for interest 
paid on student loans.

SEC. 304. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE NATIONAL 
              INSTITUTES OF HEALTH.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) the National Institutes of Health is the Nation's 
        foremost research center;
            (2) the Nation's commitment to and investment in biomedical 
        research has resulted in better health and an improved quality 
        of life for all Americans;
            (3) continued biomedical research funding must be ensured 
        so that medical doctors and scientists have the security to 
        commit to conducting long-term research studies;
            (4) funding for the National Institutes of Health should 
        continue to increase in order to prevent the cessation of 
        biomedical research studies and the loss of medical doctors and 
        research scientists to private research organizations; and
            (5) the National Institutes of Health conducts research 
        protocols without proprietary interests, thereby ensuring that 
        the best health care is researched and made available to the 
        Nation.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume increased funding in function 550 
(Health) for the National Institutes of Health of $2,700,000,000, 
reflecting the commitment made in the fiscal year 1998 Senate Budget 
Resolution to double the National Institute of Health budget by 2003.

SEC. 305. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING FUNDING LEVELS IN EDUCATIONAL 
              OPPORTUNITIES ACT.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this resolution 
assume that of the amounts provided for elementary and secondary 
education within the Budget Function 500 of this resolution for fiscal 
years 2001 through 2005, such funds shall be appropriated in proportion 
to and in accordance with the levels authorized in the Educational 
Opportunities Act, S. 2.

SEC. 306. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ADDITIONAL BUDGETARY RESOURCES.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) In its review of government operations, the General 
        Accounting Office noted that it was unable to determine the 
        extent of improper government payments, due to the poor quality 
        of agency accounting practices. In particular, the General 
        Accounting Office cited the Government's inability to--
                    (A) ``properly account for and report billions of 
                dollars of property, equipment, materials, and supplies 
                and certain stewardship assets''; and
                    (B) ``properly prepare the Federal Government's 
                financial statements, including balancing the 
                statements, accounting for billions of dollars of 
                transactions between governmental entities, and 
                properly and consistently compiling the information in 
                the financial statements.''.
            (2) Private economic forecasters are currently more 
        optimistic than the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Blue 
        Chip expects 2000 real GDP growth of 4.1 percent, whereas the 
        Congressional Budget Office expects 3.3 percent growth. From 
        1999 through 2005, Blue Chip expects real GDP to grow more than 
        0.3 percentage points faster per year than the Congressional 
        Budget Office does. Using budgetary rules of thumb, this latter 
        difference translates into more than $150,000,000,000 over the 
        5-year budget window.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels contained in this resolution assume that--
            (1) there are billions of dollars in wasted expenditures in 
        the Federal Government that should be eliminated; and
            (2) higher projected budget surpluses arising from 
        reductions in government waste and stronger revenue inflows 
        could be used in the future for additional tax relief or debt 
        reduction.

SEC. 307. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON REGARDING THE INADEQUACY OF THE 
              PAYMENTS FOR SKILLED NURSING CARE.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) Congress confronted and addressed the funding crisis 
        for medicare beneficiaries requiring skilled nursing care 
        through the Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999;
            (2) Congress recognized the need to address the inadequacy 
        of the prospective payment system for certain levels of care, 
        as well as the need to end arbitrary limits on rehabilitative 
        therapies. Congress restored $2,700,000,000 to reduce access 
        threats to skilled care for medicare beneficiaries; and
            (3) Currently, more than 1,600 skilled nursing facilities 
        caring for more than 175,000 frail and elderly Americans have 
        filed for bankruptcy protection.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that--
            (1) the Administration should identify areas where they 
        have the authority to make changes to improve quality, 
        including analyzing and fixing the labor component of the 
        skilled nursing facility market basket update factor; and
            (2) while Congress deliberates funding structural medicare 
        reform and the addition of a prescription drug benefit, it must 
        maintain the continued viability of the current skilled nursing 
        benefit. Therefore, the committees of jurisdiction should 
        ensure that medicare beneficiaries requiring skilled nursing 
        care have access to that care and that those providers have the 
        resources to meet the expectation for high quality care.

SEC. 308. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE CARA PROGRAMS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this resolution 
assume that, if the Congress and the President so choose, the following 
programs can be fully funded as discretionary programs in fiscal year 
2001, including--
            (1) the Land and Water Conservation Fund programs;
            (2) the Federal aid to Wildlife Fund;
            (3) the Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Grants;
            (4) the National Historic Preservation Fund;
            (5) the Payment in Lieu of Taxes; and
            (6) the North American Wetlands Conservation Act.

SEC. 309. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON VETERAN'S MEDICAL CARE.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) this budget addresses concerns about Veteran's medical 
        care;
            (2) we successfully increased the appropriation for 
        Veteran's medical care by $1,700,000,000 last year, although 
        the President had proposed no increase in funding in his 
        budget; and
            (3) this year's budget proposes to increase the Veteran's 
        medical care appropriation by $1,400,000,000, the level of 
        funding in the President's budget.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume an increase of $1,400,000,000 in 
Veteran's medical care appropriations in fiscal year 2001.

SEC. 310. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPACT AID.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) the Impact Aid, as created by Congress in 1950, 
        fulfills a Federal obligation to local educational agencies 
        impacted by a Federal presence;
            (2) the Impact Aid provides funds to these local 
        educational agencies to help them meet the basic educational 
        needs of all their children, particularly the needs of 
        transient military dependent students, Native American 
        children, and students from low-income housing projects; and
            (3) the Impact Aid is funded at a level less than what is 
        required to fully fund ``all'' federally connected local 
        educational agencies.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that the Impact Aid Program strive to 
reach the goal that all local educational agencies eligible for Impact 
Aid receive at a minimum, 40 percent of their maximum payment under 
sections 8002 and 8003.

SEC. 311. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FUNDING FOR INCREASED ACREAGE UNDER 
              THE CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM AND THE WETLANDS RESERVE 
              PROGRAM.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and the Wetlands 
        Reserve Program (WRP) have been successful, voluntary, 
        incentive-based endeavors that over the last decade and a half 
        have turned millions of acres of marginal cropland into 
        reserves that protect wildlife in the United States, provide 
        meaningful income to farmers and ranchers (especially in 
        periods of collapsed commodity prices), and combat soil and 
        water erosion. CRP and WRP also provide increased opportunities 
        for hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities.
            (2) CRP provides landowners with technical and financial 
        assistance, including annual rental payments, in exchange for 
        removing environmentally sensitive farmland from production and 
        implementing conservation practices. Currently, CRP includes 
        around 31,300,000 acres in the United States.
            (3) Similarly, WRP offers technical and financial 
        assistance to landowners who select to restore wetlands. 
        Currently, WRP includes 785,000 acres nationwide.
            (4) Furthermore, bipartisan legislation has been introduced 
        in the 106th Congress to increase the acreage permitted under 
        both CRP and WRP. The Administration also supports raising the 
        acreage limitations in both programs.
            (5) Unfortunately, both CRP and WRP may soon become victims 
        of their own success and their respective statutory acreage 
        limitations unless Congress acts. Given the popularity and 
        demand for these conservation programs, the statutory acreage 
        limitations will likely exhaust resources available to 
        producers who want to participate in CRP or WRP. As currently 
        authorized, CRP has an enrollment cap of 36,400,000 million 
        acres and WRP is limited at 975,000 acres. As of October 1, 
        1999, enrollment in CRP stood at approximately 31,300,000 
        million acres and enrollment in WRP at just over 785,000 acres.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that Congress and the Administration 
should take steps to raise the acreage limits of the CRP and WRP in 
order to make these programs available to aid the preservation and 
conservation of sensitive natural soil and water resources without 
negatively effecting rural communities. Further, such actions should 
help improve farm income for agricultural producers and restore 
prosperity and growth to rural sectors of the United States.

SEC. 312. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON TAX SIMPLIFICATION.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
            (1) the tax code has become increasingly complex, 
        undermining confidence in the system, and often undermining the 
        principles of simplicity, efficiency, and equity;
            (2) some have estimated that the resources required to keep 
        records and file returns already cost American families an 
        additional 10 percent to 20 percent over what they actually pay 
        in income taxes; and
            (3) if it is to enact a greatly simplified tax code, 
        Congress should have a thorough understanding of the problem as 
        well as specific proposals to consider.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that the Joint Committee on Taxation 
shall develop a report and alternative proposals on tax simplification 
by the end of the year, and the Department of the Treasury is requested 
to develop a report and alternative proposals on tax simplification by 
the end of the year.

SEC. 313. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT BY THE 
              DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 
              REGARDING AGRICULTURE MERGERS AND ANTICOMPETITIVE 
              ACTIVITY.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
            (1) the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice is 
        charged with the civil and criminal enforcement of the 
        antitrust laws, including the review of corporate mergers 
        likely to reduce competition in particular markets, with a goal 
        of protecting the competitive process;
            (2) the Bureau of Competition of the Federal Trade 
        Commission is also charged with enforcement of the antitrust 
        laws, including the review of corporate mergers likely to 
        reduce competition;
            (3) the Antitrust Division and the Bureau of Competition 
        are also responsible for the prosecution of companies and 
        individuals who engage in anti-competitive behavior and unfair 
        trade practices;
            (4) the number of merger filings under the Hart-Scott-
        Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, which the Department 
        of Justice, in conjunction with the Federal Trade Commission, 
        is required to review, has increased significantly in fiscal 
        years 1998 and 1999;
            (5) large agri-businesses have constituted part of this 
        trend in mergers and acquisitions;
            (6) farmers and small agricultural producers are 
        experiencing one of the worst periods of economic downturn in 
        years;
            (7) farmers currently get less than a quarter of every 
        retail food dollar, down from nearly half of every retail food 
        dollar in 1952;
            (8) the top 4 beef packers presently control 80 percent of 
        the market, the top 4 pork producers control 57 percent of the 
        market, and the largest sheep processors and poultry processors 
        control 73 percent and 55 percent of the market, respectively;
            (9) the 4 largest grain processing companies presently 
        account for approximately 62 percent of the Nation's flour 
        milling, and the 4 largest firms control approximately 75 
        percent of the wet corn milling and soybean crushing industry;
            (10) farmers and small, independent producers are concerned 
        about the substantial increase in concentration in the 
        agriculture industry and significantly diminished opportunities 
        in the marketplace; and
            (11) farmers and small, independent producers are also 
        concerned about possible anticompetitive behavior and unfair 
        business practices in the agriculture industry.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that--
            (1) the Antitrust Division and the Bureau of Competition 
        will have adequate resources to enable them to meet their 
        statutory requirements, including those related to reviewing 
        increasingly numerous and complex mergers and investigating and 
        prosecuting anticompetitive business activity; and
            (2) these departments will--
                    (A) dedicate considerable resources to matters and 
                transactions dealing with agri-business antitrust and 
                competition; and
                    (B) ensure that all vertical and horizontal mergers 
                implicating agriculture and all complaints regarding 
                possible anticompetitive business practices in the 
                agriculture industry will receive extraordinary 
                scrutiny.

SEC. 314. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING FAIR MARKETS FOR AMERICAN 
              FARMERS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) United States agricultural producers are the most 
        efficient and competitive in the world;
            (2) United States agricultural producers are at a 
        competitive disadvantage in the world market because the 
        European Union outspends the United States (on a dollar/acre 
        basis) by a ratio of 10:1 on domestic support and by a ratio of 
        60:1 on export subsidies;
            (3) the support the European Union gives their producers 
        results in more prosperous rural communities in Europe than in 
        the United States;
            (4) the European Union blocked consensus at the World Trade 
        Organization ministerial meeting in Seattle because Europe does 
        not want to surrender its current advantage in world markets;
            (5) despite the competitiveness of American farmers, the 
        European advantage has led to a declining United States share 
        of the world market for agricultural products;
            (6) the United States Department of Agriculture reports 
        that United States export growth has lagged behind that of our 
        major competitors, resulting in a loss of United States market 
        share, from 24 percent in 1981 to its current level of 18 
        percent;
            (7) the United States Department of Agriculture also 
        reports that United States market share of global agricultural 
        trade has eroded steadily over the past 2 decades, which could 
        culminate in the United States losing out to the European Union 
        as the world's top agricultural exporter sometime in 2000;
            (8) prices of agricultural commodities in the United States 
        are at 50-year lows in real terms, creating a serious economic 
        crisis in rural America; and
            (9) fundamental fairness requires that the playing field be 
        leveled so that United States farmers are no longer at a 
        competitive disadvantage.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that--
            (1) the United States should take steps to increase support 
        for American farmers in order to level the playing field for 
        United States agricultural producers and increase the leverage 
        of the United States in World Trade Organization negotiations 
        on agriculture as long as such support is not trade distorting, 
        and does not otherwise exceed or impair existing Uruguay Round 
        obligations; and
            (2) such actions should improve United States farm income 
        and restore the prosperity of rural communities.

SEC. 315. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON WOMEN AND SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) without Social Security benefits, the elderly poverty 
        rate among women would have been 52.2 percent, and among widows 
        would have been 60.6 percent;
            (2) women tend to live longer and tend to have lower 
        lifetime earnings than men do;
            (3) during their working years, women earn an average of 70 
        cents for every dollar men earn; and
            (4) women spend an average of 11.5 years out of their 
        careers to care for their families, and are more likely to work 
        part-time than full-time.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that--
            (1) women face unique obstacles in ensuring retirement 
        security and survivor and disability stability;
            (2) Social Security plays an essential role in guaranteeing 
        inflation-protected financial stability for women throughout 
        their old age;
            (3) the Congress and the Administration should act, as part 
        of Social Security reform, to ensure that widows and other poor 
        elderly women receive more adequate benefits that reduce their 
        poverty rates and that women, under whatever approach is taken 
        to reform Social Security, should receive no lesser a share of 
        overall federally funded retirement benefits than they receive 
        today; and
            (4) the sacrifice that women make to care for their family 
        should be recognized during reform of Social Security and that 
        women should not be penalized by taking an average of 11.5 
        years out of their careers to care for their family.

SEC. 316. PROTECTION OF BATTERED WOMEN AND CHILDREN.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
            (1) Each year an estimated 1,000,000 women suffer nonfatal 
        violence by an intimate partner.
            (2) Nearly 1 out of 3 adult women can expect to experience 
        at least 1 physical assault by a partner during adulthood.
            (3) Domestic violence is statistically consistent across 
        racial and ethnic lines. It does not discriminate based on race 
        or economic status.
            (4) The chance of being victimized by an intimate partner 
        is 10 times greater for a woman than a man.
            (5) Past and current victims of domestic violence are over-
        represented in the welfare population. It is estimated that at 
        least 60 percent of current welfare beneficiaries have 
        experienced some form of domestic violence.
            (6) Abused women who do seek employment face barriers as a 
        result of domestic violence. Welfare studies show that 15 to 50 
        percent of abused women report interference from their partner 
        with education, training, or employment.
            (7) The programs established by the Violence Against Women 
        Act of 1994 have empowered communities to address the threat 
        caused by domestic violence.
            (8) Since 1995, Congress has appropriated close to 
        $1,800,000,000 to fund programs established by the Violence 
        Against Women Act of 1994, including the STOP program, shelters 
        for battered women and children, the domestic violence hotline, 
        and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention injury control 
        programs.
            (9) The programs established by the Violence Against Women 
        Act of 1994 have been and continue to comprise a successful 
        national strategy for addressing the needs of battered women 
        and the public health threat caused by this violence.
            (10) The Supreme Court could act during this session to 
        overturn a major protection and course of action provided for 
        in the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. In United States v. 
        Morrison/Brzonkala, the Supreme Court will address the issue of 
        the constitutionality of the Federal civil rights remedy under 
        the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and may overturn 
        congressional intent to elevate violence against women to a 
        category protected under Federal civil rights law.
            (11) The actions taken by the courts and the failure to 
        reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 has 
        generated a great deal of concern in communities nationwide.
            (12) Funding for the programs established by the Violence 
        Against Women Act of 1994 is the only lifeline for battered 
        women and Congress has a moral obligation to continue funding 
        and to strengthen key components of the Violence Against Women 
        Act of 1994.
            (13) Congress and the Administration should work to ensure 
        the continued funding of programs established by the Violence 
        Against Women Act of 1994.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that, in light of the pending 
litigation challenging the constitutionality of the Federal civil 
rights remedy in the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and the lack of 
action on legislation reauthorizing and strengthening the provisions of 
that Act--
            (1) Congress, through reauthorization of the programs 
        established by the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, should 
work to eliminate economic barriers that trap women and children in 
violent homes and relationships; and
            (2) full funding for the programs established by the 
        Violence Against Women Act of 1994 will be provided from the 
        Violent Crime Reduction Fund.

SEC. 317. USE OF FALSE CLAIMS ACT IN COMBATTING MEDICARE FRAUD.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) the solvency of the medicare trust funds is of vital 
        importance to the well-being of the Nation's seniors and other 
        vulnerable people in need of quality health care;
            (2) fraud against the medicare trust funds is a major 
        problem resulting in the depletion of the trust funds; and
            (3) chapter 37 of title 31, United States Code (commonly 
        referred to as the False Claims Act) and the qui tam provisions 
        of that chapter are vital tools in combatting fraud against the 
        medicare program.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that chapter 37 of title 31, United 
States Code (commonly referred to as the False Claims Act) and the qui 
tam provisions of that chapter are essential tools in combatting 
medicare fraud and should not be weakened in any way.

SEC. 318. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE NATIONAL GUARD.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) the Army National Guard relies heavily upon thousands 
        of full-time employees, Military Technicians and Active Guard/
        Reserves, to ensure unit readiness throughout the Army National 
        Guard;
            (2) these employees perform vital day-to-day functions, 
        ranging from equipment maintenance to leadership and staff 
        roles, that allow the drill weekends and annual active duty 
        training of the traditional Guardsmen to be dedicated to 
        preparation for the National Guard's warfighting and peacetime 
        missions;
            (3) when the ability to provide sufficient Active Guard/
        Reserves and Technicians end strength is reduced, unit 
        readiness, as well as quality of life for soldiers and families 
        is degraded;
            (4) the Army National Guard, with agreement from the 
        Department of Defense, requires a minimum essential requirement 
        of 23,500 Active Guard/Reserves and 25,500 Technicians; and
            (5) the fiscal year 2001 budget request for the Army 
        National Guard provides resources sufficient for approximately 
        22,430 Active Guard/Reserves and 23,957 Technicians, end 
        strength shortfalls of 1,052 and 1,543, respectively.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.-- It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in the resolution assume that the Department of Defense will 
give priority to funding the Active Guard/Reserves and Military 
Technicians at levels authorized by Congress in the fiscal year 2000 
Department of Defense authorization bill.

SEC. 319. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING MILITARY READINESS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) the Secretary of the Air Force stated that the United 
        States Air Force's top unfunded readiness priority for fiscal 
        year 2000 was its aircraft spares and repair parts account and 
        top Air Force officers have said that getting more spares is a 
        top priority to improve readiness rates;
            (2) the Chief of Naval Operations stated that the aircraft 
        spares and repair parts account for a top readiness priority 
        important to the long-term health of the Navy;
            (3) the General Accounting Office's study of personnel 
        retention problems in the armed services cited shortages of 
        spares and repair parts as a major reason why people are 
        leaving the services;
            (4) the fiscal year 2001 budget request decreases the Air 
        Force's spares and repair parts account by 13 percent from 
        fiscal year 2000 expected levels; and
            (5) the fiscal year 2001 budget request decreases the 
        Navy's spares and repair parts account by 6 percent from the 
        fiscal year 2000 expected levels.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
functional totals in the budget resolution assume that Congress will 
protect the Department of Defense's readiness accounts, including 
spares and repair parts, and operations and maintenance, and use the 
requested levels as the minimum baseline for fiscal year 2001 
authorization and appropriations.

SEC. 320. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON COMPENSATION FOR THE CHINESE EMBASSY 
              BOMBING IN BELGRADE.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this resolution 
assume funds designated to compensate the People's Republic of China 
for the damage inadvertently done to their embassy in Belgrade by NATO 
forces in May 1999, should not be appropriated from the international 
affairs budget.

SEC. 321. SENSE OF THE SENATE SUPPORTING FUNDING OF DIGITAL OPPORTUNITY 
              INITIATIVES.

    (a) The Senate finds that--
            (1) computers, the Internet, and information networks are 
        not luxury items but basic tools largely responsible for 
        driving the current economic expansions;
            (2) information technology utility relies on software 
        applications and online content;
            (3) access to computers and the Internet and the ability to 
        use this technology effectively is becoming increasingly 
        important for full participation in America's economic, 
        political, and social life; and
            (4) unequal access to technology and high-tech skills by 
        income, educational level, race, and geography could deepen and 
        reinforce the divisions that exist within American society.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that the Committees on Appropriations 
and Finance should support efforts that address the digital divide, 
including tax incentives and funding to--
            (1) broaden access to information technologies;
            (2) provide workers and teachers with information 
        technology training;
            (3) promote innovative online content and software 
        applications that will improve commerce, education, and quality 
        of life; and
            (4) help provide information and communications technology 
        to underserved communities.

SEC. 322. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING IMMUNIZATION FUNDING.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) vaccines protect children and adults against serious 
        and potentially fatal diseases;
            (2) society saves up to $24 in medical and societal costs 
        for every dollar spent on vaccines;
            (3) every day, 11,000 babies are born--4,000,000 each 
        year--and each child needs up to 19 doses of vaccine by age 2;
            (4) approximately 1,000,000 2-year-olds have not received 
        all of the recommended vaccine doses;
            (5) the immunization program under section 317(j)(1) under 
        the Public Health Service Act, administered by the Centers for 
        Disease Control and Prevention, provides grants to States and 
        localities for critical activities including immunization 
        registries, outbreak control, provider education, outreach 
        efforts, and linkages with other public health and welfare 
        services;
            (6) Federal grants to States and localities for these 
        activities have declined from $27l,000,000 in 1995 to 
        $139,000,000 in 2000;
            (7) because of these funding reductions States are 
        struggling to maintain immunization rates and have implemented 
        severe cuts to immunization delivery activities;
            (8) even with significant gains in national immunization 
        rates, underimmunized children still exist and there are a 
        number of subpopulations where coverage rates remain low and 
        are actually declining;
            (9) rates in many of the Nation's urban areas, including 
        Chicago and Houston, are unacceptably low; and
            (10) these pockets of need create pools of susceptible 
        children and increase the risk of dangerous disease outbreaks.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in the resolution assume that Congress should enact legislation 
that provides $214,000,000 in funding for immunization grants under 
section 317 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247b) for 
infrastructure and delivery activities, including targeted support for 
immunization project areas with low or declining immunization rates or 
who have subpopulations with special needs.

SEC. 323. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING TAX CREDITS FOR SMALL 
              BUSINESSES PROVIDING HEALTH INSURANCE TO LOW-INCOME 
              EMPLOYEES.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) 25,000,000 workers in the United States were uninsured 
        in 1997 and more than two-thirds of the uninsured workers earn 
        less than $20,000 annually, according to a Henry J. Kaiser 
        Family Foundation report;
            (2) the percentage of employees of small businesses who 
        have employer-sponsored health insurance coverage decreased 
        from 52 percent in 1996 to 47 percent in 1998; for the smallest 
        employers, those with 3 to 9 workers, the percentage of 
        employees covered by employer-sponsored health insurance fell 
        from 36 percent in 1996 to 31 percent in 1998;
            (3) between 1996 and 1998, health premiums for small 
        businesses increased 5.2 percent; premiums increased by 8 
        percent for the smallest employers, the highest increase among 
        all small businesses;
            (4) monthly family coverage for workers at firms with 3 to 
        9 employees cost $520 in 1998, compared to $462 for family 
        coverage for workers at large firms; and
            (5) only 39 percent of small businesses with a significant 
        percentage of low-income employees offer employer-provided 
        health insurance and such companies are half as likely to offer 
        health benefits to such employees as are companies that have 
        only a small percentage of low-income employees.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that Congress should enact legislation 
that allows small businesses to claim a tax credit when they provide 
health insurance to low-income employees.

SEC. 324. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FUNDING FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) our success in the fight against crime and improvements 
        in the administration of justice are the result of a bipartisan 
        effort; and
            (2) since 1993 the Congress and the President have 
        increased justice funding by 92 percent, and a strong 
        commitment to law enforcement and the administration of justice 
        remains appropriate.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that funds to improve the justice 
system will be available as follows:
            (1) $665,000,000 for the expanded support of direct Federal 
        enforcement, adjudicative, and correctional-detention 
        activities.
            (2) $50,000,000 in additional funds to combat terrorism, 
        including cyber crime.
            (3) $41,000,000 in additional funds for construction costs 
        for the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Federal Law 
        Enforcement Training Center.
            (4) $200,000,000 in support of Customs and Immigration and 
        Nationalization Service port of entry officers for the 
        development and implementation of the ACE computer system 
        designed to meet critical trade and border security needs.
            (5) Funding is available for the continuation of such 
        programs as: the Byrne Grant Program, Violence Against Women, 
        Juvenile Accountability Block Grants, First Responder Training, 
        Local Law Enforcement Block Grants, Weed and Seed, Violent 
        Offender Incarceration and Truth in Sentencing, State Criminal 
        Alien Assistance Program, Drug Courts, Residential Substance 
        Abuse Treatment, Crime Identification Technologies, Bulletproof 
        Vests, Counterterrorism, Interagency Law Enforcement 
        Coordination.

SEC. 325. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE PELL GRANT.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) public investment in higher education yields a return 
        of several dollars for each dollar invested;
            (2) higher education promotes economic opportunity for 
        individuals; for example recipients of bachelor's degrees earn 
        an average of 75 percent per year more than those with high 
        school diplomas and experience half as much unemployment as 
        high school graduates;
            (3) access to a college education has become a hallmark of 
        American society, and is vital to upholding our belief in 
        equality of opportunity;
            (4) for a generation, the Federal Pell Grant has served as 
        an established and effective means of providing access to 
        higher education;
            (5) over the past decade, Pell Grant has failed to keep up 
        with inflation. Over the past 25 years, the value of the 
        average Pell Grant has decreased by 23 percent--it is now worth 
        only 77 percent of what Pell Grants were worth in 1975;
            (6) grant aid as a portion of student aid has fallen 
        significantly over the past 5 years. Grant aid used to comprise 
        55 percent of total aid awarded and loans comprised just over 
        40 percent. Now that trend has been reversed so that loans 
        comprise nearly 60 percent of total aid awarded and grants only 
        comprise 40 percent of total aid awarded;
            (7) the percentage of freshmen attending public and private 
        4-year institutions from families whose income is below the 
        national median has fallen since 1981.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that within the discretionary 
allocation provided to the Committee on Appropriations, the funding for 
the maximum Pell Grant award should be at or above the level requested 
by the President.

SEC. 326. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING COMPREHENSIVE PUBLIC EDUCATION 
              REFORM.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) Recent scientific evidence demonstrates that enhancing 
        children's physical, social, emotional, and intellectual 
        development before the age of 6 results in tremendous benefits 
        throughout life.
            (2) Successful schools are led by well-trained, highly 
        qualified principals, but many principals do not get the 
        training in management skills that the principals need to 
        ensure their school provides an excellent education for every 
        child.
            (3) Good teachers are a crucial catalyst to quality 
        education, but 1 in 4 new teachers do not meet State 
        certification requirements; each year more than 50,000 
        underprepared teachers enter the classroom; and 12 percent of 
        new teachers have had no teacher training at all.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that the Federal Government should 
support State and local educational agencies engaged in comprehensive 
reform of their public education system and that any public education 
reform should include at least the following principles:
            (1) Every child should begin school ready to learn.
            (2) Training and development for principals and teachers 
        should be a priority.

SEC. 327. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON PROVIDING ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR UNITED 
              STATES INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--
            (1) United States international leadership is essential to 
        maintaining security and peace for all Americans;
            (2) such leadership depends on effective diplomacy as well 
        as a strong military;
            (3) effective diplomacy requires adequate resources both 
        for operations and security of United States embassies and for 
        international programs;
            (4) in addition to building peace, prosperity, and 
        democracy around the world, programs in the International 
        Affairs (150) budget serve United States interests by ensuring 
        better jobs and a higher standard of living, promoting the 
        health of our citizens and preserving our natural environment, 
        and protecting the rights and safety of those who travel or do 
        business overseas;
            (5) real spending for International Affairs has declined 
        more than 40 percent since the mid-1980's, at the same time 
        that major new challenges and opportunities have arisen from 
        the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the worldwide trends 
        toward democracy and free markets;
            (6) current ceilings on discretionary spending will impose 
        severe additional cuts in funding for International Affairs;
            (7) improved security for United States diplomatic missions 
        and personnel will place further strain on the International 
        Affairs budget absent significant additional resources;
            (8) the United States cannot reduce efforts to safeguard 
        nuclear materials in the former Soviet States or shortchange 
        initiatives aimed at maintaining stability on the Korean 
        peninsula, where 37,000 United States forces are deployed. We 
        cannot reduce support for peace in the Middle East or in 
        Northern Ireland or in the Balkans. We cannot stop fighting 
        terror or simply surrender to the spread of HIV/AIDS. We must 
        continue to support all of these things, which are difficult to 
        achieve without adequate and realistic funding levels; and
            (9) the President's request for funds for fiscal year 2001 
        would adequately finance our International Affairs programs 
        without detracting from our defense and domestic needs. It 
        would help keep America prosperous and secure. It would enable 
        us to leverage the contributions of allies and friends on 
        behalf of democracy and peace. It would allow us to protect the 
        interests of Americans who travel, study, or do business 
        overseas. It would do all these things and more for about 1 
        penny of every dollar the Federal Government spends.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that additional budgetary resources 
should be identified for function 150 to enable successful United 
States international leadership.

SEC. 328. SENSE OF THE SENATE CONCERNING THE HIV/AIDS CRISIS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) More than 16,000,000 people have been killed by 
        Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) since the epidemic 
        began.
            (2) 14,000,000 Africans have died as a result of the AIDS 
        epidemic. Eighty-four percent of the worldwide deaths from AIDS 
        have occurred in sub-Saharan Africa.
            (3) Each day, AIDS kills 5,500 Africans, and infects 11,000 
        more.
            (4) By the end of 2000, 10,400,000 children in sub-Saharan 
        Africa will have lost one or both parents, to AIDS.
            (5) Over 85 percent of the world's HIV-positive children 
        live in Africa.
            (6) Fewer than 5 percent of those living with AIDS in 
        Africa have access to even the most basic care.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
            (1) the functional totals underlying this resolution on the 
        budget assume that Congress has recognized the catastrophic 
        effects of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, particularly in Sub-Saharan 
        Africa, and seeks to maximize the effectiveness of the United 
        States' efforts to combat the disease through any necessary 
        authorization or appropriations;
            (2) Congress should strengthen ongoing programs which 
        address education and prevention, testing, the care of AIDS 
        orphans, and improving home and community-based care options 
        for those living with AIDS; and
            (3) Congress should seek additional or new tools to combat 
        the epidemic, including initiatives to encourage vaccine 
        development and programs aimed at preventing mother-to-child 
        transmission of the disease.

SEC. 329. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING TRIBAL COLLEGES.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
            (1) More than 26,500 students from 250 tribes nationwide 
        attend tribal colleges. The colleges serve students of all 
        ages, many of whom are moving from welfare to work. The vast 
        majority of tribal college students are first-generation 
        college students.
            (2) While annual appropriations for tribal colleges have 
        increased modestly in recent years, core operation funding 
        levels are still about half of the $6,000 per Indian student 
        level authorized by the Tribally Controlled College or 
        University Act.
            (3) Although tribal colleges received a $3,000,000 increase 
        in funding in fiscal year 2000, because of rising student 
        populations and other factors, these institutions may face an 
        actual per-student decrease in funding over fiscal year 1999.
            (4) Per-student funding for tribal colleges is roughly half 
        the amount given to mainstream community colleges.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
levels in this resolution assume that--
            (1) the Senate recognizes the funding difficulties faced by 
        tribal colleges and assumes that priority consideration will be 
        provided to them through funding for the Tribally Controlled 
        College and University Act, the 1994 Land Grant Institutions, 
        and title III of the Higher Education Act; and
            (2) such priority consideration reflects Congress' intent 
        to continue work toward current statutory Federal funding goals 
        for the tribal colleges.