[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 39 (Monday, April 3, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2041-S2050]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S2041]]
   SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 101--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

  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 on 
March 31, 2000:

                            S. Con. Res. 101

       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

[[Page S2042]]

     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:

[[Page S2043]]

       (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

[[Page S2044]]

     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.

[[Page S2045]]

       (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

[[Page S2046]]

     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--

[[Page S2047]]

       (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

[[Page S2048]]

     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

[[Page S2049]]

     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;

[[Page S2050]]

       (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.

                          ____________________