[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 126 (Thursday, July 25, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H7398-H7409]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     BIPARTISAN BUDGET ACT OF 2019

  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 519, I call up 
the bill (H.R. 3877) to amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985, to establish a congressional budget for fiscal 
years 2020 and 2021, to temporarily suspend the debt limit, and for 
other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 519, the bill 
is considered read.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3877

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Bipartisan Budget Act of 
     2019''.

                      TITLE I--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 101. AMENDMENTS TO THE BALANCED BUDGET AND EMERGENCY 
                   DEFICIT CONTROL ACT OF 1985.

       (a) Revised Discretionary Spending Limits.--Section 251(c) 
     of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(c)) is amended by striking paragraphs (7) 
     and (8) and inserting the following:
       ``(7) for fiscal year 2020--
       ``(A) for the revised security category, $666,500,000,000 
     in new budget authority; and
       ``(B) for the revised nonsecurity category, 
     $621,500,000,000 in new budget authority; and
       ``(8) for fiscal year 2021--
       ``(A) for the revised security category, $671,500,000,000 
     in new budget authority; and
       ``(B) for the revised nonsecurity category, 
     $626,500,000,000 in new budget authority;''.
       (b) Overseas Contingency Operations Amounts.--In fiscal 
     years 2020 and 2021, the adjustments under section 
     251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)(A)) for Overseas 
     Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism appropriations 
     will be as follows:
       (1) For the revised nonsecurity category--
       (A) for fiscal year 2020, $8,000,000,000; and
       (B) for fiscal year 2021, $8,000,000,000.
       (2) For the revised security category--
       (A) for fiscal year 2020, $71,500,000,000; and
       (B) for fiscal year 2021, $69,000,000,000.
     This subsection shall not affect the applicability of section 
     251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.
       (c) New Adjustment for the U.S. Census for 2020.--Section 
     251(b)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subparagraph:

[[Page H7399]]

       ``(G) The 2020 census.--If, for fiscal year 2020, 
     appropriations for the Periodic Censuses and Programs account 
     of the Bureau of the Census of the Department of Commerce are 
     enacted that the Congress designates in statute as being for 
     the 2020 Census, then the adjustment for that fiscal year 
     shall be the total of such appropriations for that fiscal 
     year designated as being for the 2020 Census, but shall not 
     exceed $2,500,000,000.''.
       (d) Direct Spending Adjustments for Fiscal Years 2020 and 
     2021.--Section 251A of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901a), is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5)(B), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by striking ``and (12)'' and inserting ``(12), and 
     (13)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) Implementing direct spending reductions for fiscal 
     years 2020 and 2021.--(A) OMB shall make the calculations 
     necessary to implement the direct spending reductions 
     calculated pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (4) without regard 
     to the amendment made to section 251(c) revising the 
     discretionary spending limits for fiscal years 2020 and 2021 
     by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019.
       ``(B) Paragraph (5)(B) shall not be implemented for fiscal 
     years 2020 and 2021.''.

     SEC. 102. BALANCES ON THE PAYGO SCORECARDS.

       Effective on the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     balances on the PAYGO scorecards established pursuant to 
     paragraphs (4) and (5) of section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-
     As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(d)) shall be zero.

             TITLE II--ESTABLISHING A CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET

     SEC. 201. ADJUSTMENT AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET 
                   RESOLUTION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

       Upon the date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) the Chair of the Committee on the Budget of the House 
     of Representatives may adjust the allocations, aggregates, 
     and other budgetary levels included in the statement referred 
     to in section 1(b) of House Resolution 293 (116th Congress) 
     consistent with this Act; and
       (2) subsections (e), (f), and (g) of section 1 of House 
     Resolution 293 (116th Congress) shall have no force or effect 
     through the remainder of the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

     SEC. 202. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN 
                   THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2021.--If a concurrent resolution on the 
     budget for fiscal year 2021 has not been adopted by April 15, 
     2020, for the purpose of enforcing the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974 for fiscal year 2021, the allocations, 
     aggregates, and levels provided for in subsection (b) shall 
     apply in the House of Representatives after April 15, 2020, 
     in the same manner as for a concurrent resolution on the 
     budget for fiscal year 2021 with appropriate budgetary levels 
     for fiscal year 2021 and for fiscal years 2022 through 2030.
       (b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--In the 
     House of Representatives, the Chair of the Committee on the 
     Budget shall submit a statement for publication in the 
     Congressional Record after April 15, 2020, but not later than 
     May 15, 2020, containing--
       (1) for the Committee on Appropriations, committee 
     allocations for fiscal year 2021 consistent with 
     discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c)(8) 
     of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985, as amended by this Act, and the outlays flowing 
     therefrom, and committee allocations for fiscal year 2021 for 
     current law mandatory budget authority and outlays, for the 
     purpose of enforcing section 302 of the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974;
       (2) for all committees of the House of Representatives 
     other than the Committee on Appropriations, committee 
     allocations for fiscal year 2021 and for the period of fiscal 
     years 2021 through 2030 consistent with the most recent 
     baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as adjusted, to 
     the extent practicable, for the budgetary effects of any 
     provision of law enacted during the period beginning on the 
     date such baseline is issued and ending on the date of 
     submission of such statement, for the purpose of enforcing 
     section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974;
       (3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2021 in 
     accordance with the allocations established under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and
       (4) aggregate revenue levels for fiscal year 2021 and for 
     the period of fiscal years 2021 through 2030 consistent with 
     the most recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, 
     as adjusted, to the extent practicable, for the budgetary 
     effects of any provision of law enacted during the period 
     beginning on the date such baseline is issued and ending on 
     the date of submission of such statement, for the purpose of 
     enforcing section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974.
       (c) Additional Matter.--The statement referred to in 
     subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2021 the 
     matter contained in the provisions referred to in subsection 
     (e).
       (d) Adjustments.--The Chair of the Committee on the Budget 
     of the House of Representatives may adjust the allocations, 
     aggregates, and other budgetary levels included in the 
     statement referred to in subsection (b)--
       (1) to reflect changes resulting from the Congressional 
     Budget Office's updates to its baseline for fiscal years 2021 
     through 2030; or
       (2) for any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or 
     conference report by the amounts provided in such measure if 
     such measure would not increase the deficit for either of the 
     following time periods: fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2025 
     or fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2030.
       (e) Application.--
       (1) Upon submission of the statement referred to in 
     subsection (b), all references to allocations, aggregates, or 
     other appropriate levels in ``this concurrent resolution'' in 
     sections 5201, 5202, and 5203 of the House Concurrent 
     Resolution 71 (115th Congress), specified in section 
     30104(f)(1) of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, and 
     continued in effect by section 103(m) of House Resolution 6 
     (116th Congress) and section 1(h)(1) of House Resolution 293 
     (116th Congress), shall be treated for all purposes in the 
     House of Representatives as references to the allocations, 
     aggregates, or other appropriate levels contained in the 
     statement referred to in subsection (b), as adjusted in 
     accordance with this or any other Act.
       (2) The provisions of House Concurrent Resolution 71 (115th 
     Congress), specified in section 30104(f)(1) of the Bipartisan 
     Budget Act of 2018, shall have no force or effect in the 
     House of Representatives except for the sections of such 
     concurrent resolution identified in paragraph (1).
       (f) Expiration.--Subsections (a) through (e) shall no 
     longer apply if a concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2021 is agreed to by the Senate and House of 
     Representatives.

     SEC. 203. LIMITATION ON ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE HOUSE 
                   OF REPRESENTATIVES.

       (a) In General.--In the House of Representatives, except as 
     provided in subsection (b), any general appropriation bill or 
     bill or joint resolution continuing appropriations, or 
     amendment thereto or conference report thereon, may not 
     provide an advance appropriation.
       (b) Exceptions.--An advance appropriation may be provided 
     for programs, activities or accounts identified in lists 
     submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the 
     Chair of the Committee on the Budget--
       (1) for fiscal year 2022, under the heading ``Accounts 
     Identified for Advance Appropriations'' in an aggregate 
     amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority, 
     and for fiscal year 2023, accounts separately identified 
     under the same heading; and
       (2) for fiscal year 2022, under the heading ``Veterans 
     Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations''.
       (c) Definition.--The term ``advance appropriation'' means 
     any new discretionary budget authority provided in a general 
     appropriation bill or bill or joint resolution continuing 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2021, or any amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that first becomes available 
     following fiscal year 2021.
       (d) Expiration.--The preceding subsections of this section 
     shall expire if a concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2021 is agreed to by the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives pursuant to section 301 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974.

     SEC. 204. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN 
                   THE SENATE.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2020.--For the purpose of enforcing the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.) and 
     enforcing budgetary points of order in prior concurrent 
     resolutions on the budget, the allocations, aggregates, and 
     levels provided for in subsection (b) shall apply in the 
     Senate in the same manner as for a concurrent resolution on 
     the budget for fiscal year 2020 with appropriate budgetary 
     levels for fiscal year 2020 and for fiscal years 2021 through 
     2029.
       (b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--The 
     Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall 
     submit a statement for publication in the Congressional 
     Record as soon as practicable after the date of enactment of 
     this Act that includes--
       (1) for the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, 
     committee allocations for fiscal year 2020 consistent with 
     the discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c) 
     of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985, as amended by this Act, for the purpose of enforcing 
     section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 
     633);
       (2) for all committees other than the Committee on 
     Appropriations, committee allocations for fiscal years 2020, 
     2020 through 2024, and 2020 through 2029 consistent with the 
     May 2019 baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as 
     adjusted for the budgetary effects of any provision of law 
     enacted during the period beginning on the date such baseline 
     was issued and ending on the date of submission of such 
     statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633);
       (3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2020 in 
     accordance with the allocations established under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
       (4) aggregate revenue levels for fiscal years 2020, 2020 
     through 2024, and 2020 through 2029 consistent with the May 
     2019 baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as adjusted 
     for the budgetary effects of any provision of law enacted 
     during the period beginning on the date such baseline was 
     issued and ending on

[[Page H7400]]

     the date of submission of such statement, for the purpose of 
     enforcing section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     (2 U.S.C. 642); and
       (5) levels of Social Security revenues and outlays for 
     fiscal years 2020, 2020 through 2024, and 2020 through 2029 
     consistent with the May 2019 baseline of the Congressional 
     Budget Office, as adjusted for the budgetary effects of any 
     provision of law enacted during the period beginning on the 
     date such baseline was issued and ending on the date of 
     submission of such statement, for the purpose of enforcing 
     sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     (2 U.S.C. 633, 642).
       (c) Additional Matter.--The filing referred to in 
     subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2020 the 
     deficit-neutral reserve funds in title III of H. Con. Res. 71 
     (115th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2018, updated by two fiscal years.
       (d) Expiration.--This section shall expire if a concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2020 is agreed to by 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives pursuant to 
     section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 
     632).

     SEC. 205. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN 
                   THE SENATE.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2021.--For the purpose of enforcing the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.), 
     after April 15, 2020, and enforcing budgetary points of order 
     in prior concurrent resolutions on the budget, the 
     allocations, aggregates, and levels provided for in 
     subsection (b) shall apply in the Senate in the same manner 
     as for a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 
     2021 with appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2021 
     and for fiscal years 2022 through 2030.
       (b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--After 
     April 15, 2020, but not later than May 15, 2020, the Chairman 
     of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall file--
       (1) for the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, 
     committee allocations for fiscal year 2021 consistent with 
     the discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c) 
     of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985, as amended by this Act, for the purpose of enforcing 
     section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 
     633);
       (2) for all committees other than the Committee on 
     Appropriations, committee allocations for fiscal years 2021, 
     2021 through 2025, and 2021 through 2030 consistent with the 
     most recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as 
     adjusted for the budgetary effects of any provision of law 
     enacted during the period beginning on the date such baseline 
     is issued and ending on the date of submission of such 
     statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
       (3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2021 in 
     accordance with the allocations established under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
       (4) aggregate revenue levels for fiscal years 2021, 2021 
     through 2025, and 2021 through 2030 consistent with the most 
     recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office, as 
     adjusted for the budgetary effects of any provision of law 
     enacted during the period beginning on the date such baseline 
     is issued and ending on the date of submission of such 
     statement, for the purpose of enforcing section 311 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642); and
       (5) levels of Social Security revenues and outlays for 
     fiscal years 2021, 2021 through 2025, and 2021 through 2030 
     consistent with the most recent baseline of the Congressional 
     Budget Office, as adjusted for the budgetary effects of any 
     provision of law enacted during the period beginning on the 
     date such baseline is issued and ending on the date of 
     submission of such statement, for the purpose of enforcing 
     sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     (2 U.S.C. 633, 642).
       (c) Additional Matter.--The filing referred to in 
     subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2021 the 
     deficit-neutral reserve funds in title III of H. Con. Res. 71 
     (115th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2018, updated by three fiscal years.
       (d) Expiration.--This section shall expire if a concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2021 is agreed to by 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives pursuant to 
     section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 
     632).

     SEC. 206. LIMITATION ON ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE SENATE.

       (a) Point of Order Against Advance Appropriations in the 
     Senate.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Point of order.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     it shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill, 
     joint resolution, motion, amendment, amendment between the 
     Houses, or conference report that would provide an advance 
     appropriation for a discretionary account.
       (B) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``advance 
     appropriation'' means any new budget authority provided in a 
     bill or joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2020 that first becomes available for any fiscal year 
     after 2020 or any new budget authority provided in a bill or 
     joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2021 
     that first becomes available for any fiscal year after 2021.
       (2) Exceptions.--Advance appropriations may be provided--
       (A) for fiscal years 2021 and 2022 for programs, projects, 
     activities, or accounts identified in a statement submitted 
     to the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Committee 
     on the Budget of the Senate under the heading ``Accounts 
     Identified for Advance Appropriations'' in an aggregate 
     amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority 
     in each fiscal year;
       (B) for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; and
       (C) for the Department of Veterans Affairs for the Medical 
     Services, Medical Support and Compliance, Veterans Medical 
     Community Care, and Medical Facilities accounts of the 
     Veterans Health Administration.
       (3) Supermajority waiver and appeal.--
       (A) Waiver.--In the Senate, paragraph (1) may be waived or 
     suspended only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
     Members, duly chosen and sworn.
       (B) Appeal.--An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
     Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be 
     required to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a 
     point of order raised under paragraph (1).
       (4) Form of point of order.--A point of order under 
     paragraph (1) may be raised by a Senator as provided in 
     section 313(e) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 
     U.S.C. 644(e)).
       (5) Conference reports.--When the Senate is considering a 
     conference report on, or an amendment between the Houses in 
     relation to, a bill or joint resolution, upon a point of 
     order being made by any Senator pursuant to this subsection, 
     and such point of order being sustained, such material 
     contained in such conference report or amendment between the 
     Houses shall be stricken, and the Senate shall proceed to 
     consider the question of whether the Senate shall recede from 
     its amendment and concur with a further amendment, or concur 
     in the House amendment with a further amendment, as the case 
     may be, which further amendment shall consist of only that 
     portion of the conference report or House amendment, as the 
     case may be, not so stricken. Any such motion in the Senate 
     shall be debatable. In any case in which such point of order 
     is sustained against a conference report (or Senate amendment 
     derived from such conference report by operation of this 
     paragraph), no further amendment shall be in order.
       (b) Sunset.--Subsection (a) shall terminate on the date on 
     which a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 
     2021 is agreed to by the Senate and House of Representatives 
     pursuant to section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974 (2 U.S.C. 632).

     SEC. 207. POINT OF ORDER AGAINST CERTAIN CHANGES IN MANDATORY 
                   PROGRAMS IN THE SENATE.

       (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``CHIMP'' means 
     a provision that--
       (1) would have been estimated as affecting direct spending 
     or receipts under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 902) (as in 
     effect prior to September 30, 2002) if the provision was 
     included in legislation other than appropriation Acts; and
       (2) results in a net decrease in budget authority in the 
     budget year, but does not result in a net decrease in outlays 
     over the period of the total of the current year, the budget 
     year, and all fiscal years covered under the most recently 
     adopted concurrent resolution on the budget.
       (b) Point of Order in the Senate.--
       (1) In general.--It shall not be in order in the Senate to 
     consider a bill or joint resolution making appropriations for 
     a full fiscal year, or an amendment thereto, amendment 
     between the Houses in relation thereto, conference report 
     thereon, or motion thereon, that includes a CHIMP that, if 
     enacted, would cause the absolute value of the total budget 
     authority of all such CHIMPs enacted in relation to a full 
     fiscal year to be more than the amount specified in paragraph 
     (2).
       (2) Amount.--The amount specified in this paragraph is, for 
     fiscal year 2021, $15,000,000,000.
       (c) Determination.--For purposes of this section, budgetary 
     levels shall be determined on the basis of estimates provided 
     by the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate.
       (d) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal in the Senate.--In the 
     Senate, subsection (b) may be waived or suspended 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 to 
     sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of 
     order raised under subsection (b).

     SEC. 208. POINT OF ORDER AGAINST DESIGNATION OF FUNDS FOR 
                   OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS IN THE SENATE.

       (a) Point of Order.--When the Senate is considering a bill, 
     joint resolution, motion, amendment, amendment between the 
     Houses, or conference report, if a point of order is made by 
     a Senator against a provision that designates funds for 
     fiscal years 2020 or 2021 for overseas contingency 
     operations, in accordance with section 251(b)(2)(A) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 
     U.S.C. 901(b)(2)(A)), and the point of order is sustained by 
     the Chair, that provision shall be stricken from the measure 
     and may not be offered as an amendment from the floor.

[[Page H7401]]

       (b) Form of the Point of Order.--A point of order under 
     subsection (a) may be raised by a Senator as provided in 
     section 313(e) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 
     U.S.C. 644(e)).
       (c) Conference Reports.--When the Senate is considering a 
     conference report on, or an amendment between the Houses in 
     relation to, a bill or joint resolution, upon a point of 
     order being made by any Senator pursuant to subsection (a), 
     and such point of order being sustained, such material 
     contained in such conference report or House amendment shall 
     be stricken, and the Senate shall proceed to consider the 
     question of whether the Senate shall recede from its 
     amendment and concur with a further amendment, or concur in 
     the House amendment with a further amendment, as the case may 
     be, which further amendment shall consist of only that 
     portion of the conference report or House amendment, as the 
     case may be, not so stricken. Any such motion in the Senate 
     shall be debatable. In any case in which such point of order 
     is sustained against a conference report (or Senate amendment 
     derived from such conference report by operation of this 
     subsection), no further amendment shall be in order.
       (d) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal.--In the Senate, this 
     section may be waived or suspended only by an affirmative 
     vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. 
     An affirmative vote of three-fifths of Members of the Senate, 
     duly chosen and sworn shall be required to sustain an appeal 
     of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under 
     this section.
       (e) Suspension of Point of Order.--This section shall not 
     apply if a declaration of war by Congress is in effect.

     SEC. 209. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       The sections of this title are enacted by the Congress--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, respectively, and as such 
     they shall be considered as part of the rules of each House, 
     respectively, 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 such rules (so far as relating to such 
     House) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same 
     extent as in the case of any other rule of such House.

          TITLE III--TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PUBLIC DEBT LIMIT

     SEC. 301. TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PUBLIC DEBT LIMIT.

       (a) In General.--Section 3101(b) of title 31, United States 
     Code, shall not apply for the period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act and ending on July 31, 2021.
       (b) Special Rule Relating to Obligations Issued During 
     Extension Period.--Effective on August 1, 2021, the 
     limitation in effect under section 3101(b) of title 31, 
     United States Code, shall be increased to the extent that--
       (1) the face amount of obligations issued under chapter 31 
     of such title and the face amount of obligations whose 
     principal and interest are guaranteed by the United States 
     Government (except guaranteed obligations held by the 
     Secretary of the Treasury) outstanding on August 1, 2021, 
     exceeds
       (2) the face amount of such obligations outstanding on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Extension Limited to Necessary Obligations.--An 
     obligation shall not be taken into account under subsection 
     (b)(1) unless the issuance of such obligation was necessary 
     to fund a commitment incurred pursuant to law by the Federal 
     Government that required payment before August 1, 2021.

                           TITLE IV--OFFSETS

     SEC. 401. CUSTOMS USER FEES.

       (a) In General.--Section 13031(j)(3) of the Consolidated 
     Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 
     58c(j)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``October 20, 2027'' 
     and inserting ``September 30, 2029''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking ``September 30, 
     2027'' and inserting ``September 30, 2029''.
       (b) Rate for Merchandise Processing Fees.--Section 503 of 
     the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation 
     Act (Public Law 112-41; 19 U.S.C. 3805 note) is amended by 
     striking ``May 26, 2027'' and inserting ``September 30, 
     2029''.

     SEC. 402. EXTENSION OF DIRECT SPENDING REDUCTIONS THROUGH 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2029.

       Section 251A(6) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901a(6)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by striking ``fiscal years 2022 through 2027'' and 
     inserting ``fiscal years 2022 through 2029''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (C), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by striking ``fiscal year 2027'' and inserting ``fiscal 
     year 2029''.

                       TITLE V--BUDGETARY EFFECTS

     SEC. 501. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

       (a) In General.--The budgetary effects of this Act shall 
     not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard maintained pursuant 
     to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 
     U.S.C. 933(d)).
       (b) Senate PAYGO Scorecards.--The budgetary effects of this 
     Act shall not be entered on any PAYGO scorecard maintained 
     for purposes of section 4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th 
     Congress).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour, 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on the Budget.
  The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth) and the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Womack) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.


                             General Leave

  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and insert extraneous material into the Record on H.R. 3877.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today, we have an opportunity to advance bipartisan 
legislation that will help secure a stronger future for American 
families and our Nation's economy.
  The 2-year budget caps deal we are now debating raises the debt 
ceiling and increases the budget caps for 2020 and 2021. It stops 
extreme sequestration cuts of $125 billion from being implemented, 
helps us avoid another devastating government shutdown, and establishes 
a realistic budgetary framework so that we can make critical 
investments in our Nation's people and prosperity.
  This budget agreement represents a vast improvement over the harmful 
cuts contained in the President's 2020 budget proposal. It rejects the 
Trump budget's 9 percent cut to nondefense discretionary spending that 
would have weakened national and economic security, endangered public 
health, and crippled critical programs that support American families.
  Instead, this bill will allow us to make strong investments in 
everything from K-12 education and infrastructure to research and 
development, clean energy, and veterans' healthcare.
  This is about finally moving us past the threat of sequestration. It 
is about upholding the full faith and credit of the United States. And 
it is about providing much-needed certainty to our communities and for 
our economy.
  This bipartisan agreement is a victory for the American people. In 
the most divisive and polarizing environment in our lifetimes, it is a 
much-needed example of Congress coming together to prioritize the 
American people over self-serving politics.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to fulfill our obligations 
to govern and ensure we meet the needs and priorities of the American 
people by passing this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the most fundamental duties of Congress is to 
fund the government. I am pleased that, after months of uncertainty, a 
budget agreement has been reached, thanks to the work of the President, 
his Cabinet, and the Congress.
  This 2-year funding deal ends the threat of sequestration and 
continues to improve our military strength. It doubles down on our 
commitment to serving and protecting the American people by enhancing 
the United States' defense capabilities and ensuring our courageous 
troops have the resources they need to deter, fight, and win.
  It wasn't that long ago, Mr. Speaker, that our military was in the 
midst of a readiness crisis. It would be irresponsible, in my strong 
opinion, to retreat back to that point. This deal helps us prevent 
that.
  The legislation averts a $71 billion cut to defense that would have 
taken place early next year, absent an agreement.
  Mr. Speaker, I am a 30-year veteran of the Arkansas National Guard, 
one deployment under my belt. I chair the Board of Visitors at the 
United States Military Academy at West Point, and I recognize the rise 
of the threat facing us around the globe. I also understand the 
devastation a sequester would cause.
  It is not something that we can allow to happen, and I have seen the 
numbers floating around about what Congress is about to do.

[[Page H7402]]

  Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. The sequester numbers that would have 
taken place if this Congress didn't act were never going to happen. 
Anybody who suggests that we were going to cut $71 billion from 
national defense is not being intellectually honest. We were not going 
to allow that to happen.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill also takes the chaos that would ensue 
following another government shutdown off the table. Nobody in this 
room likes continuing resolutions or big omnibus packages. We take 
those off the table.
  Now, I will be honest. This is not a perfect deal. It is not the bill 
I would have written if I were just a Congress of one. No compromise in 
any serious negotiation where there are two competing sides will ever 
result in a perfect outcome. But it does allow us to move forward with 
a measure of stability for our economy.
  Again, I highlight that these negotiations brought forward an 
important agreement in which there will be no poison pills in the 
funding bills for this year or next and a concerted effort to strive 
toward no shutdowns and no large omnibus packages.
  Any compromise involves hard choices. I don't know of a committee in 
the Congress, in the House of Representatives, that has to make more 
hard choices than the people who gather around that Committee on 
Appropriations markup room.
  For our distinguished chairwoman, Nita Lowey, and all of my fellow 
appropriators who have a lot of requests, there are never enough 
resources to meet all of them, but we have to make some very hard 
choices.
  Then, let's not forget the real and practical impact of our current 
debt and the deficits that add to that debt. We need to put America 
back on a responsible fiscal path. While I support the progress we have 
made in this bill, I feel strongly that Congress must address the 
looming crisis of our debt for our children and our grandchildren.

  But here is an inconvenient truth: Total discretionary spending, when 
I came to Congress, was almost $1.3 trillion. That was what we spent on 
the discretionary budget of the U.S. Government. That is the part of 
government that most people identify with. Next year, under this caps 
agreement, discretionary spending is going to be just under $1.4 
trillion. That is not much of an increase over a 10-year period.
  To put it in perspective, discretionary spending was 9 percent of GDP 
when I came to Congress. It is down to 6 percent now.
  If you look at the CBO report that we highlighted earlier this year, 
CBO says--their words--as a percentage of the economy, discretionary 
spending is going down, and mandatory spending continues to skyrocket.
  The year before I came to Congress, mandatory spending was 61 percent 
of the Federal budget. Today, it is about 70 percent of the Federal 
budget.
  Mandatory spending is putting intense pressure on a lot of programs 
on the discretionary side that a lot of America relies on.
  I think we have to fix that. I don't know what the answer is, but I 
do know this, Mr. Speaker. I know one of the answers is that we have to 
get back to regular order.
  I can't say it any clearer. We haven't done the budget process that 
is enshrined in the 1974 Budget Act since I have been in Congress. In 
fact, most people in Congress look at how we do things now--CRs, omnis, 
shutdowns, those kinds of things--as normal. It is anything but normal.
  I know my friend, Mr. Yarmuth, and I worked very hard, as did Mrs. 
Lowey, on the Joint Select Committee on Budget Process Reform last 
year. We got close. We made a few recommendations. We couldn't quite 
meet the threshold for reporting, but we took a stab at it. I hope we 
can elevate that discussion in the 116th Congress and have some success 
doing that.
  Today, we are here to vote on a bipartisan bill, a bill that has been 
carefully negotiated over weeks with competing interests. The 
administration has been involved, with Mr. Mnuchin representing the 
President, and the four corners of leadership. Not the most ideal way 
to come up with an answer or a solution, but it is what we have today.
  Mr. Speaker, with all the things that we have in front of us, let's 
take the chaos off the table, and let's pass this deal. Then, maybe--
maybe--we can elevate the conversation to talk about the real drivers 
of the deficit and the debt in this country when we come back and as we 
move into the remainder of this year.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the chair of the Appropriations 
Committee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3877.
  For months, House Democrats have insisted on raising unworkable 
budget caps so Congress can responsibly fund our government and uphold 
our commitments to American families.
  Unless Congress and the President act, the United States will face 
$125 billion in devastating cuts that will hurt American families and 
weaken our national security.
  That is why this bipartisan legislation to avoid this fiscal cliff is 
so critical. It thoroughly rejects the President's slash-and-burn 
budget proposal, which would have pulled the rug out from under 
families and communities by decimating initiatives and services that 
make a real difference in people's lives.
  Instead of reckless cuts, Democrats were successful in securing the 
largest-ever increase in base funding above sequestration levels. With 
these more reasonable budget caps, we can undertake an orderly 
appropriations process to invest in critical domestic priorities for 
the people.
  While this bipartisan deal represents a compromise, I am proud that 
it ends the senseless austerity of the Budget Control Act once and for 
all.
  I urge support for this legislation, so that we can help give every 
American a better chance at a better life.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the distinguished Republican whip.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the remarks 
made by my friend, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack) who talked 
about the importance of what we need to do to get back into a position 
where we can get control over spending.
  There are people that are running around right now trying to pit our 
Nation's defense against balancing the Federal budget
  Mr. Speaker, in fact, it is a false choice because if you zeroed out 
the entire Department of Defense's budget, which I hope no one would 
embrace, if you zeroed it out, you would still have a deficit. So, 
clearly, it is not the Department of Defense that is the problem. We 
need a strong national defense.
  President Trump has been rebuilding our military. We need to keep 
rebuilding our military.
  Mr. Speaker, we had more men and women die in training exercises than 
dying in combat over the last 3 years, by a 5-to-1 margin. It was less 
safe to train to be in the military in the United States of America 
than it was to go into combat, because they didn't have the tools they 
needed. Planes were falling out of the sky because they didn't have 
spare parts.
  We have finally started to address that. The last thing we want to do 
is go backward on that success. And I don't think anybody in this 
building, voting ``yes'' or ``no,'' understands or would agree with the 
idea that if a ``no'' vote were to be successful, we would have a $71 
billion cut to our Nation's defense, which is one of our prime 
constitutional responsibilities.
  So we have got to get back to solving the real problems with 
deficits; and we all know where that is coming from, the mandatory 
side.
  We had a bill just in the last Congress that would have cut over $800 
billion, while improving the healthcare of the people of our country. 
And if there are better ways to go and fix these broken programs, then 
please put those on the table. But we need to go back to that.
  But in this bill, not only does it allow the President to keep 
rebuilding our military, it actually protects the pro-life gains that 
we have made. We have made incredible gains to protect innocent life.

[[Page H7403]]

  That is why groups like National Right to Life have said such strong 
things about why this is so important; why President Trump needs this 
bill so that he can rebuild our military, and keep building wall and 
border security, which is so important. We have to secure our border. 
This bill includes the ability for the President to do that as well.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Moulton), the vice chair of the Budget Committee.
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Speaker, this agreement is a good step forward; not 
a great step, but a good step.
  As vice chairman of the Budget Committee, and a veteran who serves on 
the Armed Services Committee, I want to speak for a moment about its 
impact on our national security.
  This bill turns our attention to confronting and out-competing our 
adversaries. And partly, it does so by ending the threat of 
sequestration.
  Now, we all know that the Budget Control Act was established with the 
tool of sequestration in an effort to improve our budgeting process to, 
in fact, address our debt, which itself is a threat to our national 
security. But we also know that that hasn't worked. And in the 
meantime, our national security, our defense budgeting is at risk.
  This bill not only ends that; it also creates parity in increased 
defense investments with domestic investments. That is a big deal, 
because it means we will spend as much on the dignity of Americans as 
we will on their defense.
  But it is also important to note that a lot of defense functions, a 
lot of things that ensure our national security fall under nondefense 
discretionary spending; things like investing in veterans' healthcare, 
investing in embassy security. In fact, the entire investment we make 
in the Department of Homeland Security falls under nondefense 
discretionary spending, and we increase that significantly with this 
deal.
  But let's not kid ourselves. This deal is not perfect. America is 
racking up a huge credit card bill which our kids will have to pay. It 
has skyrocketed under this President and his massive tax cut for the 
wealthiest few, and this bill does not address that.
  And while I don't love that this bill was negotiated behind closed 
doors, it proves there is middle ground, and it strips Congress of 
those draconian tools in the Budget Control Act that made that middle 
ground hard to find.
  Chairman Yarmuth and his team have done us a tremendous service. This 
deal buys us the time and the opportunity to fix the budgeting process, 
and I hope we will use it.
  In the window this creates, where we aren't negotiating under 
gunpoint, let's fix Congress and create a next-generation budgeting 
process where there is thoughtful debate and, ultimately, consensus 
around a fiscally responsible bill. We can get there. We can start 
today, and we can begin by passing this bill.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Fort Worth, Texas (Ms. Granger), the ranking member on the House 
Appropriations Committee and a former mayor. I believe mayors have a 
pretty good idea of what it takes to get things done when there are 
competing interests.
  Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3877. I am 
proud to support this 2-year budget agreement, because the alternative, 
not having an agreement, is simply not an option.
  I want all Members to understand the importance of this bill in front 
of us. This deal keeps our economy on solid ground because the United 
States will avoid defaulting on our financial obligations. Think of 
that.

  With this agreement, we continue to invest in rebuilding our Nation's 
defense and protecting our strategic interests around the world. The 
threat of terrorism continues, and Russian, Chinese, and Iranian 
aggression is on the rise. It is critical that our military is ready to 
meet and defeat all threats.
  Unfortunately, unless we pass this bill, our military and our 
veterans would face arbitrary cuts that would be harmful to our 
security and that of our partners, like Israel and Jordan.
  When I was the chairwoman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, 
I worked with the Secretary of Defense to put together a plan to 
rebuild our military. He said it would take 5 years.
  We have only appropriated the funds that were needed for two of those 
years. We should continue that. If this bill does not pass, the 
impending cuts will have a devastating impact on our national security.
  Our Constitution explicitly states that the Congress provides for the 
common defense. If we don't pass this bill, we have failed to live up 
to our Constitutional responsibilities, and I am not willing to do 
that.
  Not only does this budget agreement stabilize funding for our 
Nation's military over the next 2 years, it also sets up a framework to 
prevent harmful ``poison pill'' riders from being included in must-pass 
funding bills.
  Finally, this agreement sets us on a path to complete an orderly 
appropriations process and avoid a costly government shutdown.
  Our President should be commended for negotiating with Congressional 
leaders to protect key conservative priorities, from maintaining our 
position as the most powerful military in the world, to protecting the 
life of the unborn.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this bill and sending 
it to the President's desk quickly for a signature.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the House Armed Services 
Committee.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, it is crucially important that 
we pass this bill. The most fundamental responsibility of government is 
to fund the government and operate. And as simple as that may sound, 
over the course of the last 8 years, we have repeatedly failed to do 
that.
  We have had several government shutdowns, countless other threatened 
government shutdowns, continuing resolutions, and a steady failure to 
even come close to meeting the October 1st deadline for funding the 
discretionary portion of the government; and that has had a devastating 
impact.
  Certainly, we have heard on a number of occasions about the impact it 
has had on our national security. The Department of Defense has not 
been able to plan its budget for too many years. It has led to 
inconsistency and, as we have heard, it has led to a readiness crisis.
  But this applies also to the nondefense discretionary portion of the 
budget; to infrastructure, and healthcare, and education, and housing. 
All of those items have been under uncertainty for too long over the 
course of the last 8 years.
  This budget agreement, though not perfect, funds the government and, 
I believe, responsibly funds the government, both defense and 
nondefense.
  I really want to commend both Secretary Mnuchin and Speaker Pelosi 
for coming together and negotiating this agreement. There is no secret 
that we have big differences between the Democratically controlled 
House and the White House and the Republican-controlled Senate. But 
despite those differences, we have to function. We have to be able to 
fund the government and meet our responsibilities to the American 
people.
  They were able to transcend those differences, get this deal done, 
and fund the government in a responsible way.
  Now, it is absolutely true that the debt and the deficit are still a 
problem. I know there are many people out there who say that it is not. 
I just don't see how those numbers add up. You cannot continually spend 
more money than you take in before it becomes a problem. We need to 
responsibly address that issue.
  I don't think it was responsible to cut taxes by nearly $2 trillion 
in the face of that. I certainly also think that defense has to be part 
of that conversation.
  The gentleman earlier said, well, you could zero out the defense 
budget and it wouldn't make any difference. Well, the defense budget is 
17 percent of the budget. If you are 17 percent of a budget that is 
massively in debt, you are at least part of the problem.
  I mean, you can take any one piece of the budget and say, well, that 
is not the problem. In fact, that is kind of what we have been doing. 
We have been taking piece by piece and saying, well, we can't cut that; 
we can't raise that tax.
  Meanwhile, we have been insisting on a dollar's worth of government 
for 80

[[Page H7404]]

cents worth of taxes. In the long run, people will pay the price for 
that. In the short term we have to responsibly fund the government. 
That is exactly what this bill does.
  Again, I thank the leadership that brought this to be, and I urge 
support and passage of this bill.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Corona, California (Mr. Calvert), who is the ranking member on the 
Appropriations Committee that funds the national defense of this 
country.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Bipartisan Budget 
Deal of 2019. Like many of my colleagues, there are parts of the deal I 
object to and parts I strongly support.
  As ranking member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I would 
have preferred a higher top line for defense than $738 billion. 
However, we will always choose certainty and on-time appropriations 
rather than another destructive CR.
  Right now, our military is at an inflection point. As our military 
readiness returns to appropriate operational levels, we must continue 
to push forward on modernization efforts that will continue America's 
superiority on land, sea, air, and space into the next century.

  Just as former Secretary Mattis woke Americans up to the dire 
circumstances of our readiness levels, Americans are now beginning to 
understand that our military superiority can no longer be assumed 
against near-peer adversaries such as Russia and China.
  Whether it is hypersonics, low-yield nuclear weapons, artificial 
intelligence, or the militarization of space, the gap has closed.
  The 2-year budget deal before us today provides the certainty for our 
military to do what they do best, prepare to win the next war in the 
hopes that our military might will deter any would-be competitor from 
ever starting that war.
  I know many of my conservative friends are concerned about more 
deficit spending and adding to our $22 trillion debt. I share that 
concern, but we need to look at the full budget picture. Mandatory 
spending, if you include interest on the debt, now consumes 72 percent 
of the Federal budget.
  National defense actually accounts for 15.6 percent of the budget. 
That leaves only about 12 percent left in the pie. We cannot balance 
our budget on the back of 12 percent nondefense discretionary spending. 
The math does not work.
  In fact, since 2010, because of the BCA, accounting for inflation, we 
have reduced nondefense discretionary spending by 4.65 percent, and we 
have reduced defense discretionary by 17.2 percent.
  To my friends on the left, we cannot continue to ignore realities of 
mandatory spending and simply spend more on the discretionary side with 
no regard to the future. And the solutions need not be drastic.
  Slowing the rate of growth and making commonsense reforms for future 
generations would relieve the pressure and allow us to finally have a 
plan to pay down the debt.
  The bill before us is not perfect. That is the nature of compromise. 
But my ``yes'' vote is in support of the brave men and women who wear 
the uniform. It is our duty to support them and their missions.
  However, I do not vote blind to our budget reality, which, if left 
unchecked, will consume our entire budget.
  I urge my colleagues to support the bill, end the failed experiment 
of the BCA, and commit to true budget reform that will address our 
mounting debt.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), a distinguished member of the Appropriations 
Committee.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank you so very much, Chairman Yarmuth, 
for yielding time to speak and rise to support this 2-year budget caps 
and debt ceiling agreement that is before us and urge all of our 
colleagues to do the same.
  This agreement is not perfect. Frankly, it is a difficult vote, given 
the hard work that our Appropriations Committee has undertaken to 
diligently write, debate, mark up and pass 10 of our 12 fiscal year 
2020 annual spending bills through this Chamber. The other two were 
written and reported out of committee.
  We will have to make hard choices as we work with the Senate to 
allocate these funds among the 12 subcommittee bills, but as an 
appropriator, I intimately understand Congress' top responsibility is 
to keep the ship of state running, ensuring an open, funded, and fully 
functional government of the United States.
  I also know from experience that the full faith and credit of our 
government can never be questioned. Every one of our constituents 
deserves this recognition from their elected Member, and this agreement 
moves Congress past the devastating threats imposed under the Budget 
Control Act of 2011. Thank goodness.
  It avoids deep, automatic cuts that would devastate government's 
ability to help the American people and meet our obligations to them, 
including the most vulnerable.
  This agreement rejects the devastating cuts the President's fiscal 
year 2020 budget proposed and maintains significant funding levels for 
domestic priorities and defense priorities alike.
  Most importantly, this agreement moves us a step closer to finalizing 
appropriate allocation of all our Federal dollars responsibly.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend our leadership efforts on both sides of the 
aisle to reach a final consensus and bring this bipartisan agreement to 
the floor. This agreement reflects give-and-take from all sides of 
Congress and the White House, and it is deserving of a strong 
bipartisan showing of support from this body.
  Let's govern.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, on occasion it is important to reach out to 
the rural areas of our country for wisdom, and we are going to reach 
out to west Texas, near Clarendon, Texas. I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), my friend, the Republican lead 
on the House Armed Services Committee.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  As the current occupant of the chair will remember, on February 6, 
2018, just last year, Secretary of Defense Mattis testified: ``Let me 
be clear, as hard as the last 16 years of war have been, no enemy in 
the field has done more harm to the readiness of the United States 
military than the combined impact of the Budget Control Act's defense 
spending caps, worsened by operating in 10 of the last 11 years under 
continuing resolutions of varied and unpredictable duration.''
  Mr. Speaker, this bill before us now fixes, finally, the problems 
that Secretary Mattis pointed to in his testimony last year, for, as 
members will recall, starting in 2010, with the responsibility of both 
Republicans and Democrats, both the White House and Congress, defense 
spending went down, in real terms, about 20 percent.
  And we are not just talking numbers. We are talking increased 
aircraft accidents. We are talking tragic accidents at sea where 
sailors were killed. We are talking in all the services, a number of 
training accidents and malfunctions that had real consequences to the 
human beings who volunteer to protect our country.
  Now, the last 2 years--again, on a bipartisan basis--we have begun to 
turn that around. We have begun to improve our readiness, begun to 
improve training, begun, as the gentleman from California was talking 
about, to narrow some of the gaps that have developed on key 
technologies with other adversaries. But the job is not done yet. We 
have to continue that momentum.
  While the underlying bill before us does not provide for as much 
defense spending as I believe we should spend, the certainty of a 2-
year deal having more money for defense than was originally in the 
underlying House budget, all of those things, to me, say the right 
thing to do is to pass this.
  I know Members can find some excuse about what is in the bill they 
don't like or what is not in the bill that they wish it were. Any sort 
of legislation that is a result of compromise between two parties, two 
Houses of Congress, two branches of government, is going to yield that 
sort of result.
  But, Mr. Speaker, we cannot forget that the first function of 
government is

[[Page H7405]]

to provide for the common defense; and the Nation and, especially, the 
men and women who serve and their families depend upon us doing our job 
under the Constitution.
  Article I, section 8 says it is our job to raise and support, provide 
and maintain. This bill helps us fulfill that responsibility, and it 
should be passed.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader of the House of 
Representatives.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman, Mr. 
Yarmuth, the chairman of the Budget Committee, for yielding.
  I thank Mr. Womack for his leadership, both as chairman, now as 
ranking member on the committee, as we look to pursue fiscally 
responsible paths, but also fiscal paths that will invest, knowing the 
national security from the defense standpoint, but the national 
security from the domestic standpoint.
  Obviously, if we have a strong defense but our education system is 
wanting, our economic system is wanting, our healthcare system is 
wanting, we will have a national security problem.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise, therefore, in support of this bipartisan 
legislation, which formalizes the agreement reached earlier this week 
by Speaker Pelosi and Secretary Mnuchin on behalf of the President. It 
has the support of Senators Schumer, McConnell--the Republican leader--
and the House Republican leader, Mr. McCarthy.

  This is what we have been working toward for a very long time, and I 
am pleased that we are able to secure an agreement before the end of 
the July work period. This will provide certainty for the American 
people by providing the top-line guidance necessary for appropriators 
and the full House and Senate to complete work on funding the 
government for fiscal year 2020. Ideally, we would do that before 
September 30 of the coming months.
  But this agreement was made possible by virtue of, in my view, the 
fact that we passed 10 appropriations bills to fund 96 percent of the 
government before the end of June. That hasn't been done before.
  Now, there have been 10 bills passed back in 2006, 13 years ago, but 
it did not include Labor-Health, so it left out a very big chunk of 
government funding.
  I am proud of the fact that we did that, but it also set a mark. It 
set an objective. It set, through the chairman's deeming, the numbers 
that the appropriators could mark up their bills, that we could mark 
them up in June. It set an expectation of what we could do and should 
do.
  It was also achievable because Democrats were united in our 
determination to deliver our promise to end the constant brinksmanship 
that characterized the last several years and restore responsible 
government for the people.
  It is also, in my view, a result of the fact that Secretary Mnuchin 
wanted to have a fiscally responsible and knowable end to the 
differences between the two parties, which undermined our economic 
security and undermined the confidence of the American people and the 
international community in the financial stability of our country.
  To that end, I am glad that this agreement also suspends the debt 
limit.
  Very frankly, Mr. Speaker, we ought to do away with the debt limit. 
It is a phony issue. It bears no relation to reality. It is just a 
game. It is a political gimmick, an item of demagoguery for the 
Members.
  Very frankly, we set a debt limit when we buy something or we borrow 
something. The United States is going to pay for what it buys, and it 
is going to pay back what it borrows. That is the debt limit.
  This phony number that we are now suspending for a couple of years, I 
think that is what we should do. But, frankly, if it were up to me, I 
would do away with the debt limit, not because I don't want to see us 
bring down the debt, but because I think it bears no relationship to 
our needs, our challenges, our opportunities.
  Those who would have held hostage the full faith and credit of the 
United States, as some have done in the past to demand partisan 
concessions, will be prevented from throwing the legislative process 
into chaos as they have done.
  With the threat of default gone and the danger of sequester-level 
budget cuts removed--and thank goodness, we will see the end of the 
sequester, which, as I said, bore no relationship to needs and 
opportunities and responsibilities. With that threat gone, we can now 
move forward together to invest in fighting poverty, expanding 
opportunities, strengthening our communities, and, yes, defending our 
Nation and our allies.
  I want to thank Chairman Yarmuth, Chairwoman Lowey, Chairman Neal, 
and Ranking Member Womack, who is my friend and who I think is a very 
responsible, constructive Member of the Congress of the United States 
trying to work toward fiscal responsibility.
  Let there be no mistake: We are going to have to make some tough 
decisions in the years ahead to make sure that our fiscal house is in 
order.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people ought to know we are receiving the 
lowest revenue in a very long time, I don't know whether in history--
probably not in history--but a very low level of revenue to the 
government. But we are buying a lot of stuff, and we have got to bring 
those in balance, what we are willing to pay for and what we need to 
buy, whether it is in services, either on Social Security or Medicare 
or anything else, or on operating expenses, on an annual basis.
  This is an example, Mr. Speaker, of how we can restore the faith of 
the American people in their government--avoid a shutdown, act 
responsibly, reach agreements, create consensus--by showing them we can 
be responsible stewards of the economy, that we can advance our 
democratic values and priorities through bipartisan means, and that we 
can demonstrate that government can work for the people it serves.
  I hope we can all come together today, Mr. Speaker, and approve it, 
sending a strong sign of support to encourage the Senate to do the 
same, and to do so quickly.

  I urge the President, as he said today in a communication to his 
Republicans, he said House Republicans should support the 2-year budget 
agreement, which greatly helps our military and our vets. I am totally 
with him.
  I am pleased that the President supports this agreement. I am pleased 
that we reached this agreement. I would hope that we could all vote for 
this agreement, not because as, so many have said, it is perfect, but 
because it is the result of honest negotiations and discussions between 
rational people who know that we have a job to do for America, and we 
are prepared to do it.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  A constant theme on our side has been that of national security, a 
reason why we should support the agreement that has been hammered out 
between the administration and the four corners of leadership in the 
House and the Senate, and I stand by that.
  We have had speakers from the House Armed Services Committee, the 
House Appropriations Committee, Defense Subcommittee and so on, and it 
is an important reason because of how much money it commands of Federal 
taxpayer money to actually protect, secure, and defend the United 
States of America.
  But, Mr. Speaker, one of the discussions, one of the debates we are 
not having is about the true drivers of the deficit and the debt, and 
that is a conversation that I would like to introduce in these 
proceedings today. I brought a chart with me.
  As I was preparing my remarks today, I got to thinking: What were the 
numbers back in 2010 when I first sought office in the House of 
Representatives versus what we are talking about today?
  So we have a snapshot in time of 2010 and a snapshot in time of what 
we are debating today. Mr. Speaker, I direct your attention to this 
chart because, in 2010, discretionary spending, which is the spending 
that most of us kind of relate to the Federal Government, everything 
from keeping the lights on at this Capitol to paying for the men and 
women who are downrange defending our freedoms, was a little over $1.2 
trillion in 2010.

                              {time}  1445

  The number that we are debating today and that others have been 
critical of is just under $1.4 trillion. It is

[[Page H7406]]

$1.37 trillion. It represents an increase of $114 billion in 10 years. 
Most people would probably say that, given 10 years--we had a couple of 
years there where we had trouble with our economy--a percentage 
increase like that might be within reason.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to direct your attention to the mandatory 
side of the spending. It has come up a couple of times in our 
discussion today, the true driver of the deficit and the debt.
  When I came to Congress in 2011, the 2016 number was $2.1 trillion. 
Today, not part of this discussion, mandatory spending is just under 
$3.3 trillion. Mr. Speaker, that is an increase of almost $1.2 trillion 
in 10 years. We are not having that discussion today.
  I am reminded of the old Bronx-born bank robber, Willie Sutton, Mr. 
Speaker, who when captured, legend has it, was asked, ``Why do you rob 
banks?'' He said, ``Because that's where the money is.''
  If we are going to have a meaningful discussion, a constructive 
discussion about how we put the balance sheet of the U.S. Government 
back in order, we cannot have an intellectually honest conversation if 
we are ignoring the bottom line here. In 10 years, mandatory spending 
has grown 10 times the rate of discretionary spending, yet we are not 
talking about that today.
  Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that when this is all finished, and we pass 
this bill and put our country on a pretty solid budgetary framework for 
the next couple of years, that maybe we can sit down to talk about the 
true drivers of the deficit and the debt.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for his great work as the chair of the Budget Committee. He 
knows better than all of us that our Federal budget should be a 
statement of our national values and that what is important to us as a 
Nation should be reflected in that budget. I thank Mr. Yarmuth for his 
leadership and thank his staff for bringing this legislation to the 
floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I also thank Chairwoman Nita Lowey, the chair of the 
Appropriations Committee, and her staff for the important work that 
they did to help us get to the place we are today. That place is 
bipartisan legislation which reflects an agreement that is bold, 
bipartisan, and a victory for the American people.
  I think we all agree, including the ranking member, that we all want 
to reduce the deficit, so let us work in a bipartisan way. The national 
debt, let's work in a bipartisan way to do that.
  While we are at it, we may want to eliminate the vote on lifting the 
debt ceiling each year as well because the full faith and credit of the 
United States of America should never, ever be in question.
  This agreement was reached, and it will meet the needs of the people 
whom we are honored to represent, investing in middle-class priorities 
that advance the health, financial security, and well-being of the 
American people, and enhancing our national security.
  Democrats have achieved priorities that we set out from the start. 
Obviously, we have shared priorities.
  We are permanently ending the threat of sequestration. That is a very 
important measure. The administration has joined us to end the 
devastating sequestration cuts that threaten our investments to keep 
America number one in the global economy and, again, ensure our 
national security.
  We are also limiting offsets to half of what was originally proposed 
to those that were accepted in an earlier bipartisan agreement.
  We are taking action to avoid another government shutdown, which is 
so harmful to meeting the needs of the American people and honoring the 
work of our important men and women in our Federal workforce, and also 
the collateral damage that a shutdown does to our economy.
  We are securing robust funding for crucial domestic priorities, as I 
said. We have always insisted on parity in increases between defense 
and nondefense. We are pleased that our increase in the nondefense 
budget actually exceeds the parity number on defense by $10 billion 
over the next 2 years.
  We are pleased to be able to say that we have secured an increase of 
more than $100 billion in the budget cap for domestic priorities since 
the President took office.
  Finally, we are safeguarding the full faith and credit of the United 
States of America by achieving a lifting of the debt limit until July 
31, 2021. Perhaps between now and then, we can work in a bipartisan way 
to address removing all doubt about whether the debt limit will be 
increased.
  It is important to note that this is not about future spending. This 
is about paying for what we have invested in already.
  It was essential that we reach agreement before the upcoming August 
district work period because we were informed by the Secretary of the 
Treasury that we might exhaust the full faith and credit during the 
district work period in August.
  We are pleased to have done so with an agreement that meets the needs 
of America's families and our national security and achieves so many of 
our priorities.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a strong vote for this bill. As I said, we can 
avoid the damage of sequestration and continue to advance progress for 
the American people. I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to read from a book that we are all very familiar 
with, the Constitution of the United States, for just a moment. One of 
my concerns about what we are doing today, though I support the 
outcome, is written in Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution: 
``The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, 
imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common 
defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, 
imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.''

  Article I, Section 8, it lays it out pretty simply that the Congress 
of the United States has the power of the purse.
  While I support what we are doing today because I recognize the 
importance of getting chaos and uncertainty off the table for the 
reasons already stated in this debate, I am disappointed that the 
agreement was hammered out by basically four people, four plus one, the 
administration and four Members of the Congress referenced in Article 
I, Section 8.
  That is our job. The only meaningful debate that has happened over 
discretionary spending in this country happened only in this Chamber 
during the debates on appropriations that Mr. Hoyer referred to 
earlier. We have had those discussions.
  I don't agree with everything in those appropriations bills. I never 
have. But at least we have had that debate on the floor of the House. 
They have not had that debate on the floor of the Senate.
  Here we are today, relying on an agreement hammered out by leaders of 
both parties in both Chambers with a representative from the 
administration. To me, Mr. Speaker, that flies in the face of what 
Article I, Section 8 says it should be like.
  Again, I hope and pray that, over time, once we put this issue behind 
us, realizing that mandatory spending is growing at 10 times the rate 
of discretionary spending, the very fight that we are having today on 
this floor, maybe we can get back to regular order, do some legitimate 
budget process reform so Members like   John Yarmuth and myself can 
work together jointly to produce budgets, engage in debates on the 
floor of the people's House, and arrive at outcomes that probably we 
are all going to agree has stuff in it we like and stuff in it we don't 
like.
  That is the way the Framers intended this Chamber to be. I am hopeful 
that we will get there eventually.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), a distinguished member of the Budget 
Committee.
  (Ms. JACKSON LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)

[[Page H7407]]

  

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas 
(Mr. Womack) for his hand of conciliation, his reconciliation, and to 
acknowledge the work that he and the chairman of the Budget Committee 
have done and the tone in which the Budget Committee has conducted 
itself in 2019.
  Let me, as the gentleman referred to Article I, Section 8, take note 
of the fact that it is a recognition of the power to lay and collect 
taxes and duties, to borrow money and regulate commerce, but in 
particular, I believe that there is an underlying responsibility that 
when we do lay taxes on the American people, or we cut taxes and give 1 
percent of the population an enormous gift of paying no taxes, that we 
then have a responsibility to try to respond to the Americans who work 
every day and pay taxes and are wondering, ``What is our government 
doing?'' This budget is answering the question.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to join the gentleman and repeal the Trump 
tax cuts, as it burdens working Americans, as it denies nonprofits the 
ability to have deductions when gifts are given to them, but we are 
where we are today.
  This bipartisan budget resolution, which I am grateful to have a 
combination of leadership and others, eliminates the risk of another 
costly and devastating government shutdown. There were government 
workers on food stamps who could not get to work.
  It lifts the sequestration caps imposed under the Budget Control Act 
of 2011 to provide for increased investments in nondefense 
discretionary programs needed to keep America competitive.
  I was in the midst of those discussions, as many of us were. They 
were devastating. They were cutting the needs of Americans.
  We avoid default on the national debt.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I want to bring to the attention of the American people what we will 
be able to do: public health and disease control, highways, waterway 
maintenance, hazardous waste.
  I came from a community where Hurricane Harvey dumped 51 trillion 
gallons of water. We need infrastructure.
  The Army Corps of Engineers, Federal courts, FBI, childcare, disaster 
assistance, economic development, all of that will now come about.
  At the same time, we will ensure that the United States military will 
be strong.
  We will not be competing against each other. By the time we get 
through, we are avoiding an 11 percent cut to defense and a 9 percent 
cut to nondefense discretionary. We are making people whole.
  As it relates to what the Budget Committee has done, we have had 
hearings on healthcare, climate change, education, Medicare, Social 
Security. We have been doing work in the Budget Committee on issues 
that are important, but we are seeking parity.
  We are helping with domestic priorities. We are saying to the 
American people that we are not just taking your money and giving it to 
the top 1 percent of Americans. We are now balancing the budget, or 
working on the budget, paying down on the debt, and ensuring that we do 
not default on America's debt.
  Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be able to support this bill to help 
America.
  Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Budget Committee, I rise in strong 
support of H.R. 3877, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019.''
  I support this agreement because it:
   1. eliminates the risk of another costly and devastating government 
shutdown;
   2. lifts the sequestration caps imposed under the Budget Control Act 
of 2011 to provide for increased investments in non-defense 
discretionary (NDD) programs needed to keep America strong and 
competitive; and
   3. avoids default on the national debt and preserves America's 
standing as the world's most creditworthy nation.
  I thank my Chairman Yarmuth of the Budget Committee and Chairman Neal 
of the Ways and Means Committee, and the bipartisan and bicameral 
leadership of the Congress for their work in reaching this agreement 
and shepherding this legislation to the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly support lifting the caps imposed by the 
Budget Control Act of 2011 and ending the awful policy of 
sequestration.
  That is why I strongly supported the H.R. 2021, the ``Investing For 
The People Act,'' when it was marked up by the Budget Committee earlier 
this year.
  Mr. Speaker, without Congressional action, statutory caps on 
discretionary funding will force an 11 percent cut to defense and a 9 
percent cut, about $55 billion, to nondefense discretionary (NDD) 
programs for 2020 relative to the amounts provided for 2019.
  The Balanced Budget Agreement of 2019 replaces these destructive cuts 
with a realistic budgetary framework so that Congress, through its 
annual appropriations bills, can make critical investments in our 
nation's infrastructure and people.
  As we learned and documented in several Budget Committee hearings 
convened by Chairman Yarmuth, such deep cuts would have a devastating 
effect on U.S. national security and economic vitality.
  Failure to lift the budget caps and leaves agencies that respond to 
public health threats and emergencies vulnerable to harmful cuts.
  The National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease 
Control, along with the State Department and U.S. Agency for 
International Development, play unique roles in preparing for and 
responding to threats domestically and abroad.
  At a time when there are numerous challenges--from outbreaks of Ebola 
and Zika, to the Flint water crisis, to chronic diseases like 
Alzheimer's and cancer, to the opioid epidemic--it is clear we cannot 
neglect these investments.
  Climate change threatens crop yields, infrastructure, water and 
energy supplies, and human health.
  Climate change poses risks to federal property and resources, 
increases potential outlays from flood and crop insurance, and creates 
looming disaster assistance needs.
  Under sequestration, agencies dealing with this threat would be 
dramatically underfunded and deprived of the resources needed to 
respond to this national and global challenge.
  According to military experts, diplomacy and foreign aid are critical 
components of our national security.
  Both Trump's own former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, and 
former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates have stressed the importance 
of diplomacy and foreign aid:

       ``If you don't fully fund the State Department, then I need 
     to buy more ammunition.''--then Commander of U.S. Central 
     Command, General James Mattis, 2013
       ``. . . based on my experience serving seven presidents, as 
     a former director of C.I.A. and now as secretary of defense, 
     I am here to make the case for strengthening our capacity to 
     use `soft power' and for better integrating it with `hard 
     power.' ''--Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, 2007

  Inadequate nondefense funding levels lead to State and Foreign 
Operations appropriations bills that:
   1. slash embassy security funding by more than 21 percent; and
   2. decrease assistance to multilateral organizations, including our 
UN contributions, signaling to the rest of the world that the U.S. no 
longer keeps its word.
  Mr. Speaker, the sequestration regime created by the Budget Control 
Act of 2011 is an untenable state of affairs and must be corrected.
  The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 is an important step in the right 
direction and represents a vast improvement over the harmful cuts 
contained in the President's 2020 budget, restores certainty to our 
budgeting and achieves the important priorities of the American people, 
including:
   1. Permanently ends the threat of the sequester and preventing 
devastating funding cuts of 14 percent to defense spending and 13 
percent to non-defense spending, and replaces years of reckless 
austerity budgeting with responsible budgeting;
   2. Achieving parity between defense and non-defense discretionary 
spending; in fact, the increase in the non-defense budget authority 
that exceeds the defense number by $10 billion.
   3. Securing robust funding for critical domestic priorities, 
including an additional $2.5 billion for a fair, accurate and timely 
Census; robust funding for veterans, Child Care Development Block 
Grants, and a strong increase in the National Institutes of Health 
budget to accelerate life-saving cancer and health research.
  Mr. Speaker, for nearly 75 years, since the end of World War II, the 
world has been impressed by examples of American power.
  But what has inspired people the world over is the power of America's 
example.
  To defend America and keep her great and strong, we need to pass the 
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019, which ends sequestration and lifts

[[Page H7408]]

the budget caps and enable the Congress to invest in America and her 
people and restore their faith in their government.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McCarthy), the distinguished Republican leader of the 
United States House of Representatives; my friend and colleague from 
Bakersfield, California; and a man that I know has a great desire to 
see regular order played out on the floor of this House and an 
opportunity to go back to the budget process and appropriations process 
that we once knew in this great Chamber.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Republican leader of the 
Budget Committee for yielding. I also thank him for his work and his 
desire to see a budget in this Congress.
  I wish we had a budget in this Congress; then we would probably be in 
a little stronger position. But we work in a government that is 
designed to have compromise, a divided government.
  What we are talking about today is a compromise. It is not perfect by 
any means, but it secures important policy victories that no 
conservative can, or should, dismiss.
  Consider these priorities in the final deal:
  The Hyde amendment, perhaps the most important Federal protection for 
Americans' rights of conscience, cannot be attacked by Democrats' 
poison pills for 2 years. That means taxpayer money will not be used to 
fund abortions for the foreseeable future.
  Likewise, the Trump administration's Protect Life rule, it will be 
unimpeded by legislative antics. This vital rule stops organizations 
like Planned Parenthood from using title X money as their personal 
piggy bank.
  And here we build on what we started in the last Congress, rebuilding 
our military from the devastating cuts during sequestration. We watch a 
world that is more dangerous.
  I just read an article this week that, in the last 28 months, China 
has visited more ports than in the last 28 years. I read another 
article where China and Russia military planes entered South Korean 
air, which they have never done before, where shots actually had to be 
fired. You turn the news on, and you look at the Persian Gulf and where 
Iran is going today.
  To keep our men and women safe, you have got to make sure you have an 
investment, and that is exactly what we do. We build on the victory 
that we had before as we move forward.
  We also make investments into the future. I am one who believes, and 
I know our Republican leader of the Budget Committee believes, too, 
that the greatest threat to America is the debt. That is why our budget 
is so important.
  I understand the majority party can choose whether they want to do a 
budget or not. We chose to do budgets when we were in the majority. I 
guess the decision is not this year, so we are ending up here in a 
compromise.
  Now, I had wished in this compromise--but we are sitting in the 
minority, so, apparently, my vote does not count as much--we would want 
to offset any of this spending, find the savings in the waste, fraud, 
and abuse. It is not tough to find savings, so we offered more than 
$500 billion in offsets.
  Let that number sink in for one moment: $500 billion.
  Now, these were not draconian offsets that would have hurt the 
American public. I will give you one for an example.
  We could have reduced fraud and refundable tax credits simply by 
requiring a Social Security number on the application. That would save 
$38 billion itself. That is all we requested.
  Now, just two spending cut ideas alone would double the amount of 
savings that we need. But, unfortunately, in a divided government, and 
the other side is in the majority, they decided not. Their refusal to 
discuss any long-term reforms to the programs that are actually driving 
the debt causes problems.
  Now, as the gentleman knows, who is the leading Republican of the 
Budget Committee, when the Republicans took the majority in 2011 and we 
had to hand the gavel back--discretionary spending is what this body 
actually has the most control over, those 12 appropriations bills. When 
I had to hand the gavel back to the current Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, we 
were actually spending less than when she handed the gavel, in 2011, to 
John Boehner. That is a record I am proud of.
  But the real driver of our debt is something that, in our majority, 
we tried to do something about. We passed it, but, unfortunately, it 
failed in the Senate. We still have that same desire.
  When we were in the majority, we passed a budget that actually 
balanced. I know the first part was passing a budget. The law is 
actually to balance what we put forth. We said to the American public 
we were serious about this.
  When I look today, this gives us stability for the next 2 years. This 
helps build the military, and it gives the protections for those that 
the Republicans would care most about that are sitting in law today.
  So, no, it is not the bill I would write by myself--it is a 
compromise as we move forward--but it actually allows this process to 
work.
  For too long, the American public has watched a continuing 
resolution, after a shutdown, after a continuing resolution. One of the 
biggest goals that we had being in the majority was actually to get the 
appropriations process working again, and we did. We are proud of the 
fact of moving that forward.
  If I were to look at the appropriations process on the Democratic 
side, what they started to write without having a budget first and 
without having an agreement first, I knew those bills would never 
become law. It was a lot of time wasted. But if I looked at those 
bills, what passed on the floor, and look at what is in this compromise 
deal, it is spending less money.
  So did we succeed on turning it back some? Yes, we did, but not 
enough.
  Today is a movement forward, but we have much more work to do, and 
given the opportunity, if our friend, who is the lead Republican of the 
Budget Committee, became the chair, I know we would have a budget; I 
know we would have an appropriations process; and I know that budget 
would be balanced. But until that day comes, we will continue to watch 
to make sure we spend less, we build our military, and we make tomorrow 
better than today.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Arkansas has 3\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, it is not the most ideal situation to be in. As I 
reflect back on the many days I spent in my district--and I am about to 
go back there for the August recess, and I am going to circulate around 
my district and have some townhall meetings and engage in conversation. 
I know this subject is going to come up.
  I already know that most people are going to say: Look, you guys have 
a spending problem up there in Washington. I hear that a lot, and I 
would agree with that. Very few people say that we have a revenue 
problem, but we do have a spending problem.
  Mr. Speaker, you can bet your bottom dollar that I am going to be 
carrying this chart with me that I brought up earlier that shows the 
big difference between the mandatory side of Federal spending and what 
we are discussing here today about a $1.37 trillion discretionary 
budget.
  For all of the reasons that have been mentioned today by my 
colleagues, namely, national security, the ability to give our Pentagon 
certainty over the next 2 years as we continue to rebuild the readiness 
of the men and women who, on a voluntary basis, might I add, put their 
hand up and say, ``I will go anywhere, anytime, to defend the 
principles of freedom''--they make that pledge willingly. They are not 
conscripted into the service. They make it on a voluntary basis.
  The least that we should be able to do is to make sure that the 
resources are there that properly man the force, train the force, and 
equip the force so that we never, ever face a fight that is fair. We 
should always have the advantage.
  So, for these reasons, Mr. Speaker, and with kind of a measure of 
hope that going through this process, as we have today, maybe it will 
inspire both sides of the aisle here and at the other

[[Page H7409]]

end of this building to work together to improve our processes so that 
it is the House and the Senate, collectively, doing the work that is 
prescribed as our fundamental duty in Article I, Section 8 of the 
United States Constitution, Mr. Speaker, I encourage a ``yes'' vote on 
this bill.
  Let's put this issue behind us. Let's move on to the more important 
things of our country, to include deficits and debt and the drivers 
that actually are making the situation much worse.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I think anyone watching this debate today, and certainly 
those of us who are here in the House, would say this is a very unusual 
moment.
  We have a lot of debates in this body in which there is a great deal 
of unanimity and agreement, and usually that is over naming a post 
office or doing something that is totally noncontroversial. But today 
is very different, because today we have truly, I think, respected the 
highest legacies of this body, that this body is supposed to be a 
Chamber where you bring very diverse opinions and perspectives to try 
and find common solutions to this country's needs.
  I think the compromise that we are hopefully going to approve today 
will serve as a model for what is possible in this body and in this 
Congress, because it truly is, in my 13 years, I think, a watershed 
moment. We are in a very, very divisive, polarized environment. We have 
come together to move this country forward.
  I want to thank and commend the ranking member and my friend, Mr. 
Womack. I can't imagine having a better relationship than I have with 
the ranking member, and I hope that he feels that, when he was chairman 
and I was ranking member, it was exactly the same way. Mr. Womack is a 
total class act and a distinguished Member, and it is an honor to work 
with him.
  Mr. WOMACK. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. YARMUTH. I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Speaker, let me say, for the record, that the feeling 
is mutual. I admire and appreciate the great relationship that Mr. 
Yarmuth and I have.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for those comments.
  Mr. Speaker, I also compliment and thank the Budget Committee staff, 
both majority and minority, for the work done on this very important 
piece of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, our country is facing an infrastructure deficit; we face 
a skills and education deficit; and we face a growing income inequality 
crisis. A failure by Congress to make the necessary investments to 
promote growth and opportunity will leave our communities and country 
vulnerable.
  Instead of the extreme cuts outlined in the President's 2020 budget 
proposal, we need to be making bold investments in research and 
development, educating and training a strong workforce, improving 
public health, caring for our veterans, ensuring an accurate 2020 
Census, and protecting our homeland.
  The United States did not become an economic powerhouse and world 
leader by accident. Throughout our history, we made strong investments 
in our people, our economy, and our security that have allowed us to 
innovate and grow, while promoting broad-based economic opportunity.
  This agreement will build on that legacy by raising the caps and 
lifting the debt ceiling, allowing Congress to move our Nation forward 
without leaving our communities behind.
  I look forward to passing this bill in the House, and I encourage 
both the Senate and the White House to join us in ensuring that we meet 
our obligations to our Nation and to the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 519, the previous question is ordered on 
the bill.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________