[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 31, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H2681-H2706]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2023

  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 456, 
I call up the bill (H.R. 3746) to provide for a responsible increase to 
the debt ceiling, 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 456, the 
amendment printed in House Report 118-81 is adopted and the bill, as 
amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 3746

       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 ``Fiscal Responsibility Act of 
     2023''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. References.

                   DIVISION A--LIMIT FEDERAL SPENDING

   TITLE I--DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS FOR DISCRETIONARY CATEGORY

Sec. 101. Discretionary spending limits.
Sec. 102. Special adjustments for fiscal years 2024 and 2025.
Sec. 103. Budgetary treatment of previously enacted emergency 
              requirements.

      TITLE II--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Sec. 111. Authority for Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Resolution in the House 
              of Representatives.
Sec. 112. Limitation on Advance Appropriations in the House of 
              Representatives.
Sec. 113. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

              TITLE III--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE SENATE

Sec. 121. Authority for fiscal year 2024 budget resolution in the 
              Senate.
Sec. 122. Authority for fiscal year 2025 budget resolution in the 
              Senate.
Sec. 123. Limitation on advance appropriations in the Senate.
Sec. 124. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

                   DIVISION B--SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS

                TITLE I--RESCISSION OF UNOBLIGATED FUNDS

Sec. 1. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 2. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 3. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 4. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 5. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 6. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 7. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 8. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 9. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 10. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 11. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 12. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 13. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 14. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 15. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 16. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 17. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 18. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 19. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 20. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 21. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 22. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 23. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 24. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 25. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 26. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 27. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 28. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 29. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 30. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 31. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 32. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 33. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 34. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 35. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 36. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 37. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 38. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 39. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 40. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 41. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 42. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 43. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 44. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 45. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 46. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 47. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 48. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 49. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 50. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 51. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 52. Rescission of unobligated funds.

[[Page H2682]]

Sec. 53. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 54. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 55. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 56. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 57. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 58. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 59. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 60. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 61. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 62. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 63. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 64. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 65. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 66. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 67. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 68. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 69. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 70. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 71. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 72. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 73. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 74. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 75. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 76. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 77. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 78. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 79. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 80. Rescission of unobligated funds.
Sec. 81. Rescission of unobligated funds.

        TITLE II--FAMILY AND SMALL BUSINESS TAXPAYER PROTECTION

Sec. 251. Rescission of certain balances made available to the Internal 
              Revenue Service.

           TITLE III--STATUTORY ADMINISTRATIVE PAY-AS-YOU-GO

Sec. 261. Short title.
Sec. 262. Definitions.
Sec. 263. Requirements for administrative actions that affect direct 
              spending.
Sec. 264. Issuance of administrative guidance.
Sec. 265. Waiver.
Sec. 266. Exemption.
Sec. 267. Judicial review.
Sec. 268. Sunset.
Sec. 269. GAO report.
Sec. 270. Congressional Review Act compliance assessment.

  TITLE IV--TERMINATION OF SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL STUDENT 
        LOANS; RESUMPTION OF ACCRUAL OF INTEREST AND COLLECTIONS

Sec. 271. Termination of suspension of payments on Federal student 
              loans; resumption of accrual of interest and collections.

                      DIVISION C--GROW THE ECONOMY

            TITLE I--TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES

Sec. 301. Recalibration of the caseload reduction credit.
Sec. 302. Pilot projects for promoting accountability by measuring work 
              outcomes.
Sec. 303. Elimination of small checks scheme.
Sec. 304. Reporting of work outcomes.
Sec. 305. Effective date.

                       TITLE II--SNAP EXEMPTIONS

Sec. 311. Modification of work requirement exemptions.
Sec. 312. Modification of general exemptions.
Sec. 313. Supplemental nutrition assistance program under the Food and 
              Nutrition Act of 2008.
Sec. 314. Waiver transparency.

                      TITLE III--PERMITTING REFORM

Sec. 321. Builder Act.
Sec. 322. Interregional Transfer Capability Determination Study.
Sec. 323. Permitting streamlining for energy storage.
Sec. 324. Expediting completion of the Mountain Valley Pipeline.

                   DIVISION D--INCREASE IN DEBT LIMIT

Sec. 401. Temporary extension of public debt limit.

     SEC. 3. REFERENCES.

       Except as expressly provided otherwise, any reference to 
     ``this Act'' contained in any division of this Act shall be 
     treated as referring only to the provisions of that division.

                   DIVISION A--LIMIT FEDERAL SPENDING

   TITLE I--DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS FOR DISCRETIONARY CATEGORY

     SEC. 101. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.

       (a) In General.--Section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(c)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (7)(B), by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:
       ``(9) for fiscal year 2024--
       ``(A) for the revised security category, $886,349,000,000 
     in new budget authority; and
       ``(B) for the revised nonsecurity category; 
     $703,651,000,000 in new budget authority; and
       ``(10) for fiscal year 2025--
       ``(A) for the revised security category, $895,212,000,000 
     in new budget authority; and
       ``(B) for the revised nonsecurity category; 
     $710,688,000,000 in new budget authority;''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments to Adjustments.--
       (1) Continuing disability reviews and rederminations.--
     Section 251(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended--
       (A) in subclause (IX), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subclause (X), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (C) by inserting after subclause (X) the following:
       ``(XI) for fiscal year 2024, $1,578,000,000 in additional 
     new budget authority; and
       ``(XII) for fiscal year 2025, $1,630,000,000 in additional 
     new budget authority.''.
       (2) Health care fraud and abuse control.--Section 
     251(b)(2)(C)(i) of such Act is amended--
       (A) in subclause (IX), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subclause (X), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (C) by inserting after subclause (X) the following:
       ``(XI) for fiscal year 2024, $604,000,000 in additional new 
     budget authority; and
       ``(XII) for fiscal year 2025, $630,000,000 in additional 
     new budget authority.''.
       (3) Disaster funding.--Section 251(b)(2)(D)(i) of such Act 
     is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding subclause (I), by striking 
     ``for fiscal years 2012 through 2021'' and inserting ``for 
     fiscal years 2024 and 2025''; and
       (B) by amending subclause (II) to read as follows:

       ``(II) notwithstanding clause (iv), five percent of the 
     total appropriations provided in the previous 10 years, net 
     of any rescissions of budget authority enacted in the same 
     period, with respect to amounts provided for major disasters 
     declared pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) and 
     designated by the Congress in statute as an emergency; and''.

       (4) Reemployment services and eligibility assessments.--
     Section 251(b)(2)(E)(i) of such Act is amended--
       (A) in subclause (III), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subclause (IV), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (C) by inserting after subclause (IV) the following:

       ``(V) for fiscal year 2024, $265,000,000 in additional new 
     budget authority; and
       ``(VI) for fiscal year 2025, $271,000,000 in additional new 
     budget authority.''.

       (c) Conforming Amendments Relating to Sequestration 
     Reports.--Section 254 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 904) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``2021'' and 
     inserting ``2025''; and
       (2) in subsection (f)(2)(A), by striking ``2021'' and 
     inserting ``2025''.
       (d) Appropriation for Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund.--In 
     addition to amounts otherwise available for such purposes, 
     there are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not 
     otherwise appropriated, for investment in the delivery of 
     veterans' health care associated with exposure to 
     environmental hazards, the expenses incident to the delivery 
     of veterans' health care and benefits associated with 
     exposure to environmental hazards, and medical and other 
     research relating to exposure to environmental hazards, as 
     authorized by section 324 of title 38, United States Code--
       (1) $20,268,000,000, which shall become available on 
     October 1, 2023, and shall remain available until September 
     30, 2028; and
       (2) $24,455,000,000, which shall become available on 
     October 1, 2024, and shall remain available until September 
     30, 2029.
       (e) Appropriation for Department of Commerce Nonrecurring 
     Expenses Fund.--
       (1) In general.--In addition to amounts otherwise 
     available, there is appropriated to the Department of 
     Commerce Nonrecurring Expenses Fund for fiscal year 2023, out 
     of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 
     $22,000,000,000, to remain available until expended, of 
     which--
       (A) $11,000,000,000 is to carry out programs related to 
     Government efficiencies in fiscal year 2024; and
       (B) $11,000,000,000 is to carry out programs related to 
     Government efficiencies in fiscal year 2025.
       (2) Limitation on transfer.--Funds provided by paragraph 
     (1) shall not be subject to any transfer authority provided 
     by law.
       (3) Report requirements.--Reporting requirements in section 
     111(a) of division B of Public Law 116-93 shall apply to 
     funds provided by paragraph (1).
       (4) Statutory paygo scorecards.--The budgetary effects of 
     this subsection shall not be entered on either PAYGO 
     scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the 
     Statutory Pay As-You-Go Act of 2010.
       (5) Senate paygo scorecards.--The budgetary effects of this 
     subsection and each succeeding division shall not be entered 
     on any PAYGO scorecard maintained for purposes of section 
     4106 of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress).
       (6) Classification of budgetary effects.--Notwithstanding 
     Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping Guidelines set forth in the 
     joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference 
     accompanying Conference Report 105-217 and section 250(c)(7) 
     and (c)(8) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985, the budgetary effects of this subsection 
     shall be estimated for purposes of section 251 of such Act 
     and as appropriations for discretionary accounts for purposes 
     of the allocation to the Committee on Appropriations pursuant 
     to section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and 
     the concurrent resolution on the budget.
       (f) Additional Spending Limits.--For purposes of section 
     302(a)(5) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 
     Act of 1974, in the following applicable fiscal years,

[[Page H2683]]

     the following discretionary spending limits shall apply:
       (1) Fiscal year 2026, $1,621,959,000,000.
       (2) Fiscal year 2027, $1,638,179,000,000.
       (3) Fiscal year 2028, $1,654,560,000,000.
       (4) Fiscal year 2029, $1,671,106,000,000.

     SEC. 102. SPECIAL ADJUSTMENTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024 AND 2025.

       Section 251 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) Revised Discretionary Spending Limits for Fiscal Year 
     2024.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), if on or after 
     January 1, 2024, there is in effect an Act making continuing 
     appropriations for part of fiscal year 2024 for any 
     discretionary budget account, the discretionary spending 
     limits specified in subsection (c)(9) for fiscal year 2024 
     shall be adjusted in the final sequestration report, in 
     accordance with paragraph (2), as follows:
       ``(A) For the revised security category, the amount that is 
     equal to the total budget authority for such category for 
     base funding, as published in the Congressional Budget Office 
     cost estimate for the applicable appropriations Acts for the 
     preceding fiscal year (table 1-S of H.R. 2617, published on 
     December 21, 2022), reduced by one percent.
       ``(B) For the revised non-security category, the amount 
     that is equal to the total budget authority for such category 
     for base funding as published in the Congressional Budget 
     Office cost estimate for the applicable appropriations Acts 
     for the preceding fiscal year (table 1-S of H.R. 2617, 
     published on December 21, 2022), reduced by one percent.
       ``(2) Final report; sequestration order.--If the conditions 
     specified in paragraph (1) are met during fiscal year 2024, 
     the final sequestration report for such fiscal year pursuant 
     to section 254(f)(1) and any order pursuant to section 
     254(f)(5) shall be issued on the earlier of--
       ``(A) 10 days, not including weekends and holidays, for the 
     Congressional Budget Office and 15 days, not including 
     weekends and holidays, for the Office of Management and 
     Budget and the President, after the enactment into law of 
     annual full-year appropriations for all budget accounts that 
     normally receive such annual appropriations (or the enactment 
     of the applicable full-year appropriations Acts without any 
     provision for such accounts); or
       ``(B) April 30, 2024.
       ``(3) Reversal.--If, after January 1, 2024, there are 
     enacted into law each of the full year discretionary 
     appropriation Acts, then the adjustment to the applicable 
     discretionary spending limits in paragraph (1) shall have no 
     force or effect, and the discretionary spending limits for 
     the revised security category and revised nonsecurity 
     category for the applicable fiscal year shall be such limits 
     as in effect on December 31 of the applicable fiscal year.
       ``(e) Revised Discretionary Spending Limits for Fiscal Year 
     2025.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), if on or after 
     January 1, 2025, there is in effect an Act making continuing 
     appropriations for part of fiscal year 2025 for any 
     discretionary budget account, the discretionary spending 
     limits specified in subsection (c)(10) for fiscal year 2025 
     shall be adjusted in the final sequestration report, in 
     accordance with paragraph (2), as follows:
       ``(A) for the revised security category, the amount 
     calculated for such category in section (d)(1)(A); and
       ``(B) for the revised non-security category, the amount 
     calculated for each category in section (d)(1)(B).
       ``(2) Final report; sequestration order.--If the conditions 
     specified in paragraph (1) are met during fiscal year 2025, 
     the final sequestration report for such fiscal year pursuant 
     to section 254(f)(1) and any order pursuant to section 
     254(f)(5) shall be issued on the earlier of--
       ``(A) 10 days, not including weekends and holidays, for the 
     Congressional Budget Office, and 15 days, not including 
     weekends and holidays, for the Office of Management and 
     Budget and the President, after the enactment into law of 
     annual full-year appropriations for all budget accounts that 
     normally receive such annual appropriations (or the enactment 
     of the applicable full-year appropriations Acts without any 
     provision for such accounts); or
       ``(B) April 30, 2025.
       ``(3) Reversal.--If, after January 1, 2025, there are 
     enacted into law each of the full year discretionary 
     appropriation Acts, then the adjustment to the applicable 
     discretionary spending limits in paragraph (1) shall have no 
     force or effect, and the discretionary spending limits for 
     the revised security category and revised nonsecurity 
     category for the applicable fiscal year shall be such limits 
     as in effect on December 31 of the applicable fiscal year.''.

     SEC. 103. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF PREVIOUSLY ENACTED EMERGENCY 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 905(c) of division 
     J of Public Law 117-58 and section 23005(c) of division B of 
     Public Law 117-159, Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping 
     Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of 
     the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 
     105-217, and sections 250(c)(7) and (c)(8) of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, the 
     budgetary effects for any fiscal year for the amounts 
     specified in subsection (b) shall not count for purposes of 
     section 251 of such Act.
       (b) Amounts.--The amounts specified in this subsection 
     are--
       (1) amounts designated by the Congress as being for an 
     emergency requirement pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) and 
     section 4001(b) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the 
     concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022, in 
     division B of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (Public 
     Law 117-159);
       (2) amounts designated by the Congress as an emergency 
     requirement pursuant to section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 in division J of 
     the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-
     58); and
       (3) amounts designated by the Congress as being for an 
     emergency requirement pursuant to section 4001(a)(1) and 
     section 4001(b) of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the 
     concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022, and 
     section 1(e) of H. Res. 1151 (117th Congress) in section 
     443(b) in division G of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
     2023 (Public Law 117-328).

      TITLE II--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

     SEC. 111. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN 
                   THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2024.--For the purpose of enforcing the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for fiscal year 2024, the 
     allocations, aggregates, and levels provided for in 
     subsection (b) shall apply in the House of Representatives in 
     the same manner as for a concurrent resolution on the budget 
     for fiscal year 2024 with appropriate budgetary levels for 
     fiscal year 2024 and for fiscal years 2025 through 2033.
       (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 as soon as practicable containing--
       (1) for the Committee on Appropriations, committee 
     allocations for fiscal year 2024 consistent with 
     discretionary spending limits set forth in section 251(c)(9) 
     of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985, as added by this Act, and the outlays flowing 
     therefrom, and committee allocations for fiscal year 2024 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 2024 and for the period of fiscal 
     years 2025 through 2033 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 2024 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 2024 and for 
     the period of fiscal years 2025 through 2033 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) 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 2024 
     through 2033; 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 2024 to fiscal year 2028 
     or fiscal year 2024 to fiscal year 2033.
       (d) Expiration.--Subsections (a) through (c) shall no 
     longer apply if a concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2024 is agreed to by the Senate and House of 
     Representatives.

     SEC. 112. 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 2025, under the heading ``accounts 
     identified for advance appropriations'' in an aggregate 
     amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority;
       (2) for fiscal year 2025, under the heading ``veterans 
     accounts identified for advance appropriations''; and
       (3) for fiscal year 2025, under the heading ``indian health 
     accounts identified for advance appropriations'' in an 
     aggregate amount not to exceed the total budget authority 
     provided for such accounts for fiscal

[[Page H2684]]

     year 2024 in bills or joint resolutions making appropriations 
     for fiscal year 2024.
       (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 2024, or any amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that first becomes available 
     following fiscal year 2024.
       (d) Expiration.--The preceding subsections of this section 
     shall expire if a concurrent resolution on the budget for 
     fiscal year 2024 is agreed to by the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives pursuant to section 301 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974.

     SEC. 113. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       This title is enacted by the House of Representatives--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House, 
     and as such shall be considered as part of the rules of the 
     House, and such rules shall supersede other rules only to the 
     extent that it is inconsistent therewith; and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     the House to change such rules (so far as relating to the 
     House) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same 
     extent as in the case of any other rule of the House.

              TITLE III--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT IN THE SENATE

     SEC. 121. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN 
                   THE SENATE.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2024.--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 2024 with appropriate budgetary 
     levels for fiscal year 2024 and for fiscal years 2025 through 
     2033.
       (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 2024 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, and the outlays flowing 
     therefrom, for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974;
       (2) for all committees other than the Committee on 
     Appropriations, committee allocations for fiscal years 2024, 
     2024 through 2028, and 2024 through 2033, consistent with the 
     May 2023 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 2024 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 2024, 2024 
     through 2028, and 2024 through 2033, consistent with the May 
     2023 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 311 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 642);
       (5) levels of Social Security revenues and outlays for 
     fiscal years 2024, 2024 through 2028, and 2024 through 2033, 
     consistent with the May 2023 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); and
       (6) a statement under the heading ``Accounts Identified for 
     Advance Appropriations'' for the purpose of enforcing section 
     123 of this title.
       (c) Additional Matter.--The statement referred to in 
     subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2024 the 
     deficit-neutral reserve fund in section 3003 of S. Con. Res. 
     14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 
     for fiscal year 2022, updated by 2 fiscal years.
       (d) Expiration.--This section shall expire if a concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2024 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. 122. AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET RESOLUTION IN 
                   THE SENATE.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2025.--For the purpose of enforcing the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.), 
     after April 15, 2024, 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 
     2025 with appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2025 
     and for fiscal years 2026 through 2034.
       (b) Committee Allocations, Aggregates, and Levels.--After 
     April 15, 2024, but not later than May 15, 2024, the Chairman 
     of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall submit a 
     statement for publication in the Congressional Record that 
     includes--
       (1) for the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, 
     committee allocations for fiscal year 2025 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, and the outlays flowing 
     therefrom, 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 2025, 
     2025 through 2029, and 2025 through 2034 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. 633);
       (3) aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2025 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 2025, 2025 
     through 2029, and 2025 through 2034 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);
       (5) levels of Social Security revenues and outlays for 
     fiscal years 2025, 2025 through 2029, and 2025 through 2034 
     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); and
       (6) a statement under the heading ``Accounts Identified for 
     Advance Appropriations'' for the purpose of enforcing section 
     123 of this title.
       (c) Additional Matter.--The statement referred to in 
     subsection (b) may also include for fiscal year 2025 the 
     deficit-neutral reserve fund in section 3003 of S. Con. Res. 
     14 (117th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 
     for fiscal year 2022, updated by 3 fiscal years.
       (d) Expiration.--This section shall expire if a concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2025 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. 123. 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 2024 that first becomes available for any fiscal year 
     after 2024 or any new budget authority provided in a bill or 
     joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2025 
     that first becomes available for any fiscal year after 2025.
       (2) Exceptions.--Advance appropriations may be provided--
       (A) for fiscal years 2025 and 2026, 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;
       (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; and
       (D) for the Department of Health and Human Services for the 
     Indian Health Services and Indian Health Facilities 
     accounts--
       (i) for fiscal year 2025, in an amount that is not more 
     than the amount provided for fiscal year 2024 in a bill or 
     joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2023 
     or 2024 for programs, projects, and activities that are not 
     prohibited from using amounts provided for fiscal year 2024 
     in a bill or joint resolution making appropriations for 
     fiscal year 2023; and
       (ii) for fiscal year 2026, in an amount that is not more 
     than the amount provided for fiscal year 2025 in a bill or 
     joint resolution

[[Page H2685]]

     making appropriations for fiscal year 2024 or 2025 for 
     programs, projects, and activities that are not prohibited 
     from using amounts provided for fiscal year 2025 in a bill or 
     joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2024.
       (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) Expiration.--Subsection (a) shall terminate on the date 
     on which a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 
     year 2024 or for fiscal year 2025 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. 124. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       This title is enacted by the Senate--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate, 
     and as such shall be considered as part of the rules of the 
     Senate, and such rules shall supersede other rules only to 
     the extent that it is inconsistent therewith; and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     the Senate to change such rules (so far as relating to the 
     Senate) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same 
     extent as in the case of any other rule of the Senate.

                   DIVISION B--SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS

                TITLE I--RESCISSION OF UNOBLIGATED FUNDS

       Sec. 1.  Each rescission made by this title shall be 
     applied to the unobligated balances for each applicable 
     appropriation as of the date of enactment of this title.
       Sec. 2.  The unobligated balances from the following 
     appropriations, in the following amounts and subject to the 
     conditions specified below, are hereby permanently rescinded:
       (1) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services 
     Emergency Fund'' in title III of division A of Public Law 
     116-123, including any funds transferred from such heading 
     that remain unobligated, with the exception of $59,000,000.
       (2) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services 
     Emergency Fund'' in title V of division A of Public Law 116-
     127, including any funds transferred from such heading that 
     remain unobligated.
       (3) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services 
     Emergency Fund'' in title VIII of division B of Public Law 
     116-136, including any funds transferred from such heading 
     that remain unobligated, with the exception of $2,127,000,000 
     and--
       (A) any funds that were transferred and merged with the 
     Covered Countermeasure Process Fund authorized by section 
     319F-4 of the Public Health Service Act; and
       (B) any funds that were transferred and merged with funds 
     made available under the heading ``Office of the Secretary--
     Office of Inspector General'' pursuant to section 18113 of 
     title VIII of division B of Public Law 116-136.
       (4) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     in the first paragraph under the heading ``Public Health and 
     Social Services Emergency Fund'' in title I of division B of 
     Public Law 116-139, including any funds transferred from such 
     heading that remain unobligated, with the exception of 
     $300,000,000, which shall remain available for necessary 
     expenses for program administration and oversight.
       (5) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     in the second paragraph under the heading ``Public Health and 
     Social Services Emergency Fund'' in title I of division B of 
     Public Law 116-139, including any funds transferred from such 
     heading that remain unobligated, with the exception of 
     $243,000,000 and any funds that were transferred and merged 
     with funds made available under the heading ``Office of the 
     Secretary--Office of Inspector General'' pursuant to section 
     103 of title I of division B of Public Law 116-139.
       (6) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Public Health and Social Services 
     Emergency Fund'' in title III of division M of Public Law 
     116-260, including any funds transferred from such heading 
     that remain unobligated, with the exception of $205,000,000.
       (7) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention--CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support'' in 
     title III of division A of Public Law 116-123, including any 
     funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated, 
     with the exception of $195,000,000 and any funds that were 
     transferred and merged with the Infectious Diseases Rapid 
     Response Reserve Fund established by section 231 of division 
     B of Public Law 115-245.
       (8) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention--CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support'' in 
     title VIII of division B of Public Law 116-136, including any 
     funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated, 
     with the exception of $446,000,000 and any funds that were 
     transferred and merged with the Infectious Diseases Rapid 
     Response Reserve Fund established by section 231 of division 
     B of Public Law 115-245.
       (9) All of the unobligated balances of funds made available 
     under the heading ``Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention--CDC-Wide Activities and Program Support'' in 
     title III of division M of Public Law 116-260, including any 
     funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated, 
     with the exception of $177,000,000.
       (10) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available under the heading ``National Institutes of Health--
     National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases'' in 
     title III of division A of Public Law 116-123, including any 
     funds transferred from such heading that remain unobligated.
       (11) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available to ``Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services--
     Program Management'' in title VIII of division B of Public 
     Law 116-136.
       (12) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2301 of Public Law 117-2, with the 
     exception of $103,000,000.
       (13) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2302 of Public Law 117-2.
       (14) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2303 of Public Law 117-2, with the 
     exception of $69,000,000.
       (15) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2401 of Public Law 117-2, with the 
     exception of $7,323,000,000.
       (16) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2402 of Public Law 117-2, with the 
     exception of $714,000,000.
       (17) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2403 of Public Law 117-2.
       (18) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2501 of Public Law 117-2.
       (19) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2502 of Public Law 117-2.
       (20) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2601 of Public Law 117-2.
       (21) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2602 of Public Law 117-2.
       (22) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2603 of Public Law 117-2.
       (23) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2604 of Public Law 117-2.
       (24) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2605 of Public Law 117-2.
       (25) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2703 of Public Law 117-2.
       (26) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2704 of Public Law 117-2.
       (27) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2705 of Public Law 117-2.
       (28) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2711 of Public Law 117-2.
       (29) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2712 of Public Law 117-2.
       (30) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 2801 of Public Law 117-2.
       (31) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 3101 of Public Law 117-2, with the 
     exception of $793,000,000.
       (32) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 511A(a) of the Social Security Act, as 
     added by section 9101 of Public Law 117-2.
       (33) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 1150C(a) of the Social Security Act, as 
     added by section 9911 of Public Law 117-2.
       (34) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 1947(e) of the Social Security Act, as 
     added by section 9813 of Public Law 117-2.
       (35) All of the unobligated balances of funds made 
     available by section 1862(g)(2) of the Social Security Act, 
     as added by section 9401 of Public Law 117-2.

[[Page H2686]]

       Sec. 3.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     under the heading ``Agricultural Programs--Office of the 
     Secretary'' in title I of division B of Public Law 116-136 
     are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 4.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     by section 751 in title VII of division N of Public Law 116-
     260 are hereby permanently rescinded, except for funds made 
     available by section 601 of division HH of Public Law 117-
     328.
       Sec. 5.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     by section 753 in title VII of division N of Public Law 116-
     260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 6.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     by section 754 in title VII of division N of Public Law 116-
     260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 7.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     by section 762(i) in title VII of division N of Public Law 
     116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 8.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     by section 764(f) in title VII of division N of Public Law 
     116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 9.  The unobligated balances of amounts made available 
     by section 1001 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 10.  Of the unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 4027 of title IV of division A of Public 
     Law 116-136, $200,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 11.  Of the unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 4120 of title IV of division A of Public 
     Law 116-136, $295,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 12.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 7301(c) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 13.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 104A(m) of the Community Development 
     Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 
     4701 et seq.), as added by section 522 of title V of division 
     N of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded, 
     with the exception of $284,500,000, which shall remain 
     available for necessary expenses associated with the making 
     of awards announced prior to the enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 14.  Of the unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 3301(a)(2)(A) of Public Law 117-2, 
     $150,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 15.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 411 in subtitle A of title IV of 
     division N of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 16.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by subsection (a) of section 2206 of Public Law 
     117-2 are hereby permanently rescinded, with the exception of 
     amounts allocated under paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection 
     (b) of such section.
       Sec. 17.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2001 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 18.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2002 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 19.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2003 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 20.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Federal Highway 
     Administration--Highway Infrastructure Programs'' in title IV 
     of division M of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 21.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 7202(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 22.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by sections 5002(b) and 5006(a)(2) of Public Law 
     117-2, including any amounts transferred and merged with 
     ``Small Business Administration--Disaster Loans Program 
     Account'' pursuant to section 90007(b)(2)(A) of Public Law 
     117-58 that remain unobligated, are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 23.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Independent Agencies--Small 
     Business Administration--Disaster Loans Program Account'' in 
     title II of division B of Public Law 116-139 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 24.  Of the unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2118(a) of title II of division A of 
     Public Law 116-136, as added by section 9032 of Public Law 
     117-2, $1,000,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 25.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Public and Indian Housing--Tenant-Based Rental 
     Assistance'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 
     are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 26.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Public and Indian Housing--Native American 
     Programs'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 
     are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 27.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Housing Programs--Housing for Persons with 
     Disabilities'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-
     136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 28.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Housing Programs--Project-Based Rental 
     Assistance'' in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 
     are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 29.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development--Housing Programs--Housing for the Elderly'' in 
     title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 30.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 3208(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 31.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Transportation--
     Office of the Secretary--Salaries and Expenses'' in title XII 
     of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 32.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Transportation--
     Office of the Secretary--Essential Air Service'' in title XII 
     of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 33.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Transportation--
     Federal Aviation Administration--Grants-In-Aid for Airports'' 
     in title XII of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 34.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 7101 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 35.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 7102(a)(1) of Public Law 117-2 are 
     hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 36.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 501(a)(1) of title V of division N of 
     Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 37.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 9601(d)(1) of Public Law 117-2 are 
     hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 38.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 4009 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 39.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Justice--General 
     Administration--Justice Information Sharing Technology'' in 
     title II of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 40.  Of the unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Defense--
     Procurement--Defense Production Act Purchases'' in title III 
     of division B of Public Law 116-136, $61,381,230 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 41.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of State--
     Administration of Foreign Affairs--Diplomatic Programs'' in 
     title XI of division B of Public Law 116-136 and subsequently 
     transferred to the Department of State's ``Educational and 
     Cultural Exchange Programs'' account are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 42.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Bilateral Economic Assistance--
     Department of State--Migration and Refugee Assistance'' in 
     title XI of division B of Public Law 116-136 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 43.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Bilateral Economic Assistance--
     Funds Appropriated to the President--International Disaster 
     Assistance'' in title XI of division B of Public Law 116-136 
     are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 44.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of State--
     Administration of Foreign Affairs--Sudan Claims'' in title IX 
     of division K of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 45.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Bilateral Economic Assistance--
     Funds Appropriated to the President--Economic Support Fund'' 
     in title IX of division K of Public Law 116-260 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 46.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Federal Communications 
     Commission--Salaries and Expenses'' in title V of division B 
     of Public Law 116-136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 47.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Independent Agencies--Small 
     Business Administration--Emergency EIDL Grants'' in title II 
     of division B of Public Law 116-139 are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.
       Sec. 48.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 323(d)(1)(B) of title III of division N 
     of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 49.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 323(d)(1)(E)(i) of title III of division 
     N of Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 50.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 902(c)(5) of title IX of division N of 
     Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.

[[Page H2687]]

       Sec. 51.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 905(b) of title IX of division N of 
     Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 52.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 5003(b)(2)(A) of Public Law 117-2 are 
     hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 53.  The unobligated balances of amounts described in 
     the tenth proviso under the heading ``Administration for 
     Children and Families--Payments to States for the Child Care 
     and Development Block Grant'' in title III of division M of 
     Public Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 54.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2201(b) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 55.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2204(d)(1) of Public Law 117-2, 
     including any amounts made available by amendments made by 
     such section, are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 56.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2205 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 57.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2912(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 58.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 403(c) of the Social Security Act, as 
     added by section 9201 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 59.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 816(f) of the Native American Programs 
     Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2992d(f)), as added by section 11004 
     of Public Law 117-2, are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 60.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Rural Development Programs--
     Rural Utilities Service--Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and 
     Broadband Program'' in title I of division B of Public Law 
     116-136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 61.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 752 of title VII of division N of Public 
     Law 116-260 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 62.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 1002(c) of Public Law 117-2, are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 63.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 3207(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 64.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Energy--Energy 
     Programs--Science'' in title IV of division B of Public Law 
     116-136 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 65.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 6003 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 66.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 11002(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 67.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``Department of Education--
     Departmental Management--Program Administration'' in title 
     III of division M of Public Law 116-260 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 68.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2007 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 69.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2010 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 70.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2011 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 71.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 11006 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 72.  Of the unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 6002(a) of Public Law 117-2, all but 
     $22,000,000 are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 73.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2101(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded, with the exception of $1,892,718 for 
     the Office of the Solicitor within the Departmental 
     Management account and amounts allocated for the Office of 
     Inspector General under paragraph (2) of subsection (b) of 
     such section.
       Sec. 74.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2110(g) of Public Law 116-136, as 
     amended, are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 75.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available under the heading ``General Services 
     Administration--General Activities--Federal Citizen Services 
     Fund'' in title V of division B of Public Law 116-136 are 
     hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 76.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2021 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 77.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2022 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 78.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2023 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 79.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2(c)(2)(D)(v) of the Railroad 
     Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. 352(c)(2)(D)(v)), as 
     amended, are hereby permanently rescinded.
       Sec. 80.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 2904 of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded, with the exception of $500,000 for the 
     Railroad Retirement Board Office of Inspector General.
       Sec. 81.  The unobligated balances of amounts made 
     available by section 7404(a) of Public Law 117-2 are hereby 
     permanently rescinded.

        TITLE II--FAMILY AND SMALL BUSINESS TAXPAYER PROTECTION

     SEC. 251. RESCISSION OF CERTAIN BALANCES MADE AVAILABLE TO 
                   THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.

       Of the unobligated balances of amounts appropriated or 
     otherwise made available for activities of the Internal 
     Revenue Service by paragraphs (1)(A)(ii), (1)(A)(iii), 
     (1)(B), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of section 10301 of Public Law 
     117-169 (commonly known as the ``Inflation Reduction Act of 
     2022'') as of the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     $1,389,525,000 are hereby rescinded.

           TITLE III--STATUTORY ADMINISTRATIVE PAY-AS-YOU-GO

     SEC. 261. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Administrative Pay-As-You-
     Go Act of 2023''.

     SEC. 262. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title--
       (1) the term ``administrative action'' means a ``rule'' as 
     defined in section 804(3) of title 5, United States Code;
       (2) the term ``agency'' means any authority of the United 
     States that is an ``agency'' under section 3502(1) of title 
     44, United States Code, other than those considered to be 
     independent regulatory agencies, as defined in section 
     3502(5) of such title;
       (3) the term ``covered discretionary administrative 
     action'' means a discretionary administrative action that 
     would affect direct spending;
       (4) the term ``direct spending'' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 250(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900(c));
       (5) the term ``Director'' means the Director of the Office 
     of Management and Budget;
       (6) the term ``discretionary administrative action''--
       (A) means any administrative action that is not required by 
     law; and
       (B) includes an administrative action required by law for 
     which an agency has discretion in the manner in which to 
     implement the administrative action; and
       (7) the term ``increase direct spending'' means that the 
     amount of direct spending would increase relative to--
       (A) the most recently submitted projection of the amount of 
     direct spending presented in baseline estimates as defined in 
     section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985, as amended, under--
       (i) the budget of the President submitted under section 
     1105 of title 31, United States Code; or
       (ii) the supplemental summary of the budget submitted under 
     section 1106 of title 31, United States Code;
       (B) with respect to a discretionary administrative action 
     that is incorporated into the applicable projection described 
     in subparagraph (A) and for which a proposal has not been 
     submitted under section 263(a)(2)(A), a projection of the 
     amount of direct spending if no administrative action were 
     taken; or
       (C) with respect to a discretionary administrative action 
     described in paragraph (6)(B), a projection of the amount of 
     direct spending under the least costly implementation option 
     reasonably identifiable by the agency that meets the 
     requirements under the statute.

     SEC. 263. REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS THAT AFFECT 
                   DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Discretionary Administrative Actions.--
       (1) In general.--Before an agency may finalize any covered 
     discretionary administrative action, the head of the agency 
     shall submit to the Director for review written notice 
     regarding the covered discretionary administrative action, 
     which shall include an estimate of the budgetary effects of 
     the covered discretionary administrative action.
       (2) Increasing direct spending.--
       (A) In general.--If the covered discretionary 
     administrative action would increase direct spending, the 
     written notice submitted by the head of the agency under 
     paragraph (1) shall include a proposal to undertake 1 or more 
     other administrative actions that would provide a reduction 
     in direct spending greater than or equal to the increase in 
     direct spending attributable to the covered discretionary 
     administrative action.
       (B) Review.--
       (i) In general.--The Director shall determine whether the 
     reduction in direct spending in a proposal in a written 
     notice from an agency under subparagraph (A) is greater than 
     or equal to the increase in direct spending attributable to 
     the covered discretionary administrative action to which the 
     written notice relates.

[[Page H2688]]

       (ii) No offset.--If the written notice regarding a proposed 
     covered discretionary administrative action that would 
     increase direct spending does not include a proposal to 
     offset the increased direct spending as determined in clause 
     (i), the Director shall return the written notice to the 
     agency for resubmission in accordance with this title.
       (b) Nondiscretionary Actions.--If an agency determines that 
     an administrative action that would increase direct spending 
     is required by law and therefore is not a covered 
     discretionary administrative action, before the agency 
     finalizes that administrative action, the head of the agency 
     shall--
       (1) submit to the Director a written opinion by the general 
     counsel of the agency, or the equivalent employee of the 
     agency, explaining that legal conclusion;
       (2) submit to the Director a projection of the amount of 
     direct spending under the least costly implementation option 
     reasonably identifiable by the agency that meets the 
     requirements under the statute; and
       (3) consult with the Director regarding implementation of 
     the administrative action.
       (c) Projections.--Any projection for purposes of this title 
     shall be conducted in accordance with Office of Management 
     and Budget Circular A-11, or any successor thereto.

     SEC. 264. ISSUANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDANCE.

       Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Director shall issue instructions regarding the 
     implementation of this title, including how covered 
     discretionary administrative actions that increase direct 
     spending and nontax receipts will be evaluated.

     SEC. 265. WAIVER.

       (a) In General.--The Director may waive the requirements of 
     section 263 if the Director concludes that the waiver--
       (1) is necessary for the delivery of essential services; or
       (2) is necessary for effective program delivery.
       (b) Publication.--Any waiver determination under subsection 
     (a) shall be published in the Federal Register.

     SEC. 266. EXEMPTION.

       This title shall not apply to administrative actions with 
     direct spending cost of less than--
       (1) $1,000,000,000 over the 10-year period beginning with 
     the current year; or
       (2) $100,000,000 in any given year during such 10-year 
     period.

     SEC. 267. JUDICIAL REVIEW.

       No determination, finding, action, or omission under this 
     title shall be subject to judicial review.

     SEC. 268. SUNSET.

       This title shall expire on December 31, 2024.

     SEC. 269. GAO REPORT.

       Within 180 days of the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Comptroller General shall issue a report on the 
     implementation of this title.

     SEC. 270. CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT.

       Section 801(a)(2)(A) of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after ``compliance with procedural steps 
     required by paragraph (1)(B)'' the following: ``, and shall 
     in addition include an assessment of the agency's compliance 
     with such requirements of the Administrative Pay-As-You-Go 
     Act of 2023 as may be applicable''.

  TITLE IV--TERMINATION OF SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL STUDENT 
        LOANS; RESUMPTION OF ACCRUAL OF INTEREST AND COLLECTIONS

     SEC. 271. TERMINATION OF SUSPENSION OF PAYMENTS ON FEDERAL 
                   STUDENT LOANS; RESUMPTION OF ACCRUAL OF 
                   INTEREST AND COLLECTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Sixty days after June 30, 2023, the 
     waivers and modifications described in subsection (c) shall 
     cease to be effective.
       (b) Prohibition.--Except as expressly authorized by an Act 
     of Congress enacted after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Education may not use any authority to 
     implement an extension of any executive action or rule 
     specified in subsection (c).
       (c) Waivers and Modifications Described.--The waivers and 
     modifications described in this subsection are the waivers 
     and modifications of statutory and regulatory provisions 
     relating to an extension of the suspension of payments on 
     certain loans and waivers of interest on such loans under 
     section 3513 of the CARES Act (20 U.S.C. 1001 note)--
       (1) described by the Department of Education in the Federal 
     Register on October 12, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 61513 et seq.); 
     and
       (2) most recently extended in the announcement by the 
     Department of Education on November 22, 2022.

                      DIVISION C--GROW THE ECONOMY

            TITLE I--TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE TO NEEDY FAMILIES

     SEC. 301. RECALIBRATION OF THE CASELOAD REDUCTION CREDIT.

       Section 407(b)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     607(b)(3)) is amended in each of subparagraphs (A)(ii) and 
     (B), by striking ``2005'' and inserting ``2015''.

     SEC. 302. PILOT PROJECTS FOR PROMOTING ACCOUNTABILITY BY 
                   MEASURING WORK OUTCOMES.

       Section 411 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 611) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Pilot Projects for Promoting Accountability by 
     Measuring Work Outcomes.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall carry out a pilot 
     program under which the Secretary may select up to 5 States 
     to which a grant is made under section 403(a) for a fiscal 
     year to negotiate performance benchmarks for work and family 
     outcomes for recipients of assistance under the State program 
     funded under this part, and programs funded with qualified 
     State expenditures. The Secretary shall issue guidance on how 
     States apply for participation in the pilot. The benchmarks 
     shall include--
       ``(A) the percentage of work-eligible individuals under the 
     State program funded under this part who are in unsubsidized 
     employment during the 2nd quarter after exiting the program;
       ``(B) the level of earnings of such individuals in the 2nd 
     and 4th quarters after exit; and
       ``(C) other indicators of family stability and well-being 
     as established by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Level of performance benchmark.--The Secretary and a 
     State selected under paragraph (1) shall agree to the 
     requisite level of performance on these benchmarks after 
     developing baseline data in the State and comparative data in 
     other States.
       ``(3) Failure of state to meet benchmark.--If a State fails 
     to meet a measured benchmark standard agreed to under 
     paragraph (2) for 2 successive fiscal years, the State, in 
     order to continue in the pilot shall enter into a plan with 
     the Secretary to achieve the required level of performance 
     or, if mutually agreed to, adjust the benchmark based on new 
     information about the feasibility of meeting such benchmark.
       ``(4) Duration.--The pilot under this subsection shall be 
     in effect for 6 fiscal years, with one year to establish 
     benchmark data and negotiate targets and five years to 
     measure performance against the targets, and shall supersede 
     the requirements under section 407 for such fiscal years, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law.
       ``(5) Application of penalty for failure to reduce 
     assistance for recipients refusing without good cause to 
     work.--For purposes of section 409(a)(14), a State operating 
     a pilot must have a system for reducing the amount of 
     assistance payable to a family if an individual refuses, 
     without good cause (including for reasons described in 
     407(e)(2)), to engage in any such activities as the State has 
     required of such an individual. A State without such a system 
     shall be considered to have failed to comply with the 
     requirements of section 407(e) for so long as the failure to 
     comply continues.
       ``(6) Collection of performance data.--Each State selected 
     under paragraph (1), in consultation with the Secretary, 
     shall collect and submit to the Secretary data on the 
     performance of the State operating such a pilot program.
       ``(7) Reports.--
       ``(A) Initial report.--Not later than 12 months after the 
     date of the enactment of this subsection the Secretary shall 
     submit a report to Congress on the status of the program 
     under this section.
       ``(B) Final report.--Not later than 12 months after the 
     date on which the programs under this section have 
     terminated, the Secretary shall submit a comprehensive report 
     to Congress on outcomes achieved under such programs.''.

     SEC. 303. ELIMINATION OF SMALL CHECKS SCHEME.

       Section 407(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     607(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) Special rule regarding calculation of the minimum 
     participation rate.--The Secretary shall determine 
     participation rates under this section without regard to any 
     individual engaged in work in a family that receives no 
     assistance under this part and less than $35 in assistance 
     funded with qualified State expenditures (as defined in 
     section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)).''.

     SEC. 304. REPORTING OF WORK OUTCOMES.

       Section 411 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 611), as 
     amended by section 302, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(f) Reporting Performance Indicators.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each State, in consultation with the 
     Secretary, shall collect and submit to the Secretary the 
     information necessary for each indicator described in 
     paragraph (2), for fiscal year 2025 and each fiscal year 
     thereafter.
       ``(2) Indicators of performance.--The indicators described 
     in this paragraph for a fiscal year are the following:
       ``(A) The percentage of individuals who were work-eligible 
     individuals as of the time of exit from the program, who are 
     in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after 
     the exit.
       ``(B) The percentage of individuals who were work-eligible 
     individuals who were in unsubsidized employment in the second 
     quarter after the exit, who are also in unsubsidized 
     employment during the fourth quarter after the exit.
       ``(C) The median earnings of individuals who were work-
     eligible individuals as of the time of exit from the program, 
     who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter 
     after the exit.

[[Page H2689]]

       ``(D) The percentage of individuals who have not attained 
     24 years of age, are attending high school or enrolled in an 
     equivalency program, and are work-eligible individuals or 
     were work-eligible individuals as of the time of exit from 
     the program, who obtain a high school degree or its 
     recognized equivalent while receiving assistance under the 
     State program funded under this part or within 1 year after 
     the exit.
       ``(3) Definition of exit.--In paragraph (2), the term 
     `exit' means, with respect to a State program funded under 
     this part, ceases to receive assistance under the program 
     funded by this part.
       ``(4) Regulations.--In order to ensure nationwide 
     comparability of data, the Secretary, after consultation with 
     the Secretary of Labor and with States, shall issue 
     regulations governing the reporting of performance indicators 
     under this subsection.''.

     SEC. 305. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by this title shall take effect on 
     October 1, 2024, except for sections 301 and 303 which shall 
     take effect on October 1, 2025.

                       TITLE II--SNAP EXEMPTIONS

     SEC. 311. MODIFICATION OF WORK REQUIREMENT EXEMPTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 6(o)(3) of the Food and Nutrition 
     Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(6)(o)(3)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       (1) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A)(i) under 18 years of age; or
       ``(ii) in--
       ``(I) fiscal year 2023 over 51 years of age;
       ``(II) fiscal year 2024 over 53 years of age;
       ``(III) fiscal year 2025 and each fiscal year thereafter 
     over 55 years of age;'';
       (2) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (3) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``;''; and
       (4) adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) a homeless individual;
       ``(G) a veteran; or
       ``(H) an individual who is 24 years of age or younger and 
     who was in foster care under the responsibility of a State on 
     the date of attaining 18 years of age or such higher age as 
     the State has elected under section 475(8)(B)(iii) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 675(8)(B)(iii)).''.
       (b) Application.--
       (1) State agency.--A state agency shall apply section 
     6(o)(3) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended by 
     subsection (a), to any application for initial certification 
     or recertification received starting 90 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Sunset.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
     cease to have effect on October 1, 2030.

     SEC. 312. MODIFICATION OF GENERAL EXEMPTIONS.

       Section 6(o)(6) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 
     U.S.C. 2015(o)(6)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (E)--
       (A) in the heading, by striking ``Subsequent fiscal years'' 
     and inserting ``Fiscal years 2020 through 2023'';
       (B) by striking ``(F) through (H)'' and inserting ``(G) 
     through (I)''; and
       (C) by striking ``year,'' and inserting ``year through 
     fiscal year 2023,'';
       (2) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``or (E)'' and 
     inserting ``, (E) or (F)'';
       (3) by redesignating subparagraphs (F), (G), and (H) as 
     subparagraphs (G), (H), and (I), respectively;
       (4) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
       ``(F) Subsequent fiscal years.--Subject to subparagraphs 
     (G) through (I), for fiscal years 2024 and each subsequent 
     fiscal year, a State agency may provide a number of 
     exemptions such that the average monthly number of exemptions 
     in effect during the fiscal year does not exceed 8 percent of 
     the number of covered individuals in the State, as estimated 
     by the Secretary under subparagraph (C), adjusted by the 
     Secretary to reflect changes in the State's caseload and the 
     Secretary's estimate of changes in the proportion of members 
     of households that receive supplemental nutrition assistance 
     program benefits covered by waivers granted under paragraph 
     (4)'';
       (5) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``(H)'' and inserting 
     ``(I)'';
       (6) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``(F) and (H)'' and 
     inserting ``(G) and (I)'';
       (7) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``(F) through (H)'' 
     and inserting ``(G) through (I)''; and
       (8) by adding at end the following:
       ``(J) Rule of construction for exemption adjustment.--
     During fiscal year 2024 and each subsequent fiscal year, 
     nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to allow a 
     State agency to accumulate unused exemptions to be provided 
     beyond the subsequent fiscal year.''.

     SEC. 313. SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM UNDER THE 
                   FOOD AND NUTRITION ACT OF 2008.

       Section 2 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 
     2011) is amended by adding at end the following:
     ``That program includes as a purpose to assist low-income 
     adults in obtaining employment and increasing their earnings. 
     Such employment and earnings, along with program benefits, 
     will permit low-income households to obtain a more nutritious 
     diet through normal channels of trade by increasing food 
     purchasing power for all eligible households who apply for 
     participation.''.

     SEC. 314. WAIVER TRANSPARENCY.

       Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall make public all 
     available State waiver requests, including all supporting 
     data from the State, and agency approvals of such requests, 
     including relevant documentation on the utilization of 
     waivers authorized under Section 6(o)(4)(A) of the Food and 
     Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)(4)(A)).

                      TITLE III--PERMITTING REFORM

     SEC. 321. BUILDER ACT.

       (a) Paragraph (2) of Section 102.--Section 102(2) of the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``insure'' and 
     inserting ``ensure'';
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``insure'' and 
     inserting ``ensure'';
       (3) in subparagraph (C)--
       (A) by inserting ``consistent with the provisions of this 
     Act and except where compliance would be inconsistent with 
     other statutory requirements,'' before ``include in every'';
       (B) by striking clauses (i) through (v) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(i) reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the 
     proposed agency action;
       ``(ii) any reasonably foreseeable adverse environmental 
     effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be 
     implemented;
       ``(iii) a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed 
     agency action, including an analysis of any negative 
     environmental impacts of not implementing the proposed agency 
     action in the case of a no action alternative, that are 
     technically and economically feasible, and meet the purpose 
     and need of the proposal;
       ``(iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of 
     man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of 
     long-term productivity; and
       ``(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of 
     Federal resources which would be involved in the proposed 
     agency action should it be implemented.''; and
       (C) by striking ``the responsible Federal official'' and 
     inserting ``the head of the lead agency'';
       (4) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``Any'' and inserting 
     ``any'';
       (5) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) through (I) as 
     subparagraphs (G) through (L), respectively;
       (6) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
       ``(D) ensure the professional integrity, including 
     scientific integrity, of the discussion and analysis in an 
     environmental document;
       ``(E) make use of reliable data and resources in carrying 
     out this Act;
       ``(F) consistent with the provisions of this Act, study, 
     develop, and describe technically and economically feasible 
     alternatives;''; and
       (7) in subparagraph (I), as amended, by inserting 
     ``consistent with the provisions of this Act,'' before 
     ``recognize''.
       (b) New Sections.--Title I of the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 106. PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF LEVEL OF REVIEW.

       ``(a) Threshold Determinations.--An agency is not required 
     to prepare an environmental document with respect to a 
     proposed agency action if--
       ``(1) the proposed agency action is not a final agency 
     action within the meaning of such term in chapter 5 of title 
     5, United States Code;
       ``(2) the proposed agency action is excluded pursuant to 
     one of the agency's categorical exclusions, another agency's 
     categorical exclusions consistent with section 109 of this 
     Act, or another provision of law;
       ``(3) the preparation of such document would clearly and 
     fundamentally conflict with the requirements of another 
     provision of law; or
       ``(4) the proposed agency action is a nondiscretionary 
     action with respect to which such agency does not have 
     authority to take environmental factors into consideration in 
     determining whether to take the proposed action.
       ``(b) Levels of Review.--
       ``(1) Environmental impact statement.--An agency shall 
     issue an environmental impact statement with respect to a 
     proposed agency action requiring an environmental document 
     that has a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the 
     quality of the human environment.
       ``(2) Environmental assessment.--An agency shall prepare an 
     environmental assessment with respect to a proposed agency 
     action that does not have a reasonably foreseeable 
     significant effect on the quality of the human environment, 
     or if the significance of such effect is unknown, unless the 
     agency finds that the proposed agency action is excluded 
     pursuant to one of the agency's categorical exclusions, 
     another agency's categorical exclusions consistent with 
     section 109 of this Act, or another provision of law. Such 
     environmental assessment shall be a concise public document 
     prepared by a Federal agency to set forth the basis of such 
     agency's finding of no significant impact or determination 
     that an environmental impact statement is necessary.
       ``(3) Sources of information.--In making a determination 
     under this subsection, an agency--
       ``(A) may make use of any reliable data source; and
       ``(B) is not required to undertake new scientific or 
     technical research unless the new scientific or technical 
     research is essential

[[Page H2690]]

     to a reasoned choice among alternatives, and the overall 
     costs and time frame of obtaining it are not unreasonable.

     ``SEC. 107. TIMELY AND UNIFIED FEDERAL REVIEWS.

       ``(a) Lead Agency.--
       ``(1) Designation.--
       ``(A) In general.--If there are two or more participating 
     Federal agencies, such agencies shall determine, by letter or 
     memorandum, which agency shall be the lead agency based on 
     consideration of the--
       ``(i) magnitude of agency's involvement;
       ``(ii) project approval or disapproval authority;
       ``(iii) expertise concerning the action's environmental 
     effects;
       ``(iv) duration of agency's involvement; and
       ``(v) sequence of agency's involvement.
       ``(B) Joint lead agencies.--In making a determination under 
     subparagraph (A), the participating Federal agencies may 
     appoint such State, Tribal, or local agencies as joint lead 
     agencies as the involved Federal agencies shall determine 
     appropriate. Joint lead agencies shall jointly fulfill the 
     role described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Role.--A lead agency shall, with respect to a 
     proposed agency action--
       ``(A) supervise the preparation of an environmental 
     document if, with respect to such proposed agency action, 
     there is more than one participating Federal agency;
       ``(B) request the participation of each cooperating agency 
     at the earliest practicable time;
       ``(C) in preparing an environmental document, give 
     consideration to any analysis or proposal created by a 
     cooperating agency;
       ``(D) develop a schedule, in consultation with each 
     cooperating agency, the applicant, and such other entities as 
     the lead agency determines appropriate, for completion of any 
     environmental review, permit, or authorization required to 
     carry out the proposed agency action;
       ``(E) if the lead agency determines that a review, permit, 
     or authorization will not be completed in accordance with the 
     schedule developed under subparagraph (D), notify the agency 
     responsible for issuing such review, permit, or authorization 
     of the discrepancy and request that such agency take such 
     measures as such agency determines appropriate to comply with 
     such schedule; and
       ``(F) meet with a cooperating agency that requests such a 
     meeting.
       ``(3) Cooperating agency.--The lead agency may, with 
     respect to a proposed agency action, designate any Federal, 
     State, Tribal, or local agency that has jurisdiction by law 
     or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact 
     involved in a proposal to serve as a cooperating agency. A 
     cooperating agency may, not later than a date specified in 
     the schedule established by the lead agency, submit comments 
     to the lead agency.
       ``(4) Request for designation.--Any Federal, State, Tribal, 
     or local agency or person that is substantially affected by 
     the lack of a designation of a lead agency with respect to a 
     proposed agency action under paragraph (1) may submit a 
     written request for such a designation to a participating 
     Federal agency. An agency that receives a request under this 
     paragraph shall transmit such request to each participating 
     Federal agency and to the Council.
       ``(5) Council designation.--
       ``(A) Request.--If the participating Federal agencies are 
     unable to agree on the designation of a lead agency within 45 
     days of the request under paragraph (4), then the Federal, 
     State, Tribal or local agency or person that is substantially 
     affected by the lack or a designation of a lead agency may 
     request that the Council designate a lead agency. Such 
     request shall consist of--
       ``(i) a precise description of the nature and extent of the 
     proposed agency action; and
       ``(ii) a detailed statement with respect to each 
     participating Federal agency and each factor listed in 
     paragraph (1) regarding which agency should serve as lead 
     agency.
       ``(B) Transmission.--The Council shall transmit a request 
     received under subparagraph (A) to each participating Federal 
     agency.
       ``(C) Response.--A participating Federal agency may, not 
     later than 20 days after the date of the submission of a 
     request under subparagraph (A), submit to the Council a 
     response to such request.
       ``(D) Designation.--Not later than 40 days after the date 
     of the submission of a request under subparagraph (A), the 
     Council shall designate the lead agency with respect to the 
     relevant proposed agency action.
       ``(b) One Document.--To the extent practicable, if a 
     proposed agency action will require action by more than one 
     Federal agency and the lead agency has determined that it 
     requires preparation of an environmental document, the lead 
     and cooperating agencies shall evaluate the proposal in a 
     single environmental document.
       ``(c) Request for Public Comment.--Each notice of intent to 
     prepare an environmental impact statement under section 102 
     shall include a request for public comment on alternatives or 
     impacts and on relevant information, studies, or analyses 
     with respect to the proposed agency action.
       ``(d) Statement of Purpose and Need.--Each environmental 
     document shall include a statement of purpose and need that 
     briefly summarizes the underlying purpose and need for the 
     proposed agency action.
       ``(e) Page Limits.--
       ``(1) Environmental impact statements.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     an environmental impact statement shall not exceed 150 pages, 
     not including any citations or appendices.
       ``(B) Extraordinary complexity.--An environmental impact 
     statement for a proposed agency action of extraordinary 
     complexity shall not exceed 300 pages, not including any 
     citations or appendices.
       ``(2) Environmental assessments.--An environmental 
     assessment shall not exceed 75 pages, not including any 
     citations or appendices.
       ``(f) Sponsor Preparation.--A lead agency shall prescribe 
     procedures to allow a project sponsor to prepare an 
     environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement 
     under the supervision of the agency. Such agency may provide 
     such sponsor with appropriate guidance and assist in the 
     preparation. The lead agency shall independently evaluate the 
     environmental document and shall take responsibility for the 
     contents.
       ``(g) Deadlines.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     with respect to a proposed agency action, a lead agency shall 
     complete, as applicable--
       ``(A) the environmental impact statement not later than the 
     date that is 2 years after the sooner of, as applicable--
       ``(i) the date on which such agency determines that section 
     102(2)(C) requires the issuance of an environmental impact 
     statement with respect to such action;
       ``(ii) the date on which such agency notifies the applicant 
     that the application to establish a right-of-way for such 
     action is complete; and
       ``(iii) the date on which such agency issues a notice of 
     intent to prepare the environmental impact statement for such 
     action; and
       ``(B) the environmental assessment not later than the date 
     that is 1 year after the sooner of, as applicable--
       ``(i) the date on which such agency determines that section 
     106(b)(2) requires the preparation of an environmental 
     assessment with respect to such action;
       ``(ii) the date on which such agency notifies the applicant 
     that the application to establish a right-of-way for such 
     action is complete; and
       ``(iii) the date on which such agency issues a notice of 
     intent to prepare the environmental assessment for such 
     action.
       ``(2) Delay.--A lead agency that determines it is not able 
     to meet the deadline described in paragraph (1) may extend 
     such deadline, in consultation with the applicant, to 
     establish a new deadline that provides only so much 
     additional time as is necessary to complete such 
     environmental impact statement or environmental assessment.
       ``(3) Petition to court.--
       ``(A) Right to petition.--A project sponsor may obtain a 
     review of an alleged failure by an agency to act in 
     accordance with an applicable deadline under this section by 
     filing a written petition with a court of competent 
     jurisdiction seeking an order under subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Court order.--If a court of competent jurisdiction 
     finds that an agency has failed to act in accordance with an 
     applicable deadline, the court shall set a schedule and 
     deadline for the agency to act as soon as practicable, which 
     shall not exceed 90 days from the date on which the order of 
     the court is issued, unless the court determines a longer 
     time period is necessary to comply with applicable law.
       ``(h) Report.--
       ``(1) In general.--The head of each lead agency shall 
     annually submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
     Public Works of the Senate a report that--
       ``(A) identifies any environmental assessment and 
     environmental impact statement that such lead agency did not 
     complete by the deadline described in subsection (g); and
       ``(B) provides an explanation for any failure to meet such 
     deadline.
       ``(2) Inclusions.--Each report submitted under paragraph 
     (1) shall identify, as applicable--
       ``(A) the office, bureau, division, unit, or other entity 
     within the Federal agency responsible for each such 
     environmental assessment and environmental impact statement;
       ``(B) the date on which--
       ``(i) such lead agency notified the applicant that the 
     application to establish a right-of-way for the major Federal 
     action is complete;
       ``(ii) such lead agency began the scoping for the major 
     Federal action; or
       ``(iii) such lead agency issued a notice of intent to 
     prepare the environmental assessment or environmental impact 
     statement for the major Federal action; and
       ``(C) when such environmental assessment and environmental 
     impact statement is expected to be complete.

     ``SEC. 108. PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT.

       ``When an agency prepares a programmatic environmental 
     document for which judicial review was available, the agency 
     may rely on the analysis included in the programmatic 
     environmental document in a subsequent environmental document 
     for related actions as follows:
       ``(1) Within 5 years and without additional review of the 
     analysis in the programmatic environmental document, unless 
     there are

[[Page H2691]]

     substantial new circumstances or information about the 
     significance of adverse effects that bear on the analysis.
       ``(2) After 5 years, so long as the agency reevaluates the 
     analysis in the programmatic environmental document and any 
     underlying assumption to ensure reliance on the analysis 
     remains valid.

     ``SEC. 109. ADOPTION OF CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS.

       ``An agency may adopt a categorical exclusion listed in 
     another agency's NEPA procedures for a category of proposed 
     agency actions for which the categorical exclusion was 
     established consistent with this paragraph. The agency 
     shall--
       ``(1) identify the categorical exclusion listed in another 
     agency's NEPA procedures that covers a category of proposed 
     actions or related actions;
       ``(2) consult with the agency that established the 
     categorical exclusion to ensure that the proposed adoption of 
     the categorical exclusion to a category of actions is 
     appropriate;
       ``(3) identify to the public the categorical exclusion that 
     the agency plans to use for its proposed actions; and
       ``(4) document adoption of the categorical exclusion.

     ``SEC. 110. E-NEPA.

       ``(a) Permitting Portal Study.--The Council on 
     Environmental Quality shall conduct a study and submit a 
     report to Congress within 1 year of the enactment of this Act 
     on the potential for online and digital technologies to 
     address delays in reviews and improve public accessibility 
     and transparency under section 102(2)(C) of the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) 
     including, but not limited to, a unified permitting portal 
     that would--
       ``(1) allow applicants to--
       ``(A) submit required documents or materials for their 
     project in one unified portal;
       ``(B) upload and collaborate with the applicable agencies 
     to edit documents in real-time, as required;
       ``(C) upload and display visual features such as video, 
     animation, geographic information system displays, and three-
     dimensional renderings; and
       ``(D) track the progress of individual applications;
       ``(2) include a cloud based, digital tool for more complex 
     reviews that would enhance interagency coordination in 
     consultation by--
       ``(A) centralizing, across all necessary agencies, the 
     data, visuals, and documents, including but not limited to 
     geographic information system displays, other visual 
     renderings, and completed reports and analyses necessary for 
     reviews;
       ``(B) streamlining communications between all necessary 
     agencies and the applicant;
       ``(C) allowing for comments and responses by and to all 
     necessary agencies in one unified portal;
       ``(D) generating analytical reports to aid in organizing 
     and cataloguing public comments; and
       ``(E) be accessible on mobile devices;
       ``(3) boost transparency in agency processes and present 
     information suitable for a lay audience, including but not 
     limited to--
       ``(A) scientific data and analysis; and
       ``(B) anticipated agency process and timeline; and
       ``(4) include examples describing how at least five permits 
     would be reviewed and processed through this portal.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $500,000 for the Council on Environmental 
     Quality to carry out the study directed by this section.

     ``SEC. 111. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this title:
       ``(1) Categorical exclusion.--The term `categorical 
     exclusion' means a category of actions that a Federal agency 
     has determined normally does not significantly affect the 
     quality of the human environment within the meaning of 
     section 102(2)(C).
       ``(2) Cooperating agency.--The term `cooperating agency' 
     means any Federal, State, Tribal, or local agency that has 
     been designated as a cooperating agency under section 
     107(a)(3).
       ``(3) Council.--The term `Council' means the Council on 
     Environmental Quality established in title II.
       ``(4) Environmental assessment.--The term `environmental 
     assessment' means an environmental assessment prepared under 
     section 106(b)(2).
       ``(5) Environmental document.--The term `environmental 
     document' means an environmental impact statement, an 
     environmental assessment, or a finding of no significant 
     impact.
       ``(6) Environmental impact statement.--The term 
     `environmental impact statement' means a detailed written 
     statement that is required by section 102(2)(C).
       ``(7) Finding of no significant impact.--The term `finding 
     of no significant impact' means a determination by a Federal 
     agency that a proposed agency action does not require the 
     issuance of an environmental impact statement.
       ``(8) Participating federal agency.--The term 
     `participating Federal agency' means a Federal agency 
     participating in an environmental review or authorization of 
     an action.
       ``(9) Lead agency.--The term `lead agency' means, with 
     respect to a proposed agency action--
       ``(A) the agency that proposed such action; or
       ``(B) if there are 2 or more involved Federal agencies with 
     respect to such action, the agency designated under section 
     107(a)(1).
       ``(10) Major federal action.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `major Federal action' means an 
     action that the agency carrying out such action determines is 
     subject to substantial Federal control and responsibility.
       ``(B) Exclusion.--The term `major Federal action' does not 
     include--
       ``(i) a non-Federal action--

       ``(I) with no or minimal Federal funding; or
       ``(II) with no or minimal Federal involvement where a 
     Federal agency cannot control the outcome of the project;

       ``(ii) funding assistance solely in the form of general 
     revenue sharing funds which do not provide Federal agency 
     compliance or enforcement responsibility over the subsequent 
     use of such funds;
       ``(iii) loans, loan guarantees, or other forms of financial 
     assistance where a Federal agency does not exercise 
     sufficient control and responsibility over the subsequent use 
     of such financial assistance or the effect of the action;
       ``(iv) business loan guarantees provided by the Small 
     Business Administration pursuant to section 7(a) or (b) and 
     of the Small Business Act ( U.S.C. 636(a)), or title V of the 
     Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 695 et 
     seq.);
       ``(v) bringing judicial or administrative civil or criminal 
     enforcement actions;
       ``(vi) extraterritorial activities or decisions, which 
     means agency activities or decisions with effects located 
     entirely outside of the jurisdiction of the United States; or
       ``(vii) activities or decisions that are non-discretionary 
     and made in accordance with the agency's statutory authority.
       ``(11) Programmatic environmental document.--The term 
     `programmatic environmental document' means an environmental 
     impact statement or environmental assessment analyzing all or 
     some of the environmental effects of a policy, program, plan, 
     or group of related actions.
       ``(12) Proposal.--The term `proposal' means a proposed 
     action at a stage when an agency has a goal, is actively 
     preparing to make a decision on one or more alternative means 
     of accomplishing that goal, and can meaningfully evaluate its 
     effects.
       ``(13) Special expertise.--The term `special expertise' 
     means statutory responsibility, agency mission, or related 
     program experience.''.

     SEC. 322. INTERREGIONAL TRANSFER CAPABILITY DETERMINATION 
                   STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Electric Reliability Organization (as 
     that term is defined in section 215(a)(2) of the Federal 
     Power Act), in consultation with each regional entity (as 
     that term is defined in section 215(a)(7) of such Act) and 
     each transmitting utility (as that term is defined in section 
     3(23) of such Act) that has facilities interconnected with a 
     transmitting utility in a neighboring transmission planning 
     region, shall conduct a study of total transfer capability as 
     defined in section 37.6(b)(1)(vi) of title 18, Code of 
     Federal Regulations, between transmission planning regions 
     that contains the following:
       (1) Current total transfer capability, between each pair of 
     neighboring transmission planning regions.
       (2) A recommendation of prudent additions to total transfer 
     capability between each pair of neighboring transmission 
     planning regions that would demonstrably strengthen 
     reliability within and among such neighboring transmission 
     planning regions.
       (3) Recommendations to meet and maintain total transfer 
     capability together with such recommended prudent additions 
     to total transfer capability between each pair of neighboring 
     transmission planning regions.
       (b) Publication.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the North American Electric 
     Reliability Corporation shall deliver a study to Federal 
     Energy Regulatory Commission, which shall publish the study 
     required in subsection (a) in the Federal Register and seek 
     public comments.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 12 months after the end of the 
     public comment period in subsection (b), the Federal Energy 
     Regulatory Commission shall submit a report on its 
     conclusions to Congress and include recommendations, if any, 
     for statutory changes.

     SEC. 323. PERMITTING STREAMLINING FOR ENERGY STORAGE.

       Section 41001(6)(A) of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A)) 
     is amended by inserting ``energy storage,'' before ``or any 
     other sector''.

     SEC. 324. EXPEDITING COMPLETION OF THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY 
                   PIPELINE.

       (a) Definition of Mountain Valley Pipeline.--In this 
     section, the term ``Mountain Valley Pipeline'' means the 
     Mountain Valley Pipeline project, as generally described and 
     approved in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Docket Nos. 
     CP16-10, CP19-477, and CP21-57.
       (b) Congressional Findings and Declaration.--The Congress 
     hereby finds and declares that the timely completion of 
     construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline is 
     required in the national interest. The Mountain Valley 
     Pipeline will serve demonstrated natural gas demand in the 
     Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast regions, will increase 
     the reliability of natural gas supplies and the availability 
     of natural gas at reasonable prices, will allow natural gas 
     producers to access additional markets

[[Page H2692]]

     for their product, and will reduce carbon emissions and 
     facilitate the energy transition.
       (c) Approval and Ratification and Maintenance of Existing 
     Authorizations.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
       (1) Congress hereby ratifies and approves all 
     authorizations, permits, verifications, extensions, 
     biological opinions, incidental take statements, and any 
     other approvals or orders issued pursuant to Federal law 
     necessary for the construction and initial operation at full 
     capacity of the Mountain Valley Pipeline; and
       (2) Congress hereby directs the Secretary of the Army, the 
     Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture, and the Secretary of the Interior, and other 
     agencies as applicable, as the case may be, to continue to 
     maintain such authorizations, permits, verifications, 
     extensions, biological opinions, incidental take statements, 
     and any other approvals or orders issued pursuant to Federal 
     law necessary for the construction and initial operation at 
     full capacity of the Mountain Valley Pipeline.
       (d) Expedited Approval.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, not later than 21 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act and for the purpose of facilitating the 
     completion of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, the Secretary of 
     the Army shall issue all permits or verifications necessary--
       (1) to complete the construction of the Mountain Valley 
     Pipeline across the waters of the United States; and
       (2) to allow for the operation and maintenance of the 
     Mountain Valley Pipeline.
       (e) Judicial Review.--
       (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court 
     shall have jurisdiction to review any action taken by the 
     Secretary of the Army, the Federal Energy Regulatory 
     Commission, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of 
     the Interior, or a State administrative agency acting 
     pursuant to Federal law that grants an authorization, permit, 
     verification, biological opinion, incidental take statement, 
     or any other approval necessary for the construction and 
     initial operation at full capacity of the Mountain Valley 
     Pipeline, including the issuance of any authorization, 
     permit, extension, verification, biological opinion, 
     incidental take statement, or other approval described in 
     subsection (c) or (d) of this section for the Mountain Valley 
     Pipeline, whether issued prior to, on, or subsequent to the 
     date of enactment of this section, and including any lawsuit 
     pending in a court as of the date of enactment of this 
     section.
       (2) The United States Court of Appeals for the District of 
     Columbia Circuit shall have original and exclusive 
     jurisdiction over any claim alleging the invalidity of this 
     section or that an action is beyond the scope of authority 
     conferred by this section.
       (f) Effect.--This section supersedes any other provision of 
     law (including any other section of this Act or other 
     statute, any regulation, any judicial decision, or any agency 
     guidance) that is inconsistent with the issuance of any 
     authorization, permit, verification, biological opinion, 
     incidental take statement, or other approval for the Mountain 
     Valley Pipeline.

                   DIVISION D--INCREASE IN DEBT LIMIT

     SEC. 401. 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 January 1, 2025.
       (b) Special Rule Relating to Obligations Issued During 
     Extension Period.--Effective on January 2, 2025, 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 January 2, 2025, 
     exceeds
       (2) the face amount of such obligations outstanding on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Restoring Congressional Authority Over the National 
     Debt.--
       (1) 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 January 2, 2025.
       (2) Prohibition on creation of cash reserve during 
     extension period.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall not 
     issue obligations during the period specified in subsection 
     (a) for the purpose of increasing the cash balance above 
     normal operating balances in anticipation of the expiration 
     of such period.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective 
designees.
  The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
submit extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Missouri?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this debate was a long time coming, not because it is 
complicated, but because Democrats couldn't accept the solution.
  We are here at the eleventh hour, finally dealing with a debt limit 
on a bipartisan basis, because President Biden apparently needed 100 
days to pick up the phone to talk to Republicans.
  During those 100 days, the case for cutting spending as part of a 
debt ceiling increase has only grown stronger. We have seen the worst 
inflation crisis in a generation--the direct result of reckless 
spending--continue to rob the pocketbooks of working families. We have 
seen interest rates continue to rise, driving up the cost of purchasing 
a car, a home, or a small business loan.
  Interest payments on our national debt are $110 billion higher over 
the first 7 months of this fiscal year than they were over the same 
time last fiscal year. In other words, runaway spending is adding to 
our debt crisis on the front end and the back end.
  Something else occurred during those 100 days. House Republicans took 
action. While the White House was saying they would only accept a blank 
check debt ceiling increase, an idea that did not and does not have the 
votes even in a Senate controlled by the President's own party, House 
Republicans passed a responsible plan to address the debt ceiling while 
cutting spending and supporting American workers.
  We acted on behalf of working families who are tired of paying more 
to put gas in their cars, clothes on their backs, and food on their 
tables.
  We acted on behalf of the small business owners who are desperate to 
remove the ``help wanted'' signs in their storefront windows.
  We acted on behalf of the families trapped on government assistance 
to help provide them with a path to a more prosperous future.
  One has to wonder, what was President Biden waiting for? A massive 
slowdown in the economy? We got that, too. In the first quarter of this 
year, economic growth slowed significantly to just over 1 percent.
  However, these data points do not tell the full story. To get that, 
Mr. Speaker, you have to go into the communities across this country 
and listen to those on the front lines of the economy.
  At the Ways and Means Committee, we have done just that. From West 
Virginia to Oklahoma, Georgia to New York, we have listened to American 
workers, families, farmers, and small business owners who have shared 
their concerns and their solutions.
  At the heart of so much of what we have heard is the simple message: 
Stop spending money we do not have on policies that do not work.
  According to a recent survey, 60 percent of the American people say 
that an increase in the Nation's debt limit ought to be accompanied by 
a reduction in the Nation's spending.
  The Fiscal Responsibility Act is a step in responding to that 
request. It does much of what Republicans said we would do: put a check 
on Washington spending, claw back the pandemic-era funding that 
everyone should agree is no longer needed, take a bite out of the IRS' 
recent $80 billion pay raise, severely dampen the regulatory 
administrative state, and lift more Americans out of poverty through 
commonsense work requirements for those who can work.
  Does this bill do everything folks might want? No. However, I am 
reminded of a quote by Thomas Jefferson, where he said, in part: ``The 
ground of liberty is to be gained by inches. We must be contented to 
secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward 
for what is yet to get.''
  This bill keeps alive the precedent that was set decades ago that has 
been

[[Page H2693]]

upheld by Republicans and Democrats alike--even by President Biden when 
he was a Senator and when he was Vice President. That is, when it comes 
to addressing the Nation's debt limit, Congress and the White House 
need to come to the table to also help address the Nation's debt 
crisis.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me point out that, as the chairman noted, he didn't 
have the whole story, so we intend to spend the next hour filling in 
the rest of the story.
  We are here tonight because of a reckless position that was adopted 
by the majority that was prepared to take this Nation to the precipice 
of default. Thank goodness for Joe Biden's legislative skills, so we 
will not go over the edge. We will preserve the full faith and credit 
of the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, just think of what was being proposed here. At risk was 
the dollar as the international currency.
  Do people have any idea what role treasuries play in terms of 
international transactions? The American dollar drives the world's 
economy, and they were prepared to take us over the edge with the 
reckless spending plan that they have.
  Thanks to Leader Jeffries and the measured tone that he took, we find 
ourselves tonight with an agreement that we might not love--because it 
is not about perfection. I stopped telling people that I was perfect 46 
years ago when I ran for the Springfield City Council. After one 
legislative session, I never professed to being perfect again.

  There is give-and-take to negotiation, and it means precisely that 
you give and you take. That is what we are acknowledging here this 
evening.
  That old sage of political thought got it right. Mick Jagger said: 
``You get what you need.''
  Democrats can proudly say tonight that, with the help of Joe Biden, 
we protected Social Security, protected Medicare, protected Medicaid, 
and protected veterans benefits, all of which we have profoundly 
embraced over these years.
  How did we get here? This is about the CARES Act that saved the 
American economy--22 million jobs gone, now 22 million jobs returned, 
and 9\1/2\ million jobs going unanswered. This was a manufactured 
crisis that brings us to this evening.
  The President's experienced leadership in the face of divided 
government in this body is one-half of one-third of the Federal 
Government. We still have a ways to go.
  Let's talk about why the bill ran up. It is on the CARES Act. 
Republicans voted for more defense spending. Some Republicans voted for 
the CHIPS Act, and some voted for the infrastructure bill.
  Let me point out something, and I hope everybody is paying attention 
to this: In December 2017, Republicans borrowed $2.3 trillion to 
provide a tax cut to the wealthiest among us.
  Mr. Speaker, do you know what the great irony of that is? Even the 
wealthy wouldn't say they were asking for that tax cut. That is how we 
got here.
  Their default on America act, in an effort to balance the budget on 
hardworking Americans' backs, tonight will be compromised. They 
targeted food security and healthcare while ignoring tax loopholes.
  Mr. Speaker, do you think around here we might someday close one tax 
loophole?
  The tax bill that we put out was well received everywhere, and it was 
progrowth in nature.
  Let me also point out something else by historical record this 
evening. Republicans are always in favor, Mr. Speaker, of balancing the 
budget when there is a Democratic President. That is the reality of it. 
Let's not forget who put us in this situation.
  In the last 25 years, Republicans have voted for $10 trillion worth 
of tax cuts to the top 1 percent: 2001, $1.3 trillion; 2003, $1 
trillion; and then their tax plan in December 2017, $2.3 trillion of 
borrowed money.
  They wanted to take the American economy hostage, and Joe Biden, 
Leader Jeffries, and the Democratic Caucus pushed back to make sure 
that the position that we have tonight, which we overwhelmingly intend 
to support, is reasonable policy achieved because of the hard-nosed 
negotiating of President Biden and Leader Jeffries.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry), who spent hours, days, and 
weeks in the negotiation process to help get us where we are today.
  Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Smith for yielding the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, for the first time in debt limit negotiations, the U.S. 
Government will spend less money next year than it did this year.
  This rates as one of the largest deficit reduction bills in American 
history, and it will fundamentally change the spending trajectory here 
in Washington with more work to do and more work ahead.
  The bill contains spending cuts that take a step in the right 
direction toward restoring fiscal sanity in Washington. This agreement 
will return discretionary spending to 2022 levels.
  Additionally, we set top-line spending at 1 percent annual growth 
over the next 6 years.
  We also cut spending through the largest funding rescissions in 
American history, clawing back billions of dollars in unspent COVID 
money.
  We institute the first-ever statutory paygo to hold President Biden 
accountable for his administrative actions. If this rule had been in 
place over the last 2 years, it would have checked regulatory overreach 
that has cost the economy at least $1.5 trillion during Biden's 
Presidency.
  This agreement will also change the way Washington operates by 
compelling a workable appropriations process.
  Simply put, this legislation ends the Democrats' spending spree and 
fights inflation.
  This deal will also help grow our economy and lift Americans out of 
poverty by instituting the strongest work requirements in a generation 
in some of our social safety net programs. These reforms will combat 
the labor shortages crippling small businesses by encouraging 
individuals to contribute to our society and economy while preserving 
these programs for those who need them most.
  Another progrowth solution in this bill is the transformational 
reforms to the permitting process and the environmental review process. 
Cutting this red tape will boost domestic energy production, lower 
costs for struggling American families, and set us on a path toward 
energy independence. Furthermore, it will be faster, cheaper, and 
easier to build things in America, large and small. Whether that is 
infrastructure, roads, bridges, new homes, new factories, so be it.
  This legislation, though, is a product of divided government. 
Republicans only control the House of Representatives, not the Senate 
and not the White House. Throughout this process--which was long, 
laborious, and tough--it has been Speaker McCarthy's leadership and 
House Republicans leading. We passed a plan, and it was that plan and 
the Speaker's leadership that enabled these negotiations and this 
agreement.
  Mr. Speaker, this is the most conservative spending package during my 
time in Congress. I am proud to support it, and I encourage my 
colleagues to vote ``yes.''

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Jeffries).
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from 
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for yielding, and I thank Mr. Neal 
for his tremendous, steadfast leadership in this moment of crisis that 
was manufactured by extreme MAGA Republicans on the other side of the 
aisle.
  I thank the distinguished members of the Ways and Means Committee. I 
thank House Democrats for your steady hand, for your unity of purpose, 
for your efforts to make sure that we push back the extreme MAGA 
Republican efforts to jam rightwing cuts down the throats of the 
American people that would have undermined the health, the safety, and 
the economic well-being of everyday Americans.
  From the very beginning, House Democrats were clear that we would not 
allow extreme MAGA Republicans to default on our debt, crash the 
economy, or trigger a job-killing recession.

[[Page H2694]]

  Under the leadership of President Joe Biden, Democrats kept our 
promise. We will continue to do what is necessary to put people over 
politics.
  The question that remains right now is what will the House Republican 
majority do?
  It appears that you may have lost control of the floor of the House 
of Representatives.
  Earlier today, 29 House Republicans voted to default on our Nation's 
debt and against an agreement that you negotiated.
  It is an extraordinary act that indicates just the nature of the 
extremism that is out of control on the other side of the aisle.
  Extreme MAGA Republicans attempted to take control of the House 
floor. Democrats took it back for the American people.
  We will continue to do what is necessary under the leadership of 
President Joe Biden to build an economy that works for everyday 
Americans and push back against the extremism on the other side of the 
aisle.
  Under the Trump administration, Democrats helped the former President 
avoid a default, raised the debt ceiling three times without 
gamesmanship, partisanship, or brinkmanship because Democrats put 
people over politics, even though we strongly disagreed with your 
reckless policies, as Chairman Neal eloquently outlined.
  In 2017, you passed the GOP tax scam where 83 percent of the benefits 
went to the wealthiest 1 percent here in America and caused our Nation 
to go $2 trillion in debt to subsidize the lifestyles of the wealthy, 
the well-off, and the well-connected. It did nothing to lift up the 
economy for everyday Americans.
  That was the case with your so-called tax cuts under Ronald Reagan, 
and that was the case under George W. Bush: failed policy; and trickle-
down economics that has come to mean only one thing for everyday 
Americans. You may get a trickle, but you are guaranteed to stay down. 
Your policies have failed.
  Yet despite that failure, despite the fact that you went $2 trillion 
into debt to pass your GOP tax scam, House Democrats were there to make 
sure that America did not default. We were there then, and we are here 
today, to put people over politics.
  I am thankful for my colleagues, for their work, for their 
commitment, for their patriotism, for their dedication, for their 
willingness to find the common ground necessary under the leadership of 
President Joe Biden, who did an extraordinary job under very difficult 
circumstances to protect values of importance to the American people, 
notwithstanding your threats to crash the economy, trigger a recession, 
and default on our debt.
  President Biden understood, despite the hostage-taking situation that 
you unnecessarily thrust the country into, that we had an obligation, a 
responsibility to avoid a catastrophic default. That is exactly what 
President Biden and Democrats have been able to do.
  We also made clear that America would not find ourselves back in this 
hostage-taking situation. You passed the default on America act about a 
month ago that had extreme rightwing cuts.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members, including leadership, are reminded 
to direct their remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I did not mention any single Member by 
name or any single individual on the other side of the aisle.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated on this floor, House 
Democrats will continue to put people over politics and push back 
against the extremism on the other side of the aisle.
  I am thankful for the leadership of President Joe Biden in avoiding a 
catastrophic default. I am thankful for the leadership of President Joe 
Biden in finding a way to an agreement that will avoid a hostage-taking 
situation for the balance of the 118th Congress.
  I am thankful for the leadership of President Joe Biden and House 
Democrats who protected Social Security, protected Medicare, protected 
Medicaid, protected veterans' benefits, protected education, protected 
public safety, and protected the American people from the draconian 22 
percent across-the-board cuts that House Republicans were trying to 
visit on everyday Americans.
  As a result of that effort, that leadership of President Joe Biden, 
we are going to be able to get through this hostage-taking situation 
and ensure that we can continue to build an economy that works for 
everyday Americans.
  I thank House Democrats for their leadership. I thank House Democrats 
for their work. We will continue to show up and stand up and speak up 
without fear for everyday Americans to ensure that we can continue 
America's long, necessary, and majestic march toward a more perfect 
Union.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), who has worked for days and 
weeks to get us to where we are today.

  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for 
yielding.
  Let me explain why we are in the situation that we are in today. We 
have watched over the last year as my friends across the aisle have 
pushed through legislation called the IIJA, called the IRA, the CHIPS 
Act, the ARP, all these acronyms.
  What does it mean to you?
  What it means to the American people, Mr. Speaker, is it means that 
$10 trillion in extra funds have been spent--$10 trillion.
  Let me tell you what that means. Today, a child born in America is 
going to inherit about $4\1/2\ million in debt at their birth--$4\1/2\ 
million--the amount of money they are going to pay over their lifetime, 
according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
  Right now, we have hit our credit card limit as a Nation. We don't 
have the ability to pay the monthly payment, and so we are in a 
quandary.
  We have to figure out how we are going to raise that credit card 
limit. Just like you would do with your own family, you would have a 
conversation, Mr. Speaker, with your child. You would say, hey, how did 
you get yourself in this situation? We have to fix it.
  The situation we are in right now, we have four options in front of 
us. There are four.
  Number one, we can default on the debt. You cannot pay your credit 
card bill which means late payment penalties, interest rates going up, 
and you cause havoc on the American family.
  The second option is you can say, hey, we are going to use this 14th 
Amendment thing that doesn't really exist, and the President can just 
do it on his own.
  The third option is you can get all the moderates together, and they 
can do a relatively clean debt ceiling that just keeps that debt going 
up and up and up from $32 trillion today to $52 trillion over the next 
20 years or so.
  Mr. Speaker, 17\1/2\ cents of every tax dollar paid over the next 10 
years is going to go towards interest on the debt--17\1/2\ cents.
  The third option we have is, again, a clean debt ceiling, just 
running it up.
  The fourth option we have, the one that is before us today, is the 
Fiscal Responsibility Act.
  It is absolutely historic. For the first time ever, as a result of 
the strategic nature of this Speaker, we are in a situation where we 
have legislation before us that will result in the greatest savings in 
American history that will result in the greatest rescission, or taking 
back of funds, in our Nation's history.
  We have legislation before us today that will strengthen and instill 
work requirements for welfare.
  We have legislation before us today that will rescind funds for 
additional IRS agents because I have never had a constituent say, gosh, 
I wish I could have more audits.
  We have legislation before us today that, for the first time in 40 
years, streamlines the environmental process.
  Mr. Speaker, here it is: Historic efforts to raise the deficit, $6.5 
trillion is how much this will result in. This one, $2 trillion in 
savings. This is the option.
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. There is not an imaginary fifth option, Mr. 
Speaker. It doesn't exist. Let's be honest with the American people. 
Support this legislation.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the previous gentleman left out infrastructure

[[Page H2695]]

spending, the CARES Act, defense spending, the CHIPS Act, and the PACT 
Act, all of which had Republican support in terms of the expenditures.
  Bill Clinton balanced the budget four straight times during his 
Presidency, and the money was given away with big tax cuts in 2001 and 
2003.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, protecting our country's full faith and 
credit requires accepting some unacceptable Republican demands.
  As one cartoonist aptly described them, Republicans suffer from a 
form of deficit attention disorder. You see, when Republicans are in 
charge, they are absolutely obsessed with deficits.
  Give them a little power, and their attention--poof. It just 
magically vanishes as they begin to deplete the Treasury with tax gifts 
for the well connected.
  Like their multitrillion-dollar Trump tax giveaway, they are already 
planning in coming days to soon borrow more to reward those at the top.
  Their boundless affection for tax cheats and for tax expenditures may 
increase the debt by even more than the cuts that they make today in 
education, healthcare, and environmental protection, which are so 
wrong.
  As climate deniers, these Republicans sought to repeal our climate 
law but were held to one pipeline and a weakening of environmental 
review laws, a troubling setback that we can overcome.
  We should be leaping forward instead of moving slowly. Ransom paid; 
America protected.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Murphy).
  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fiscal 
Responsibility Act.
  Over 100 days ago, President Biden said he would not negotiate. 
Republicans, acting on behalf of this country, forced him to negotiate.
  The bill alters our fiscal trajectory and helps remedy the Federal 
Government's insatiable spending problem.
  This landmark legislation lowers nondefense discretionary spending 
and forces Congress to employ a functioning appropriations process.
  More importantly, the measure doesn't result in new taxes and doesn't 
touch Social Security, Medicare, or veterans' benefits.
  Is the bill perfect? Absolutely not.
  Is it a step in the right direction? Absolutely. CBO scores a 
decrease in spending of $1.9 trillion.
  Let's not forget, Rome was not built in a day. It is now up to 
Republicans to make the necessary cuts to rein in our terrible spending 
and our terrible debt of $31 trillion.
  I urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation.

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Thompson), who spent 6 hours in front of the Rules 
Committee.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, the American people can't 
afford a default. Default on our debt would be catastrophic, an 
economic disaster with consequences for every one of our constituents. 
Congress can't let that happen.
  This bill is not perfect, but thanks to President Biden's leadership, 
the bill before us achieves two key points: One, it prevents default, 
averting an economic disaster; and, two, it preserves not only key 
programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, but also 
maintains virtually all House Democrats' achievements from the last 2 
years, including the climate provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, 
which I was proud to author with my colleagues on the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Despite where Republicans started, the President has negotiated 
legislation that protects Medicaid and the Inflation Reduction Act, the 
CHIPS Act, and the PACT Act, which provides for veterans' healthcare.
  Now, I share some of my colleagues' concerns with the bill. I am 
particularly opposed to the Republicans' demand to cut mental health 
care. After climate change, mental health is the single biggest crisis 
in our country. There is no reason to cut critical funding for mental 
health.
  Their cuts to the IRS will not decrease the deficit. It will increase 
the deficit. A fully funded IRS is in everyone's best interests.
  Overall, this legislation is a compromise, which is what the American 
people expect and deserve from a divided government. Most important, it 
averts the catastrophe of a default.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Utah (Mr. Moore).
  Mr. MOORE of Utah. Mr. Speaker, when I ran for Congress, I ran on the 
promise that I would use my position to reverse Washington's debt 
culture.
  In my first term, I was in the minority party, and after 2 years of 
voting against Democrats' spending proposals, I finally today get the 
opportunity to vote ``yes'' on a comprehensive and thoughtful piece of 
legislation that will serve as the most significant spending cut in 
American history.
  Does this bill achieve everything that I want? No, of course not. 
That is the reality. However, my support is a significant step forward, 
reversing our ballooning national debt.
  The Fiscal Responsibility Act allows us to cut spending by $2.1 
trillion over the next decade. It is the largest deficit reduction 
ever. For the first time in 40 years, we will be able to address our 
permitting process, to be able to address our energy sector and 
transportation projects from crippling regulations.
  This act represents the beginning of what is to come as Republicans 
govern in a responsible, productive manner. We fought hard to get this 
agreement and blew through Democrats' red lines over and over again.
  This isn't over. We can responsibly govern, and success today will 
bring more success in the future. I look forward to casting my vote 
``yes.''
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Larson), my neighbor.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, three times President Biden 
has had to deal with the Republican-manufactured default crisis around 
raising the debt ceiling.
  Since 1960, Congress has dealt with the debt ceiling 78 times. During 
the Trump administration alone, it raised the debt ceiling three times 
without holding the American economy and its people hostage.
  President Biden is to be commended for being the adult in the room 
and providing the leadership to prevent a catastrophic default that 
hurts the U.S. standing in the global economy and Americans here at 
home.
  That does not excuse the behavior of the Republican majority in the 
House, who seek to normalize hostage taking in an effort to hurt 
programs that serve our people the most.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank President Biden for protecting Social Security, 
Medicare, and veterans' benefits. The trust the American people placed 
in you has been validated again.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this 
legislation.
  The debt ceiling is one of the best pathways to address debt and 
deficits. In addition to immediate spending cuts and future spending 
caps, this bill includes provisions to prevent IRS from auditing 
families and small businesses and helps get Americans back to work.
  My bill with Representative Steel to rescind IRS funding was 
partially put into this bill. Even though we passed the entire bill by 
our majority in January, parts of it are in this bill, and House 
Republicans continue to work to protect every family and small business 
from IRS overreach.
  This bill also modernizes TANF work requirements and ends the scheme 
of States sending small-dollar checks to people who are already working 
to artificially raise their TANF work rates. These changes will focus 
TANF dollars on those who need it the most and will push States to do 
more to connect work-capable adults with the 9.6 million job openings 
we have across our economy right now.
  We have more to do to get our work done and our fiscal house in 
order. We need to ensure our economy always rewards hard work, and this 
bill is a great start.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), one of the most accomplished Speakers of the 
House in the history of America.

[[Page H2696]]

  

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for 
his leadership. I also thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Boyle), the ranking member of the Budget Committee.

  Mr. Speaker, I associate myself with the great remarks of our 
distinguished leader, Mr. Hakeem Jeffries, who spoke earlier and 
captured so much of what is so important here today.
  Mr. Speaker, our Constitution makes perfectly clear the validity of 
the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned. In the 
bipartisan budget agreement, we honor our sworn oaths as lawmakers to 
uphold this constitutional duty.
  While I find this legislation objectionable, it will avert an 
unprecedented default, which would bring devastation to America's 
families: millions of jobs eliminated, trillions in savings erased, 
higher costs on loans, mortgages, car payments, credit card bills, and 
more.
  Let us commend President Biden for his responsible leadership to 
prevent this unconscionable outcome while protecting Social Security, 
Medicare, Medicaid; protecting healthcare for our veterans as our 
Commander in Chief; protecting our progress on climate and 
infrastructure; and protecting our economy.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill, reaffirming to 
Americans that the full faith and credit of the United States shall not 
be questioned.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. McCarthy). He has worked numerous hours, days--in 
fact, he has been working since January--to get to where we are today.
  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, let me first say how grateful I am to 
Congressmen Graves and McHenry. They have given their time and talents 
to this effort for more than a month. Our entire Conference and country 
owes them a debt of gratitude.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my Conference. They worked hard. When I went to 
see the President on February 1, I sat in the Oval Office right in the 
chair across from him. I said, Mr. President, the debt limit is coming.
  At that time, Janet Yellen said it would be into maybe July, August.
  I said that we should work together. I said that there are only two 
things, Mr. President: Never raise taxes, and we have to spend less 
than we spent this year.
  He said that we would meet, but for 97 days we would never meet. It 
wasn't until this House took action to pass a bill. I sit back and I 
think for one moment, what if that bill didn't pass, because nothing 
passed in the Senate? If that bill had not passed, the only other 
option was sitting over here in a discharge petition. It just needs a 
few more signatures, and it would be: Just raise the debt. Just raise 
the debt.
  But tonight is going to be different. Tonight, we are going to do 
something we haven't done before. Tonight, we are going to give America 
hope. Tonight, we are going to vote for the largest savings in American 
history: over $2.1 trillion. That is what we will vote on.
  Mr. Speaker, every great nation that has overextended itself has 
collapsed. Mindful of this truth, George Washington said in his 
Farewell Address that a healthy public credit is a source of strength 
and security for a nation.
  By that same token, an unhealthy debt burden is a source of weakness 
and insecurity.
  President Washington's words ring true today. We are seeing the 
negative effects of runaway spending in real time: record inflation, 
rising interest rates, broken supply chains, and economic uncertainty.
  Runaway spending is also making America more dependent on foreign 
debt holders. The total debt we owe to other countries is $7.4 
trillion. Countries like China are buying more of our farmland, more of 
our businesses, and more of our debt. This is unsustainable; but what 
is even worse, it is dangerous.
  However, runaway spending is more than a national and economic 
security problem. My belief, Mr. Speaker, is that it is a moral 
problem.
  Mr. Speaker, this is Halle. Halle was born at 9:58 a.m. on April 11 
of this year. She weighed 6 pounds, 7 ounces. Her blue eyes, she got 
that from her dad. That button nose, she got that from her mom. The 
$95,000 bill, she got that from Washington. Not a very good gift for a 
newborn. That is Halle's portion of the national debt.
  Sadly, Halle is not alone. Every child who is born today owes $95,000 
in debt. Mr. Speaker, that is $10,000 more in debt for every child 
since this President took office.
  It reminds me of what Ronald Reagan once said: ``When a business or 
an individual spends more than it makes, it goes bankrupt. When 
government does it, it sends you the bill.''
  Mr. Speaker, to continue Washington's spending addiction is both 
irresponsible and just wrong, so let's stop it. I will be honest, 
tonight's bill doesn't stop it, but for the first time, we begin to 
turn the ship. This shouldn't be our last. It shouldn't even be a 
debate. We should challenge each other for how could we put ourselves 
on a fiscal path even better.

  For months, President Biden and Senator Schumer were adamant that 
they would not negotiate spending cuts. Mr. Speaker, I remember 
watching Senator Schumer on George Stephanopoulos one Sunday. He said: 
Just watch, we are going to break them. The Republicans can't get 
together. They can't pass a bill, and it is going to be a clean debt 
ceiling. You just watch.
  The only person that didn't pass the bill was the person that made 
that quote. They demanded a clean debt limit, which really means they 
spend more, and you just pay more in taxes.
  House Republicans said no. Over the past 4 months, we fought hard to 
change how Washington works. We stopped the Democrats from writing a 
blank check for more spending after the largest spending binge in 
American history that brought us some of the worst inflation our Nation 
has ever known.
  We used the power we had to force the President to negotiate. You 
watched me day after day requesting to negotiate with the President. We 
produced a bill that in a divided government takes a step toward 
smaller government, less regulation, more economic growth, and more 
take-home pay.
  Unlike previous Speakers, Members didn't have to pass the bill to 
find out what is in it. They had 72 hours to read it, and it is only 99 
pages. Fifteen of those pages were just rescissions, just money that we 
had spent that sat there.
  Here is the bottom line, Mr. Speaker: The Fiscal Responsibility Act 
is the biggest spending cut in American history.
  I, for one, Mr. Speaker, don't want to be on the wrong side of 
history. Yes, I could say I am going to vote ``no'' because there is 
something not in the bill. If I took that philosophy, I would never 
vote ``yes.''
  I simply read the bills in front of me and decide: Is this good for 
the country? I would say that answer is easily yes.

                              {time}  2000

  Taxpayers will save an additional $2.1 trillion. For the first time 
in more than a decade, Congress will spend less next year than this 
year.
  In fact, the Fiscal Responsibility Act is the only bill that reduces 
overall spending, reduces nondefense spending, and reduces the deficit, 
unlike any other debt limit increase in recent history.
  We are finally bending the curve on discretionary spending because of 
this bill. We are doing it while at the same time raising our national 
defense, with our veterans fully funded, with Social Security and 
Medicare preserved, and without raising a penny in new taxes.
  That is a major victory.
  Mr. Speaker, it is only part of the story. Tens of billions of 
dollars in unspent COVID funds will be clawed back for taxpayers 
because of this bill's spending rescissions, the largest in American 
history. If you add up all the rescissions in American history, this is 
larger than that. I think it is only common sense that if the pandemic 
is over, but billions of dollars have not been spent, why would you 
spend them now if the pandemic is over? Why don't we provide them back 
to the hardworking taxpayer that has to pay it, like Halle.
  Mr. Speaker, just listen to some of the programs we are slashing:
  $400 million from the CDC's global health fund. Don't get worried 
because

[[Page H2697]]

that is not going to help you. That is your hardworking taxpayer money 
being sent to countries like China. I guess that is to help China be 
able to buy our bonds, and we will pay for their healthcare. I would 
rather focus on America.
  What about work-capable adults without dependents? They are going to 
get a job. They are going to learn new skills, and they are going to 
earn a paycheck because of this bill's new welfare reforms. These 
reforms are going to change people's lives. When we vote on this bill 
today, somebody is going to have a better job tomorrow because of your 
vote. Families will be stronger and more self-sufficient. People will 
be lifted out of poverty.
  Don't believe anyone who says our plan hurts America's social safety 
net. We are such a generous Nation, and when people fall on tough 
times, we help them. That will not change.
  This is important: Assistance programs are supposed to be temporary, 
not permanent--a hand up, not a handout; a bridge to independence, not 
a barrier.
  If you also vote for this bill tonight, new roads, bridges, highways, 
and pipelines are going to be built sooner and faster because of this 
bill's permitting reform.
  Mr. Speaker, I know that is a bipartisan view. We talk about it all 
the time. We see it in our homes. We get frustrated that you will vote 
for a transportation bill, you will serve 10 years in the Congress, and 
once you leave, the person who follows you 6 years later will be at the 
groundbreaking because we spent all that time studying.
  I think America wants to compete. They want to cut the red tape. They 
just want a fair process.
  This is going to save families money and make America less dependent 
on China, changing America for the better for decades to come.
  Finally, taxpayers will be more protected from harassment and costly 
new burdens. We rejected every single one of President Biden's demands 
for new tax hikes and new government mandates. Believe me, from the 
person sitting in the room with the President, he asked every single 
time.
  Instead, this bill eliminates the funding that would have been spent 
this year to hire Biden's army of new IRS agents. Overall, we have cut 
more than $20 billion from Biden's IRS slush fund. To date, they 
haven't been able to hire a single one of Biden's 87,000 new IRS 
agents. I will come back year after year to keep it that way because 
the government should work for you, not go after you.
  Mr. Speaker, passing the Fiscal Responsibility Act is a crucial first 
step for putting America back on track. It does what is responsible for 
our children, what is possible in a divided government, and what is 
required by our principles and promises. Yes, it may not include 
everything we need to do, but it is absolutely what we need to do right 
now.
  Moving forward, House Republicans will build on its structural 
reforms. As we do, the American people can be confident in this: I am 
never giving up. I heard the detractors.
  I am an optimist. I have to be. I sat there 15 rounds.
  I am an optimist. I waited 97 days and listened to the President tell 
me he will never meet with me, but I woke up every morning thinking 
this might be the day.
  I am an optimist. I watched division in this House, but tonight, we 
might come together and do something very big for this Nation.
  Don't mistake that it is the solution. It is the beginning. We should 
wake up the next morning on how we can do even better tomorrow. You 
see, I will never give up on the American people, and I will never give 
up on keeping our Commitment to America.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon 
(Mr. Blumenauer), a champion of the Inflation Reduction Act and the tax 
credits that were included.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is amazing how the Republicans can 
make political drama appear smaller than life: major questions with 
extremists are reduced to parody and political theater.
  We may have averted catastrophe, but it doesn't mean there was not a 
real cost to America. We should commit to never again allow such 
political hostage taking. Instead, lay the foundation for using the 
clear language of the 14th Amendment to avoid the debt ceiling 
altogether.
  We should collect billions of dollars already payable from some of 
the wealthiest individuals and corporations. It would be a strong 
signal about the fairness of our tax system.
  It is ironic that Republicans are worried about pressing rich people 
for taxes they already owe, but would subject poor people to more 
harassment and meaningless paperwork.
  We should instead concentrate on changing policies to reduce the 
deficit. If there will be time limits on benefits, maybe we could start 
with 20,000 rich farmers who got a million dollars a year or more for 
37 consecutive years.
  If we act in good faith, it shouldn't be so hard, and America will be 
the better.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the majority leader.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Missouri for 
yielding and for his leadership on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, for the first time in years, this Congress is actually 
debating a bill that will reduce spending from one year to the next. 
Let me repeat that: reduce spending from one year to the next. That is 
not something you hear around this town often.
  Usually, the debate is: How much more money will Washington spend?
  In fact, if Republicans were not in the majority in this House, that 
is exactly the debate that would be going on, how much more to spend, 
how many more taxes to raise because that is what President Biden 
wanted at the outset of this debate on the debt ceiling.
  Just for a little background, let's be clear what the debt ceiling 
is. The debt ceiling is the Nation's credit card. For the last 2 years, 
you saw out-of-control, reckless spending to the tune of trillions of 
dollars where President Biden and his allies racked up so much debt 
that they maxed out the Nation's credit card.
  We are at this point to address that problem.
  Mr. Speaker, wouldn't it make sense at the same time that we are 
addressing the problem that President Biden created with years of 
spending money that we don't have that we also have an honest 
discussion and start solving the problem that caused the Nation to max 
out the credit card? That is what this debate has been about for the 
last few months. Frankly, I think it is a debate that has been a long 
time coming in this Nation.
  Over months of debate, while no one gets everything they want, I 
think it is important that we talk about the things that we got, that 
we talk about the things that the American people will get out of this 
bill that will help start turning the trajectory of our Nation's 
spending in Washington, finally putting our country back on a path 
where we can keep this debate going.
  This is the first step. Let's make no mistake about it, this bill 
doesn't solve all the problems that have been created over years and 
decades, but it starts to finally turn the ship of state in the right 
direction. It starts with real savings, over $2 trillion in actual 
spending cuts. That is in the bill.
  Again, this is a very historic first step. It doesn't mean that is 
where we stop. It means that is where we start. You don't get the next 
round of trillions in spending cuts if you don't lock in the first $2.1 
trillion that is in this bill.
  Now, something else we do is we actually go and reclaim for the 
taxpayers of America what has been identified as $28 billion in slush 
funds floating around Washington, all under the name of COVID. 
President Biden himself actually said COVID is over.
  We passed legislation here in this House under this Republican 
majority to end the pandemic so we can get our country and our economy 
back going again. Yet, there is $28 billion out there still unspent 
that liberals in Washington want to spend. If we don't pass this bill, 
they will spend that money in the name of COVID, even though COVID is 
over.
  There is $28 billion that should go back in savings to the taxpayer. 
Well, guess what is in this bill, Mr. Speaker? Those $28 billion are 
reclaimed so the taxpayers get that money back. That is in this bill.

[[Page H2698]]

  Let's talk about the IRS. In my years in public service on the State 
level or in Congress, I have never gotten a single call from a 
constituent going: Do you know what? The thing we really want you to do 
is go add more people to the IRS.

  Yet, President Biden, for some reason, decided he wanted to more than 
double the size of the IRS. He wanted to go from about 80,000 people--
to add not up to 87,000, but to add an additional 87,000 people. 
According to the Congressional Budget Office, they confirmed that it 
would break President Biden's promise.
  You heard it over and over again that if you make less than $400,000 
a year, don't worry, you won't pay any more in new taxes. Well, maybe 
they are redefining what lower income means because if you are making 
less than $100,000, according to the CBO, those new IRS agents will be 
going after lower income family workers and the single mom that is 
working two jobs at a restaurant. That is who they will be going after.
  We step in and say no, we have to end that madness--over a billion 
dollars in cuts to the IRS to stop them from doing just that.
  Let's talk about another big area of savings. A lot of people take 
out loans--a loan to buy their first home. I know that is harder to do 
under the Biden economy because interest rates are so high because of 
the out-of-control spending in Washington. This bill finally starts to 
address that so, hopefully, interest rates can go down. Hopefully, 
families can afford to buy their first home again.
  There is something else that people do. Usually, a first loan a lot 
of people take out is a student loan. I know I did when I was a 
student. I signed the document, and it helped me get through college. I 
also worked my way through college.
  When I graduated, there was never a day where I thought somebody 
else, some single mom working two jobs, ought to pay that loan back 
instead of me. I paid those loans back, and most Americans have done 
that. About 13 percent of the American people take out student loans.
  Yet, for some reason, the President decided that he thinks all 
Americans, 100 percent of American taxpayers, should pay the student 
loans of the 13 percent that don't want to pay them back. Is that fair? 
Does anybody think that is fair to all of those people who are working 
hard and barely getting by in a tough economy?
  What we do is we actually start those loan payments back. That is $60 
billion in savings just this year, in the first year, so that people 
don't have to carry the burden for something that somebody else said 
they would do.

                              {time}  2015

  This is America. We make our choices. If you want to take out a loan, 
you should have that ability, but you shouldn't expect somebody else to 
go pay it for you. Let's get back to the values that made this country 
so great.
  We put real permitting reforms in place, something we haven't seen in 
decades. Anybody that is trying to build anything in America, if you 
are trying to build a factory, if you are trying to maybe add on to 
your farm, if you have got a barn and you want to add on to it, they 
find a puddle in the back and under Waters of the U.S., next thing you 
know, you have got five different Federal agencies where groups are 
suing to stop you from getting that permit, even though you have done 
everything right. You followed all the rules.
  We finally fixed that. We created a one-stop-shop so that if you are 
trying to get a permit, if you are playing by the rules, somebody else 
can't go game the system to try to kill your project by going to one 
agency and you spend 2 years fighting that lawsuit, you win that one. 
The next day they file another lawsuit with another agency and another 
and another, and next thing you know, it is 10 years later, and you 
just give up and walk away. It happens all the time in America.
  We will have a one-stop-shop, but we also put shot clocks on the 
unelected bureaucrats because, you know what, Mr. Speaker, if a Federal 
agency tells you that you have to get them some information back, they 
don't say, hey, get it to us whenever you want to. They give you a 
deadline and it is usually pretty soon, and if you don't meet that 
deadline, you don't get your permit.
  But if you get them all the information, you might wait 6 months, a 
year, or longer to hear back from the Federal agency. These are people 
that work for the taxpayers of America. Shouldn't they have the same 
requirements and a shot clock on them that they put on you, the 
American people paying their salaries? That is in this bill.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, real work requirements. I don't think there has 
ever been a time in America where there are more jobs that are open, 
people looking for workers. You can go to a restaurant, if you want to 
take your family out for a nice dinner, and you will see a third of the 
tables empty, yet they are not seating anybody because they don't have 
enough workers.
  Why is that? Because the Federal Government is paying millions of 
people right now not to work. Think about that.
  In America, where everybody is looking for workers, the Federal 
Government is borrowing money from countries like China to pay people 
not to work. This is insanity.
  For all the people out there that are working, they are paying that 
freight. Why don't we say, for people who are able-bodied, who are able 
to get back into the workforce--there is a social safety net for people 
who run on hard times. If you just choose to sit at home and turn down 
jobs, that is your prerogative as an American. Just don't ask someone 
who is working two jobs to pay for you to sit at home and turn down 
work.
  By putting work requirements back in place, something Joe Biden 
himself voted for as a Senator, you also strengthen Social Security and 
Medicare, two programs that are going bust under President Biden's 
runaway spending that we shored up in this bill, actually strengthening 
those programs that are so important to the people who paid into it.
  There is more work to be done, absolutely, and we will get to work 
tomorrow working on the next round of things we need to do to keep 
getting this country back on track, but we never get there if we don't 
start with the first step.
  That is what we are doing here tonight. That is why we need to get 
this bill passed, and then go to work on the next reforms we have got 
to do to continue strengthening this great Nation, the United States of 
America. I urge passage.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished majority leader failed to 
mention that we raised the national debt three times during Donald 
Trump's Presidency. He failed to point out that $8.7 trillion was added 
to the national debt during Donald Trump's Presidency.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a productive member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, the only problem is our tax system is 
broken, and you don't want to talk about it. We made strides to fix 
this problem with a historic IRS investment.
  The IRS is coming after you. I saw those commercials. You are better 
than that, guys and gals. You are better than that. No one's putting an 
army together, but we want to make sure everybody pays their fair 
share.
  What in God's name is wrong with that?
  That is what we are talking about. If you look at the IRS estimates 
of those people who are getting away with murder, that is what the 
average American knows about, thinks about, but does little talking 
about because he figures he can't do anything about it. You can.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. PASCRELL. So, Article I is ignored many times by both parties, 
both sides of the aisle. It is the Congress that has the power to put a 
budget together. It is pretty simple.
  All Americans must understand what is happening here. President Biden 
put forward a budget to boost opportunity for working Americans, 
increase access to healthcare, and improve tax fairness.

[[Page H2699]]

  Mr. Speaker, in the greatest country in the world, if we don't fix 
our tax system, we have not done our job as Congress, folks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, Democrats often say that the new 
IRS funding will only be used to go after the wealthy. This is simply 
not the case.
  I include in the Record a CBO blog post from 2021 examining the Biden 
administration's $80 billion proposal and stating that it would return 
the audit rates to the levels of about 10 years ago, and that that rate 
would rise for all taxpayers. Our calculations show that this would 
mean 600,000 more audits per year for taxpayers making less than 
$75,000 a year.

                     [From CBO Blog, Sept. 2, 2021]

              The Effects of Increased Funding for the IRS

                           (By Phill Swagel)

       Last month, the Congressional Budget Office published An 
     Analysis of Certain Proposals in the President's 2022 Budget. 
     Since then, CBO has completed its analysis of another 
     proposal in the President's budget, an increase in spending 
     for the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS's) enforcement 
     activities. CBO estimates that portions of the 
     Administration's proposal to increase funding for the IRS by 
     $80 billion over the 2022-2031 period would increase revenues 
     by approximately $200 billion over those 10 years. That 
     estimate does not include changes in revenues resulting from 
     portions of the proposal that involve new information-
     reporting requirements and other changes to the tax code; 
     those changes are estimated by the staff of the Joint 
     Committee on Taxation (JCT).


                              The Proposal

       The Administration proposes funding for the IRS that is $80 
     billion greater over 10 years than the amounts in CBO's July 
     2021 baseline projections (which reflect the assumption that 
     current laws generally do not change). Two types of funding 
     would be provided: discretionary appropriations, which would 
     mainly be used for enforcement activities; and mandatory 
     funding, which would be used for a variety of activities (not 
     only enforcement but also operations support, business-
     systems modernization, and taxpayer services).
       Spending would increase in each year between 2021 and 2031, 
     though the highest growth would occur in the first few years. 
     By 2031, CBO projects, the proposal would make the IRS's 
     budget more than 90 percent larger than it is in CBO's July 
     2021 baseline projections and would more than double the 
     IRS's staffing. Of the $80 billion, CBO estimates, about $60 
     billion would be for enforcement and related operations 
     support.
       The Administration also proposes that financial 
     institutions increase their reporting about account inflows 
     and outflows. Part of the increased funding would support the 
     implementation of a new information-reporting system to be 
     used by those institutions. The resulting effects on revenues 
     are estimated by JCT and are not included in CBO's estimate 
     of an approximately $200 billion increase.


   How CBO Estimates the Effect on Revenues of Increased IRS Funding

       CBO's estimate of revenues is based on the IRS's projected 
     returns on investment (ROIs) for spending on new enforcement 
     initiatives. The IRS estimates those ROIs by calculating the 
     expected revenues that would be raised from taxes, interest, 
     and penalties as a result of the new initiatives and dividing 
     them by their additional cost. (The agency has provided ROIs 
     over the past five years as part of its budget 
     justification.) The IRS's ROIs ramp up over three years as 
     staff become trained and fully productive, arrive at the peak 
     level, and then stay there. In recent years, peak ROIs have 
     ranged from 5 to 9. That is, a $1 increase in spending on the 
     IRS's enforcement activities results in $5 to $9 of increased 
     revenues.
       CBO adjusts the ROIs so that they better reflect the 
     marginal return on additional spending. First, CBO expects 
     the IRS to prioritize the enforcement activities that it 
     thinks will have the highest average return; additional 
     enforcement spending would therefore have lower returns than 
     previous spending. Second, CBO expects taxpayers to adapt to 
     the IRS's enforcement activities and adopt new ways of 
     evading detection, so an enforcement activity may have a 
     lower return in later years. Finally, the productivity of the 
     IRS's enforcement activities will also depend on the IRS's 
     other capabilities. For example, modernized information 
     technology that stored all of a taxpayer's information in 
     digital form could increase the productivity of examiners 
     (the employees who detect taxpayers' noncompliance).
       CBO's estimate of revenues also accounts for the timing of 
     collections resulting from enforcement activity by new hires. 
     Taxes are assessed at the end of an audit; if taxpayers 
     disagree with the assessment, they can appeal and continue to 
     litigate. The length of each step depends on the complexity 
     of the case. CBO estimates that an audit of medium complexity 
     would take 24 months to complete. That time, combined with 
     the expected training time for an experienced new hire, 
     suggests that the IRS would begin to collect revenues 30 
     months after the new hire joined the agency. (The timing 
     would be longer when cases were more complex or when the 
     taxpayer did not agree to the assessment and appealed.)
       What is Incorporated Into CBO's Estimate. CBO's estimate of 
     the change in revenues is relative to the amount of revenues 
     collected under current law (which is reflected in CBO's 
     baseline budget projections). Under guidelines agreed to by 
     the legislative and executive branches, this change in 
     revenues typically would not be included in a cost 
     estimate for legislation that brought about the change, 
     but it would be reflected in CBO's baseline budget 
     projections once the legislation was enacted.
       CBO's estimate reflects the assumption that the proposed 
     increase in funding would follow the proposed expansion of 
     information reporting. Expanded information reporting might 
     allow the IRS to better target potentially noncompliant 
     taxpayers; it might also prompt taxpayers to file more 
     accurate tax returns. It might have a positive effect on 
     revenues collected, but it might also reduce the ROIs from 
     enforcement activities, because if returns are more accurate, 
     there will be less noncompliance to audit. In CBO's and JCT's 
     judgment, those effects roughly offset each other, on net, 
     resulting in a small positive effect on ROIs.
       CBO's estimate includes ``direct revenues'' and ``protected 
     revenues.'' Direct revenues are generated from the IRS's 
     auditing and collection efforts. Protected revenues result 
     when the IRS prevents a taxpayer from recouping previously 
     assessed and paid taxes--for example, when the IRS prevents 
     fraudulent refunds or disallows claims in taxpayers' amended 
     returns.
       The estimate reflects CBO's expectation that the increased 
     enforcement activities would change the voluntary compliance 
     rate--that is, the share of taxes owed that are paid 
     voluntarily and on time--only modestly. The magnitude of that 
     effect is highly uncertain, however, and the empirical 
     evidence about the effects of audits on taxpayers' behavior 
     is inconclusive. Research about such deterrence finds varying 
     responses, depending on the type of taxpayer. People 
     generally increase their reported income in the years 
     following an audit, but people with higher income generally 
     do not, and neither do corporations. (For more discussion, 
     see Box 1 in CBO's July 2020 report Trends in the Internal 
     Revenue Service's Funding and Enforcement.)
       How the Current Analysis Differs From Previous Analyses. In 
     that July 2020 report, CBO estimated that a $40 billion 
     increase in enforcement funding would raise $103 billion (for 
     a net effect of $63 billion). The methods used for this 
     estimate differ in several ways from the methods used for 
     that one.
       First, CBO used updated ROIs that incorporated the IRS's 
     most recent estimates of the return on enforcement 
     activities. CBO then adjusted the ROIs to reflect both direct 
     revenues and protected revenues, increasing the peak ROI from 
     6.4 to 7.1.
       Second, CBO's current methods allow for positive 
     interaction between enforcement spending and other IRS 
     funding. That is, CBO accounts for ways in which increased 
     capabilities, such as more digitization of taxpayers' 
     information and greater visibility of income flows, can 
     increase the productivity of enforcement activities.
       Third, this analysis reflects a longer time frame for 
     receiving enforcement revenues because of the complexity of 
     audits associated with high-wealth individuals, large 
     corporations, and partnerships. Taxpayers with greater 
     resources may be more likely to appeal assessments or to 
     litigate their disputes in the U.S. Tax Court, delaying the 
     receipt of assessed taxes. As a result, revenues from some 
     audits will not be received until later than CBO estimated in 
     its July 2020 analysis.
       Sources of Uncertainty. The change in revenues resulting 
     from an increase in the IRS's funding could be different from 
     CBO's estimate. It depends on the IRS's ability to hire 
     experienced candidates, changes in voluntary compliance, and 
     the interaction of enforcement funding with the IRS's other 
     capabilities.
       The IRS intends to hire mid- and senior-level people with 
     private-sector experience who will not require a great deal 
     of training to become productive. But it might not be able to 
     hire its desired mix of candidates. If it hired less 
     experienced candidates, it would have to spend more resources 
     training them. Not only would they take longer to become 
     productive, but current staff members would have to devote 
     more time to training them. A related source of uncertainty 
     in CBO's estimate is attrition: if it proved higher than 
     expected, personnel would have fewer years at full 
     productivity.
       An increase in the IRS's funding could signal that the 
     agency was more capable of detecting noncompliance, thus 
     increasing voluntary compliance and revenues. However, if 
     there were fewer noncompliant taxpayers to audit, the ROIs 
     from the IRS's enforcement activities would drop, and the 
     direct revenues from increased enforcement would be lower 
     than CBO estimated.
       Finally, it is unclear how much the greater information 
     reporting or the increased IRS spending in areas other than 
     enforcement (such as technology) could improve examiners' 
     productivity. Greater nonenforcement spending might increase 
     overall revenues but decrease ROIs--for example, if improved 
     services for taxpayers enabled those taxpayers to more 
     accurately determine their

[[Page H2700]]

     tax liability, reducing the pool of noncompliant taxpayers to 
     audit.


                          Effects on Taxpayers

       The proposed increase in spending on the IRS's enforcement 
     activities would result in higher audit rates than those 
     underlying CBO's baseline budget projections. Between 2010 
     and 2018, the audit rate for higher-income taxpayers fell, 
     while the audit rate for lower-income taxpayers remained 
     fairly stable. In CBO's baseline projections, the overall 
     audit rate declines, resulting in lower audit rates for both 
     higher-income and lower-income taxpayers. The proposal, by 
     contrast, would return audit rates to the levels of about 10 
     years ago; the rate would rise for all taxpayers, but higher-
     income taxpayers would face the largest increase. In 
     addition, the Administration's policies would focus 
     additional IRS resources on enforcement activity aimed at 
     high-wealth taxpayers, large corporations, and partnerships. 
     CBO estimates that if the proposals were enacted, tax 
     compliance would be improved, and more households would meet 
     their obligation under the law.
       Higher audit rates would probably also result in some 
     audits of taxpayers who would later be determined not to owe 
     additional taxes. However, the Administration's proposal for 
     more information reporting, as well as additional spending on 
     IRS technology, might reduce the burden on compliant 
     taxpayers by allowing the IRS to better target noncompliant 
     ones and to reduce the number of audits that resulted in no 
     change in tax assessment.

  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
  Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I come from a town called 
Butler, Pennsylvania, and in that area, it is Pennsylvania's 16th 
Congressional District. In that district, the average annual income for 
a family of four is about $52,000.
  Now, down here people laugh and say nobody can live on $52,000 a 
year. I said, in my district they do. In my district they do.
  But let's talk about this in kitchen-table economics. Last year, we 
had about $4.9 trillion in revenue. We spent $6.22 trillion.
  Kitchen-table economics is that you tell that family that earned 
$49,000, go out and spend $62,000, and they look at you like there is 
something wrong with your head. They say, you can't do that. I said, 
your government does. Your government does. They do it every year, and 
they do it with your tax dollars.
  Listen, this is America's wake-up call. This isn't about the blue 
side of the House or the red side of the House. Look up in the gallery. 
That is red, white, and blue. That is America. Those are the people 
that pay our taxes.
  All we are asking tonight is we look at the Fiscal Responsibility 
Act. What a weird name to be used in Washington. I wish we could stop 
playing this game of who struck John. Both parties have spent too much 
money for far too long.
  Tonight is the night to turn this ship around. This is the USS 
Abraham Lincoln, and it takes more than one person at the wheel. We 
have all got to grab that wheel, and we have got to start pulling on 
that wheel to turn this ship around.
  Tonight is a wake-up call, America. It is not a Republican wake-up 
call or a Democrat wake-up call, but it is an American wake-up call. 
Please, wake up.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I commend President Biden, Leader 
Jeffries, and all of our negotiators for the great work they have done 
to keep us from defaulting on our debts.
  This agreement protects critical funding for children and families. I 
am especially pleased with the protections for homeless youth in 
school, foster children who have aged out of care, and veterans in need 
of health services. It protects Medicare, Medicaid, and Social 
Security.
  This bill protects historic investments in clean energy. It also 
protects the 40 million student loan borrowers under President Biden's 
student loan relief plan, and it provides relief for some of my 
concerns about SNAP and work benefits and work requirements in TANF.
  I still have some serious concerns about how it affects the 
environment and responds to climate control issues. The bill is not 
everything I wanted, but it does give us an opportunity to pay our debt 
and protect the good work we have done during the first term of 
President Biden.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington), the Budget chairman.
  Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, as I have repeatedly warned, the fiscal 
state of our Nation is in decline. Our financial health is rapidly 
deteriorating, and our national debt is unsustainable, and, by the way, 
both parties bear some blame.
  One thing is for sure, Mr. Speaker. We didn't get here overnight, and 
we won't get out of this mess with just one piece of legislation.
  Here is my admonition to my colleagues. This can't just be a one-off 
deal. It must be the beginning of a movement to restore fiscal sanity 
in our Nation's Capitol. We must end the era of Big Government funded 
on the backs of our children and change the culture in Washington to 
continuously and repeatedly rein in our out-of-control deficit 
spending.
  Today, there is only one deal on the table, and only one question for 
me and my colleagues to answer: Do the biggest cuts to the wasteful and 
bloated bureaucracy, record rescissions of Federal funds and reforms to 
welfare and environmental regulations constitute a meaningful step in 
the right direction?
  Mr. Speaker, the answer is unequivocally, yes. As I have said all 
along, we will pay our bills. We will protect the good faith and credit 
of the United States, but we will not give politicians a blank check to 
bankrupt our country.
  The American people gave Republicans the majority in the House to 
stop our Democratic colleagues' unbridled spending and reverse Biden's 
failed economic policies, and I believe the Fiscal Responsibility Act 
is certainly a good start, which is why I support this piece of 
legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Alabama (Ms. Sewell), a very capable member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Ms. SEWELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bipartisan budget 
agreement in order to protect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, 
while also preventing a devastating default on our debt.
  To be clear, this bill is far from perfect, but it prevents a 
default, it prevents future efforts to hold this Nation hostage for the 
rest of the 118th Congress, and it prevents cruel Republican cuts.
  This budget agreement that President Biden negotiated protects 
funding for education, healthcare, veterans' benefits, Medicare, 
Medicaid, and Social Security. Most importantly, it prevents 
Republicans from forcing a devastating default that would kill 
countless jobs in my district and destroy our economy.
  Mr. Speaker, I join in expressing my frustration with the crisis that 
my Republican colleagues have manufactured. The American people deserve 
better than a Republican majority that chooses to govern crisis by 
crisis. Let's lift this debt ceiling and get on with the people's 
business in the people's House.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker).

                              {time}  2030

  Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fiscal Responsibility 
Act. How could I not support a bill that claws back billions in unspent 
COVID funds, a bill that cuts trillions in Biden's out-of-control 
spending, a bill that caps spending levels for years to come, and a 
bill that enacts work requirements to bring more Americans back into 
the workforce, lift households out of poverty by connecting them with 
the best antipoverty program--a good job. Most importantly, this bill 
is the beginning. It is a start to put our Nation on a better fiscal 
trajectory.
  Our debt-to-GDP today is at the highest level ever since the end of 
World War II. If we do nothing to curb spending, our Federal debt will 
be double our GDP by 2050. This is a start to change our trajectory.
  Now, I wish I could be voting for more than this. I liked our 
original bill a heck of a lot better, but the fact is, the President 
and the Democrats who

[[Page H2701]]

control the Senate fought hard to maintain their spending addiction.
  Given that we only control the House, I am very pleased with all that 
is in this bill. It is most definitely an improvement over existing 
law, and I am disappointed that some of my colleagues don't see that.
  This bill will give our creditors the confidence that we can govern 
by putting us on a better path.
  It is a step in the right direction, and I am proud to support it.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, there isn't anybody in this Chamber who 
believes that Republicans will abide by a cap on defense spending in 
the next year.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from 
Washington (Ms. DelBene), a champion of the child tax credit.
  Ms. DelBENE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Bipartisan 
Budget Agreement. This deal will protect American families and our 
economy from a devastating default on our Nation's bills in just 5 
days. It will also shield our veterans, seniors, law enforcement, and 
schools from the worst of the extreme demands my Republican colleagues 
issued while holding our economy hostage.
  This deal is far from perfect, but we can't allow perfect to be the 
enemy of the good when the stakes are this high. A default would mean 
an immediate recession, millions of jobs lost, devastated retirement 
accounts, and higher borrowing costs for Americans.
  Compromise means that no one gets everything they want, so we have a 
choice between a catastrophic outcome or a chance to move forward with 
a bipartisan compromise. The worst outcome here would be a default.
  Mr. Speaker, let's get this done and over to the Senate so we can 
take default off the table.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Malliotakis).
  Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Mr. Speaker, the Rolling Stones said, ``You can't 
always get what you want . . . you get what you need,'' and we need to 
avert a default that would stop checks to our seniors, benefits for our 
veterans, hurt the U.S. dollar, and Americans' retirement savings. We 
also need to change the fiscal trajectory of our Nation.
  This bill does both by reducing inflationary spending for the first 
time in over a decade with the largest savings in history, imposing 
spending caps, and adding checks and balances on the executive branch.
  We started from a place where the President and the Senate refused to 
negotiate, and we ended with conservative wins that include stopping 
Biden's plan to hire additional IRS agents this year, clawing back 
unused COVID funds, expanding work requirements to reduce dependency on 
public benefits, and cutting costly red tape that slows down critical 
infrastructure projects.
  While no deal is perfect, this is only the beginning, and we cannot 
allow perfect to be the enemy of the good. Republicans, under the 
leadership of Speaker McCarthy, have restored balance to government. We 
put an end to the Democrats' massive inflationary spending sprees, and 
we will continue to fight for the American taxpayers as we proceed in 
this process to stop reckless policies that fuel inflation.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), a very capable woman and member of the Ways and 
Means Committee.
  Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, Republicans claim they just had 
to threaten the economic well-being of every American man, woman, and 
child because the $31 trillion debt was too high.
  Well, hypocrisy, thou hast a name, GOP. Because what they insisted 
on, their red line was not financial at all; it was to double down on 
the so-called ``work requirements.'' Thank God the White House 
negotiations pushed back on the worst of these changes in TANF that 
would have saved $6 million over 10 years.
  Speaker after speaker has insisted on denying food to poor, old women 
who are primarily Black and Brown. It seems like the pound of flesh 
that you get is more delicious than having savings, but just wait. 
Before the ink is dry on this bill, you will be pushing for $3.5 
trillion in business tax cuts. Hear my words. You heard it here first.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser).
  Mr. MEUSER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman very much for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, while the Fiscal Responsibility Act is not perfect and 
God knows we need serious corrections, but there are at least ten 
conservative American provisions in this bill that will benefit our 
economy and advance a higher level of fiscal responsibility.
  Let's be honest, this is the most conservative bill that can pass 
with a Biden White House and a Schumer Senate. The Fiscal 
Responsibility Act stops the excessive spending, stops the bleeding, 
and adds to our workforce with work requirements. It includes the most 
important Federal and environmental permitting reforms in 40 years.
  Don't take my word for it. This is coming from the Associated General 
Contractors of America, the American Petroleum Institute, the Marcellus 
Shale Coalition, and the National Association of Manufacturers.

  Virtually every small business association, every group committed to 
sound, fiscal policy, such as Americans for Tax Reform and Americans 
for Prosperity have endorsed this legislation. This bill reins in the 
Biden administration's executive order spending which accounted for 
over $1 trillion in spending over the last 2 years.
  There is also a reduction of the IRS for $20 billion, it protects 
Social Security, and all the while we will avoid a catastrophic 
default. I urge support of this bill.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee), whose voice and health have been returned.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the ranking member, for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, paying America's bills isn't an option. Defaulting on 
our debt would have a consequence for every single American and, in 
fact, would have global consequences. It would increase every families' 
costs. It would eliminate millions of jobs, and threaten the retirement 
security of seniors and families all across this country.
  Let me be clear: We shouldn't be in this position. We shouldn't be 
close to default. It is a manufactured crisis. The House Republican 
majority created this crisis because they didn't have the will to 
submit their ideas to the legislative process, rather holding us all 
hostage to exact this price, to exact this legislation when we could 
have simply gone through the legislative process of making decisions 
about the priorities for this country.
  They have the majority on the Appropriations Committee, on the Ways 
and Means Committee, and on the Budget Committee. They ought not fear 
the argument over these issues. We need to make sure that we accept the 
fact that we have come to a compromise to protect Medicare and 
Medicaid. It protects the American people from catastrophic default. I 
urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3746.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock).
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, this is the first time in my 15 years in 
Congress that I have voted to increase the debt limit. I do so today 
because this measure places real constraints on future spending, more 
than $2 trillion. That makes this bill the most important victory for 
fiscal conservatism in more than a decade.
  The debt is but a symptom of the central problem--reckless spending. 
Once we have spent a dollar, there are only three ways to pay for it: 
Taxes, inflation, or debt. It is the spending, stupid.
  We have got a long way to go, but until the American people have had 
enough and replace the President and the Senate majority, this is a 
remarkable step forward. The many progrowth provisions in the bill 
provide the most potent antidote to debt--economic expansion.
  Mr. Speaker, defeating this bill would create a financial and 
political panic that will quickly forfeit the many hard-won reforms 
that are in this bill. We cannot let that happen.
  Mr. NEAL. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Beyer), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this imperfect bill.

[[Page H2702]]

  Mr. Speaker, look, I would have much rather voted for a clean debt 
limit increase as we did three times under the previous President. I do 
believe it is profoundly wrong that Republicans chose to hold our 
economy hostage, using the American people as leverage to demand 
concessions, and it was unnecessary.
  We are in a divided House. They have all the leverage they need to 
negotiate this through the regular appropriations process.
  Our values sometimes overlap, but they don't here when they want to 
protect the wealthiest tax cheats and we just want everyone to pay 
their fair share.
  Look, President Biden and his negotiating team worked skillfully and 
successfully to prevent a majority of the draconian tax cuts. This bill 
could have been so much worse, but it would be a catastrophe if we 
didn't pass it.
  Mr. Speaker, I will vote ``yes,'' and I continue to urge my 
colleagues to permanently abolish the debt ceiling, which could cause a 
real disaster someday soon if we don't get rid of it.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Lawler).
  Mr. LAWLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my support for the 
Fiscal Responsibility Act. As I have said from the very beginning, we 
must negotiate, we must cut spending, and we cannot default.
  The FRA reduces discretionary spending for the first time in decades, 
and it is the largest deficit reduction in our Nation's history. It 
cuts nondefense and nonveteran spending to below 2022 levels, one of 
the primary goals of the Limit, Save, Grow Act.
  It saves taxpayers $2.1 trillion over the next 6 years while blocking 
$5 trillion in new taxes proposed by the Biden administration. The bill 
also caps spending at 1 percent growth over the next 6 years and 
through the appropriations process, House Republicans will have the 
opportunity to reduce spending even more.
  That will help us take on the Biden administration's reckless 
spending head on, crack down on record inflation, and get our economy 
on the right track. This bill also protects Social Security, Medicare, 
and veterans' benefits, despite previous false claims by my Democratic 
colleagues that we were going to cut those vital programs.
  It enacts critical permitting and NEPA reform, enacts safeguards on 
executive spending, and forces Congress to engage in a functional 
appropriations process.
  The bottom line is this: With a divided government, no party is going 
to get 100 percent of what it wants. We all have a responsibility to 
govern, and default is not an option.

  The Fiscal Responsibility Act puts us on the path to fiscal sanity, 
protects our commitment to veterans and seniors, and raises the debt 
ceiling so we will not default. This is a bill we should all support, 
and I will vote ``aye.''
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania, (Mr. Evans).
  Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, this bill is far from perfect; however, the 
full faith and credit of the United States is at risk, and we cannot 
let Republicans drive us to default.
  Defaulting on the national debt would disrupt Social Security 
benefits for 92,000 households in my congressional district. I will not 
stand by and let harm come to our Nation, seniors, and disabled people. 
I urge my colleagues not to draw out this debt crisis and instead 
return to our focus of lowering the costs for working families.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Guthrie). The gentleman from 
Massachusetts has 10 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Missouri has 
4 minutes remaining.

                              {time}  2045

  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Schneider), another very capable member of the Ways and 
Means Committee.
  Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the bipartisan 
budget agreement and President Biden's work to ensure the Nation pays 
our bills and avoids a catastrophic, self-inflicted economic crisis.
  This legislation protects the many bipartisan achievements realized 
in the last Congress, such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act, CHIPS and Science Act, PACT Act, as well as the Inflation 
Reduction Act with its historic investments in addressing climate 
change.
  With this vote, we will protect Social Security, Medicare, and 
Medicaid and prevent devastating cuts sought to life-sustaining SNAP 
and TANF programs. With this vote, we will keep America moving forward 
to meet the challenges ahead of us.
  Compromise requires give-and-take, and both sides made difficult 
concessions to achieve this agreement. This is the result of bipartisan 
dealmaking, and I look forward to holding up the President's side of 
this bargain.
  I hope this is a learning moment, and we can avoid future political 
brinkmanship.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to put the American people over 
politics and support this important bill.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Panetta), a very capable member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I support the bipartisan budget agreement 
to raise the debt ceiling because if we don't, we will devastate the 
global markets and undermine the faith of the world's most important 
financial system, the United States of America.
  I support a clean raising of the debt ceiling, but elections have 
consequences. My colleagues on the other side wanted to use their 
leverage for concessions. In a divided government, governing means 
compromise, and it gets us this bill, legislation that would: one, 
raise the debt ceiling until 2025; two, stop the drastic cuts desired 
by the Republicans and protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
  Although it limits SNAP for certain ages, it expands those types of 
benefits for veterans and our homeless.
  Finally, we protect the historic legislation we passed last Congress 
to invest in our infrastructure and manufacturing, reduce drug costs, 
and care for veterans. Part of this bill even furthers our transition 
to clean energy.
  I will vote for this bill, but we have a lot more to do if we want to 
get serious about reducing our debt and deficit. That only begins when 
we stop governing by crisis and start governing by leadership.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Pfluger).
  Mr. PFLUGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of my district, the 
most important energy district in the country, on behalf of American 
energy independence, and on behalf of all Americans who are searching 
for a reasonable solution to a looming crisis.
  There are approximately, right now, 229 major fossil fuel projects in 
the United States currently awaiting permit approval. A recent study 
found that $157 billion in energy investment was stuck in the NEPA 
pipeline and that simply a 2-year NEPA deadline would spur $67 billion 
in energy investment. Killing energy projects by the bureaucratic red 
tape nightmare and the slow-walking that we have seen is unacceptable. 
No more.
  I am extremely proud of the energy reforms, the NEPA reforms, and the 
EPA reforms in this bill, the first in over 40 years, which will speed 
up over 200 projects to lower costs for consumers and protect our 
national security.
  No, this bill is not perfect, and arguably, it shouldn't be. A 
divided government yields compromise and slows the heavy hand of 
government, but saving $2 trillion, lifting families out of poverty, 
and defunding IRS agents is worth it. Vote ``yes'' for America's energy 
independence.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the 
Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett), an alum of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Speaker, Democrats' leadership has protected our 
hard-earned and historic economic recovery. That team secured an 
agreement that prevents Republicans from forcing devastating default 
and rejects their most extreme cuts in the GOP default on America bill. 
President

[[Page H2703]]

Biden's agreement protected Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and 
veterans' healthcare.
  This was a negotiation with individuals whose top priority was 
cutting food assistance and protecting the wealthy. That was their main 
priority across the entire negotiation.
  Fiscal responsibility? Their only responsibility was to protect their 
tax cuts for the ultrawealthy that grew the debt by $7 trillion in the 
first place.
  The President successfully insisted that if this agreement was going 
to include time limits on SNAP, it needed to include meaningful 
improvements to SNAP.
  Republicans protected the wealthy at the feet of the neediest 
Americans.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rogers of Alabama). The time of the 
gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. PLASKETT. Democrats understand the needs of the American people 
and our most vulnerable Americans, as well as the full faith and credit 
of the American people.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is no longer recognized.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I remind my colleagues that 
because of the Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the bottom 20 percent 
of earners saw their average Federal tax rate fall to its lowest level 
in 40 years. Low- and middle-income families of four saved at least 
$2,000 on their tax bill each year.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr.   David Scott), the ranking member of the Committee on 
Agriculture.
  Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, this is a most historic 
night.
  First of all, I thank President Biden. President Biden invited me, 
along with the other leaders, ranking member, and chairman of our 
Agriculture Committee. It gave me a chance to talk straight to the 
President about the serious food shortage that is coming to our 
veterans.
  Many of you may not know this, but the veterans are living in more 
food-insecure households than anybody else--7.4 percent higher than the 
general public. When I told President Biden that, he said that we have 
to do something about it. That is when he moved, with his energy, to be 
able to take not only the veterans but others off of SNAP work 
requirements.
  God bless this President for his leadership.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Mrvan).
  Mr. MRVAN. Mr. Speaker, I ran for Congress to solve problems, and 
this legislation averts a crisis. A default would jeopardize millions 
of people with unemployment, increase interest rates, and put retirees 
at risk and devastate their 401(k)'s.
  A default would also jeopardize numerous investments in the American 
worker in the 117th Congress, including the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act. That bill not only created jobs but also, with a strong 
``buy American'' provision, strengthened our domestic steel and 
manufacturing base and also allows for our veterans to be protected and 
provides funds dedicated to the health benefits and resources for the 
toxic exposures fund.
  I appreciate the dedicated work of the administration and my 
Democratic colleagues.
  For my neighbor Gretchen, who had anxiety about her 401(k), this bill 
supports the American worker. It supports American industry, the steel 
industry, and it also protects the American Dream. I am voting ``yes.''
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 5 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Missouri has 2\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for 
closing.
  Mr. Speaker, I think that this has been an elevating conversation 
about how we arrived here tonight. Our colleagues on the other side 
voted for the infrastructure bill, voted for the CHIPS Act, voted for 
the CARES Act, voted for the defense spending increases, and they voted 
for a tax cut in 2017 that borrowed $2.3 trillion that was added to the 
national debt.
  Now, for those who might be paying attention tonight, the national 
debt is the cumulative effect of deficits. These were annual deficits 
that were run up.
  Neither party is responsible for the pandemic. On March 11, 2020, we 
were warned what was coming. Twenty million jobs evaporated. Tonight, 
in some measure because of the leadership of Joe Biden, every one of 
those jobs has been returned and 9\1/2\ million jobs go unanswered.
  In this negotiation, which means you don't get everything you want, 
there are some quality moments that we take great credit for. We 
defended Social Security despite the fact that there were three 
Republican Senators who proposed cuts to Social Security. That is the 
reality. We defended Medicare. We defended Medicaid. We defended 
veterans benefits. We are very proud of the fact that we wrote the 
pandemic relief act.
  There is a group here tonight--I have been here long enough to know 
this--that was against this before they were against it. They were 
against it years ago, never mind tonight--this moment of bringing the 
Nation to default, what it would do to the American dollar as the 
currency of choice for the world, what this would do in treasury 
markets for liquidity purposes, what this would do to the hard-earned 
401(k) plans of the American family, to take us to this moment, this 
showdown that we had.
  This argument tonight was never about perfection. All 435 Members of 
this House would probably have written a different version of this 
bill. In a divided government, that is not reality.
  The last point I want to make is this: In the coming days, after this 
righteous debate about balancing the budget, our Republican colleagues 
are about to offer a massive tax cut. We need to be ready because of 
the fiscal rectitude that they have offered on this floor tonight. The 
corresponding responsibility of all of us is to point out what they 
intend to do with another tax cut--2001, $1.3 trillion, and by the way, 
with two wars and 2 million more veterans that we need to support.
  The other reality is that back in 2003 was another trillion dollars 
of tax cuts. The worst one of all was that tax cut in December 2017, 
where they borrowed $2.3 trillion for a tax cut that went to the 
wealthiest among us and had very meager economic growth.

                              {time}  2100

  This debate tonight was a good and spirited one because we also, I 
think, have found a common purpose in passing this legislation.
  Let's engage in this debate going forward. If we want the things that 
we say they want, then we are going to have to pay for them. That 
means, at some point, revisiting these tax cuts that have been put on 
the table in an arbitrary fashion and, as I noted, with borrowed money.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, we hear the other side of the aisle over and over talk 
about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
  Let me tell you about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Mr. Speaker. Last 
year, we had record revenue into the United States of $4.9 trillion, 
which was $900-plus billion more than what the Joint Committee on 
Taxation and the CBO predicted would happen upon passage of the Tax 
Cuts and Jobs Act.
  The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act delivered for a family of four who makes 
less than $60,000 a year. They paid zero in Federal taxes.
  Mr. Speaker, let's talk about tax cuts. The other side passed 
something called the Inflation Reduction Act, and it was tax cuts for 
their wealthy donors. In fact, the CBO just came out with a new score 
saying that it cost over $700 billion.
  Guess what? Ninety percent of your tax credits go to corporations 
with more than $1 billion in revenues, and $125 billion goes to China. 
That is what your tax cuts did.
  After years of Washington running in the wrong direction, we have an 
opportunity to take meaningful steps in the right direction on 
addressing America's debt crisis.
  The American people deserve nothing less. They see what inflation, 
caused by reckless spending of the Democratic Party, has done to their 
family budgets, to their retirement security, and to their small 
business plan.

[[Page H2704]]

  We have the opportunity to end the constant doling out of tax dollars 
under the guise of COVID relief.
  We have the opportunity to downsize the $80 billion pay raise that 
was given to the IRS last year. The IRS does not need a raise. It needs 
a reckoning.
  We have the opportunity to support those who can work to find work 
and climb out of poverty.
  We have the opportunity to put some guardrails on the administration, 
so if they are going to spend tax dollars by executive fiat, then they 
have to find savings somewhere else.
  We have the opportunity and the responsibility to address our debt 
crisis as we address the debt ceiling.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this bill to prevent a 
catastrophic default, which would jack up interest rates, eliminate 
700,000 jobs, raise mortgage rates to over 8 percent, cut housing 
vouchers, and hurt small businesses and consumers.
  All of this, because Republicans, who added $6.7 trillion to the debt 
under twice-impeached former President Trump.
  Republicans claim they care about debt reduction.
  But their leader, former President Trump said, ``I'm the king of 
debt. I'm great with debt. Nobody knows debt better than me.'' He said 
this to Norah O'Donnell in an interview on CBS.
  Very recently, Trump said, ``I say to the Republicans out there--
Congressmen, Senators--if they don't give you massive cuts, you're 
going to have to do a default.''
  Democrats support this bill because we refuse to allow our country to 
default on its debt.
  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3746, 
the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
  This bill is not perfect. Some will say that it is not even good. But 
I say it is better than the extortion bill pushed through this House 
last month by this Republican majority that would have forced Congress 
to either default on paying our nation's bills or make devastating cuts 
that would hurt the health, safety, and well-being of the American 
people.
  This bill prevents a default that would trigger an economic 
catastrophe, a global market panic, and a job killing recession.
  The most egregious cuts that the Republicans originally proposed last 
month in their Default on America Act will be avoided.
  Cuts that were originally proposed to the Toxic Exposure Fund created 
by the bipartisan PACT Act have been reversed as have the reductions in 
veterans' health care and benefits.
  I have been very concerned about the cuts to rural development 
programs, nutrition for women and children, and funding for 
economically distressed farmers which have been reduced.
  We must pay our debts and debate issues of spending and revenue 
through regular order and not under threat of default.
  No, this bill is not perfect. And to many it may not be good. But it 
is a better way forward than the chaos and consequences of a first ever 
default on the full faith and credit of the United States.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, Section 321 of the Fiscal Responsibility 
Act of 2023 (FRA) employs the term ``reasonably foreseeable'' in four 
instances. The intent of using the term ``reasonably foreseeable'' in 
subsection (a) of section 321, which amends section 102 of the National 
Environmental Policy Act, is to narrow the scope of NEPA's 
requirements. NEPA requires federal agencies to prepare ``a detailed 
statement . . . on the environmental impact'' of any proposed federal 
project ``significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment.'' 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(i). This detailed statement is 
colloquially known as an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). At 
present, NEPA requires that an EIS must include, inter alia, a detailed 
statement on ``the environmental impact of the proposed agency action'' 
and ``any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should 
the proposal be implemented[.]'' 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(i) and (ii).
  Ultimately, in amending NEPA to include the concept of reasonable 
foreseeability, Congress intends to establish in statute Sierra Club v. 
Marsh, 976 F.2d 763 (1st Cir. 1992). In Sierra Club, the court stated 
succinctly that ``[n]ot all impacts need be discussed in exhaustive 
detail. First, only those effects that are `likely' (or `foreseeable' 
or `reasonably foreseeable') need be discussed . . . and, as in other 
legal contexts. the terms `likely' and `foreseeable,' as applied to a 
type of environmental impact, are properly interpreted as meaning that 
the impact is sufficiently likely to occur that a person of ordinary 
prudence would take it into account in reaching a decision.'' Sierra 
Club at 765 (internal citations omitted). Through use of the term 
``reasonably foreseeable'' in section 321 of the FRA, Congress intends 
to narrow NEPA's scope by establishing in statute the ordinary prudence 
standard with respect to NEPA analysis.
  Section 321(a) of the FRA amends 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)(i) and (ii) 
with the intent to narrow the scope of what must be included in an EIS. 
Clause (i) is amended from ``the environmental impact of the proposed 
action'' to ``reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the 
proposed agency action''. The intent of this amendment is to narrow the 
scope from ``any environmental impact'', which can be broadly 
construed, to only those ``environmental effects'' that would be a 
``reasonably foreseeable'' result ``of the proposed agency action.'' In 
executing this amendment to NEPA. Congress seeks to clarify that an 
agency need not evaluate all effects of a proposed action, but rather 
only those effects that are ``reasonably foreseeable.''
  Clause (ii) is amended from ``any adverse environmental effects which 
cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented'' to ``any 
reasonably foreseeable adverse environmental effects which cannot be 
avoided should the proposal be implemented''. The intent of this 
amendment is to narrow the scope from ``any adverse environmental 
effects'', which can be broadly construed, to only those adverse 
environmental effects that are also ``reasonably foreseeable.'' In each 
of these instances, it is Congress's intent to enshrine in statute the 
ordinary prudence standard with respect to the content of an EIS.
  Similarly, section 321(b) of the FRA also employs the term 
``reasonably foreseeable'' in establishing in statute levels of review 
under NEPA. By qualifying the ``significant effect'' with the term 
``reasonably foreseeable'', Congress again intends to employ the 
ordinary prudence standard to make clear the circumstances in which an 
agency must issue an EIS. Specifically, Congress intends to limit 
preparation of an EIS to only those instances where the significant 
effect on the quality of the human environment is also ``reasonably 
foreseeable'' as opposed to merely possible or any or all potential 
significant effects. The term ``reasonably foreseeable'' is again 
employed with respect to an ``environmental assessment'' for 
consistency and to provide clarity in the distinction between 
circumstances in which an EIS versus an environmental assessment is 
required.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to speak on H.R. 3746, 
the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
  It is important to highlight and discuss how we got here and what is 
at stake with this critical and momentous measure.
  I know I am not alone in the disappointment at what steps have been 
taken to hold our nation's economy hostage and put American lives at 
risk.
  It is shameful that, while we have a bipartisan agreement here today, 
we have taken painful compromises to get here.
  And although arduous efforts on both sides of the aisle allowed for 
us to move forward with this agreement, and some critical protections 
for the American people have been preserved--it must be stated that 
this agreement is not one that entirely reflects what we in Congress 
should be united on--namely, our most basic and fundamental truths that 
hold us together as a democracy.
  We are nation that upholds the ability for all to prosper, as well as 
one that upholds the ability for all Americans to be protected and 
cared for in our times of greatest need.
  It is important to understand that the foundations of a society do 
not extend only to its political and economic system; they must extend 
to its social and moral system as well.
  Taking all of these in balance there is no other comparable 
governmental system that has raised the standard of living of millions 
of people, created vast new wealth and resources, or inspired so many 
beneficial innovations and technologies.
  Governmental structures providing for protections and safety nets for 
all Americans is what makes us all successful as a nation united.
  Creating and preserving such structure is the critical investment in 
our government, our nation, our security, and our development and 
growth for current and future generations to benefit from.
  Yet, instead of investing in America, many of my Republican 
colleagues would rather focus on holding our economy hostage to advance 
unpopular and dangerous priorities.
  Holding our nation's debt ceiling as collateral to inflict painful 
cuts that will impact the lives of millions of Americans and knowing 
that breaching the debt limit would provoke unprecedented economic 
damage and instability in the U.S. and around the world is a sad state 
that we have found ourselves in.
  Yes, it is evident that my Republican colleagues will not prioritize 
the wellbeing, safety, health, and prosperity of the American people 
when looking at what we have had to give up in this bill.

[[Page H2705]]

  While much is unknown about the devastating impact this bill will 
have, we do know that some immediate changes will inevitably cause harm 
to many American families, children and vulnerable individuals.
  That is why I offered several amendments during the Rules Committee 
that will make additional exemptions and elimination of 
disqualifications for several additional special populations in which 
we must protect and continue to support when they are in their most 
desperate and fragile times of need.
  Ensuring that we are not taking critical resources and money for food 
away from children and families living in poverty is not only the right 
thing to do, but also the economically smart thing to do.
  The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the nation's 
most important and effective anti-hunger program.
  Any changes in SNAP will have an incredible impact on millions of 
Americans and Texans.
  As of 2020, there were 18.66 million households relying on SNAP and 
7.11 million SNAP households with children.
  Texas holds the second highest number of households using the SNAP 
program in 2023 at 1,167,720, making up 11.5 percent of Texas 
households.
  As of April 2023, there were 284,794 SNAP cases and 615,463 eligible 
individuals in Harris County, my district's biggest county.
  This included 92,214 individuals aged less than 5 and 228,519 
individuals between the ages of 5 through 17.
  My first amendment for H.R. 3746, listed on the Rules Co1nmittee 
roster as Amendment No. 56, would have added a provision to extend 
exemption regarding current work requirement exemptions in the Food and 
Nutrition Act for a parent or person responsible for dependent child up 
to age 24 in SNAP household.
  In Texas, 79 percent of SNAP participants are families with children. 
That's more than the national rate of 69 percent of SNAP participants 
across the country being families with children.
  Further, the SNAP participation rate in Texas for working poor people 
is 72 percent--which is also more than the national rate of 41 percent 
of SNAP participants nationwide being in working families.
  We need to understand that parents continue to support children 
beyond the age of adolescence impacting financial resources for 
families well into a child's early twenties.
  Across the country there 5.134 million, and 528,000 in Texas aged 18 
through 24 in poverty as of 2021.
  Nearly 1 in 3 parents (31 percent) have made a significant financial 
sacrifice to help their adult children financially.
  Over two-thirds (68 percent) of parents of adult children have made 
or are currently making a financial sacrifice to help their kids 
financially.
  Parents say they sacrificed retirement savings (43 percent), 
emergency savings (51 percent), paying down their own debt (49 percent) 
or reaching a financial milestone (55 percent).
  Over 40 percent of American children rely primarily on their mothers' 
earnings for financial support in crosssectional surveys.
  In July 2022, half of adults ages 18 to 29 were living with one or 
both of their parents.
  Significantly higher than the share who were living with their 
parents in 2010 (44 percent on average that year) or 2000 (38 percent 
on average).
  What this means is that we need to understand that support for 
families with dependent children under the age of 24 and who are living 
in poverty need to be protected and extended the grace of an exemption 
in this bill.
  My second amendment for H.R. 3746, listed on the Rules Committee 
roster as Amendment No. 59, would have extended the former foster care 
exemption to all individuals 24 or younger under state custody and 
aging out of critical support services.
  More than 23,000 children will age out of the US foster care system 
every year.
  Every year in Texas, more than 1,200 young adults age out of the 
foster care system without being adopted.
  Less than half of Texas foster care alumni (46.9 percent) were 
currently employed at least ten hours per week.
  Only half of alumni (51.6 percent) reported having a household income 
that was greater than the poverty line.
  By 24 years old, 50 percent of former foster kids had been ``couch 
surfing'' since leaving care.
  One in ten interviewed alumni (11.1 percent) was currently 
incarcerated; nearly seven in ten males (68.0 percent) had been 
arrested since leaving care, 55.2 percent had been convicted of a 
crime, and 62.3 percent had spent at least one night incarcerated.
  Over 90 percent of foster youth who move more than four times will 
end up in juvenile justice.
  Many youth in the juvenile and criminal justice system are not deemed 
to be indigent but have also had contact with the foster care system 
and have been removed from their homes even if they have not been 
formerly adjudicated as a foster child.
  Far too often children in state custody are taken from their homes 
for significant periods of times during their adolescence and at a time 
when they are most vulnerable to recidivating upon their return to 
their homes due to gaps and lack of resources to help them get jobs, 
education, mental health care, substance abuse and housing.
  It is important that we continue to provide necessary resources for 
all children and youth aging out of state custody where they have been 
removed from their homes during critical times of development and 
growth--and often are left to survive on their own and/or cannot return 
to their homes upon their release.
  We need to do more to support youth aging out of state custody.
  Despite no Democratic common-sense amendments being accepted at this 
posture, we have no choice but to continue to move forward and still 
try to make a better way for our nation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 456, 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.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on passage of the bill will be followed by a 5-minute vote 
on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 2797.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 314, 
noes 117, not voting 4, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 243]

                               AYES--314

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Allen
     Allred
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Auchincloss
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Balint
     Barr
     Bean (FL)
     Beatty
     Bentz
     Bera
     Bergman
     Beyer
     Bice
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Bucshon
     Budzinski
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Caraveo
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carey
     Carl
     Carson
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (LA)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Chavez-DeRemer
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Cicilline
     Ciscomani
     Clark (MA)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Comer
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Curtis
     D'Esposito
     Davids (KS)
     Davidson
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (NC)
     De La Cruz
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DelBene
     Deluzio
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Duarte
     Duncan
     Dunn (FL)
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Estes
     Evans
     Ezell
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fletcher
     Flood
     Foster
     Foushee
     Foxx
     Frankel, Lois
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Frost
     Gallagher
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garbarino
     Garcia, Mike
     Garcia, Robert
     Gimenez
     Golden (ME)
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Gottheimer
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Green, Al (TX)
     Greene (GA)
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Harder (CA)
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinson
     Horsford
     Houchin
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Issa
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson (NC)
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs
     James
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kaptur
     Kean (NJ)
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kildee
     Kiley
     Kilmer
     Kim (CA)
     Kim (NJ)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Kustoff
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Landsman
     Langworthy
     Larsen (WA)
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lawler
     Lee (FL)
     Lee (NV)
     Leger Fernandez
     Letlow
     Levin
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lynch
     Magaziner
     Malliotakis
     Manning
     Massie
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClellan
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McGarvey
     McHenry
     Meeks
     Menendez
     Meuser
     Mfume
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Molinaro
     Moolenaar
     Moore (UT)
     Morelle
     Moskowitz
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Murphy
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Nickel
     Norcross
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Omar
     Owens
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peltola
     Pence
     Perez
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Pfluger
     Phillips
     Pingree

[[Page H2706]]


     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reschenthaler
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rouzer
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rutherford
     Ryan
     Salazar
     Salinas
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Scanlon
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Simpson
     Slotkin
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Smucker
     Sorensen
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Stanton
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Stevens
     Stewart
     Strickland
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Tenney
     Thanedar
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Titus
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Trahan
     Trone
     Turner
     Underwood
     Valadao
     Van Orden
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (NY)
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym

                               NOES--117

     Alford
     Barragan
     Biggs
     Bishop (NC)
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Bowman
     Brecheen
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Burchett
     Burlison
     Bush
     Cammack
     Carter (TX)
     Casar
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Clarke (NY)
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Collins
     Connolly
     Crane
     Crockett
     DeLauro
     DeSaulnier
     DesJarlais
     Donalds
     Espaillat
     Fallon
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gonzales, Tony
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Guest
     Hageman
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hayes
     Hern
     Higgins (LA)
     Hoyle (OR)
     Huffman
     Hunt
     Jackson (TX)
     Jayapal
     Kamlager-Dove
     Khanna
     LaHood
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (PA)
     Lesko
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Mann
     Mast
     McCormick
     McGovern
     Meng
     Miller (IL)
     Mills
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran
     Nadler
     Norman
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Ogles
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pocan
     Porter
     Posey
     Pressley
     Ramirez
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Roy
     Santos
     Schakowsky
     Scott (VA)
     Self
     Sessions
     Spartz
     Stansbury
     Steube
     Strong
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Tlaib
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Vargas
     Velazquez
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Banks
     Boebert
     Craig
     Ross

                              {time}  2121

  Mr. MENENDEZ changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated against:
  Mr. BANKS. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted 
``nay'' on rollcall No. 243.
  Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 243.

                          ____________________