[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 120 (Wednesday, July 22, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H5127-H5143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027
General Leave
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 113.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1438 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the concurrent
resolution, H. Con. Res. 113.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Goldman) to preside
over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1251
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 113) establishing the congressional
budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2027 and
setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2028
[[Page H5128]]
through 2036, with Mr. Goldman of Texas in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the concurrent resolution is
considered read the first time.
General debate shall be confined to the concurrent resolution and
shall not exceed 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget or their
respective designees.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington) and the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Boyle) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, the American people suffered through 4 years of
lawlessness, incompetence, and habitual failure under Joe Biden and
Democratic leadership, one self-inflicted disaster after another:
border chaos, rampant crime, feckless foreign policy, spending-induced
inflation that we haven't seen in a half a century, a crushing cost-of-
living crisis, and the worst regressive tax on working families in this
country.
In the historic election of 2024, our citizens gave us unified
Republican leadership and an unambiguous and unequivocal message. They
said that we want strong, competent leaders, commonsense policies, and
a commitment to America and Americans first.
Mr. Chairman, for our part, from day one, Republicans have united and
relentlessly delivered in reversing those failed Democratic policies,
delivering on the American people's priorities, and restoring America's
greatness and the American spirit along with it.
Mr. Chairman, we have been doing this in the face of unprecedented
Democratic obstruction. They either didn't listen to the American
people in the election of 2024, or worse: They didn't care.
Instead of humble self-reflection and change, the Democratic Party
has doubled down on their radical agenda and has hastened their march
to Democratic socialism. Their entire strategy has been to resist
Republicans and obstruct, obstruct, obstruct the President at all
fronts and at all costs, even if it hurts our great Nation, its
success, and the safety and security of the American people, sadly.
Exhibit A: The Democrats shut the government down for the first time
in history when we presented a clean CR to continue the funding of last
year until we could work out an appropriations deal. They rejected it,
and their demand was to repeal the safeguards that we put in to prevent
illegals and ineligible people from draining the safety net that is
there for vulnerable Americans.
Then, they shut Homeland Security down, and they held not only TSA
agents and coastguardsmen hostage, but they held the American people
and our security hostage for absurd and dangerous demands that would
have returned our country back to the Biden border nightmare, along
with endangering our hardworking and brave Border Patrol and ICE
agents.
The Democrats have gone on time and time again with this
unprecedented obstruction. Recently, they blocked the National Defense
Authorization Act to protest President Trump and our troops' efforts to
stop this radical terrorist regime from having nuclear weapons.
They blocked FISA, which is a critical tool for our intelligence
agencies to stave off and thwart terrorist attacks and Chinese
espionage and hacking into our critical infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, I could go on and on. Let me tell you what we have done
as Republicans, relentlessly, every day, with the commitment to the
people who sent us up here. In reconciliation 1.0, we prevented the
largest tax hike in our Nation's history, 22 percent, which would have
been on top of the 21 percent increase in prices they experienced from
Biden inflation.
We gave permanent tax relief to working families and small
businesses. We made the largest investment in rebuilding our military,
restoring their spirit, peace through strength for the USA. We saved a
record $1.6 trillion in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse that was
robbing taxpayers and weakening the safety net for our most vulnerable.
Reconciliation 2.0, unfortunately, we had to burn a reconciliation
and go at it again unilaterally, Republicans stopping the defunding of
ICE and CBP. That is right. We didn't get a single Democratic vote to
fund ICE and CBP, and the only way we turned Homeland Security back on
is they wanted to cut them out of the equation. That is what we did
with the second reconciliation.
Mr. Chairman, here we are with reconciliation 3.0, supporting our
troops in their time of need with just baseline battlefield readiness,
bullets and bombs to finish the job and to come home safely and
victoriously; strengthening our food supply; and, ultimately, we want
to safeguard the integrity of our elections.
We want to restore the American people's confidence because as the
Founders said in the Declaration of Independence: ``There is no just
government without the consent of the governed,'' and there is no
legitimate consent and there is no functioning democracy if the
American people have no confidence in this election.
Mr. Chairman, it is not just the President. It is not just MAGA
Republicans. Nancy Pelosi, in 2017, said this: ``Our election was
hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to protect our
democracy . . . `'
Well, you know what, Mr. Chairman? I agree with Nancy Pelosi. We have
a duty. We have a duty to safeguard our elections. We have a duty to
restore confidence in what underpins the will of the people, their
freedoms, our common defense, and the general welfare of every American
in this country.
Mr. Chairman, I encourage not just Republicans but my Democratic
colleagues to join us in supporting our troops, safeguarding our
elections, and saving America.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1300
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chair, as you may recall, 2 years ago, in the election that my
good friend the chair referenced, Donald Trump won a whopping landslide
of 1\1/2\ points, one of the closest national popular votes in American
history, for those keeping score. During that election, he campaigned
in my State, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, more than any other in
the country. The promise he most often recited at every rally was, and
these were his exact words: I will lower your costs on day one.
Mr. Chair, what an abject failure. This Presidency, and the
rubberstamp Republicans who enable him, have pushed through an agenda
that hasn't lowered costs for the American people. It has only made
things far more expensive.
He started over a year ago with the Trump tariff taxes, a tax on most
imported goods. On average, this has raised costs by about $1,800 a
year for the American family. He then doubled down on that last summer,
in July of last year, when the rubberstamp Republicans passed, and the
President signed what he used to call the big, beautiful bill, which
has become the big, ugly law for the American people. That bill makes
healthcare more expensive for the American people while cutting off
their food assistance at a time that food prices are through the roof.
Now, here we are, after all of that. We have the Republican
reconciliation 3.0. I think that both parties would agree--in fact, the
two Presidential nominees 2 years ago happened to, in a rare point of
agreement, but they happened to agree that the number one issue on
people's minds by far was the affordability crisis, that America had
become too expensive.
Isn't it interesting that despite the fact that polls continue to
show by an overwhelming majority that is the biggest issue that voters
care about, we have in front of us the Republican reconciliation 3.0,
47 pages, 6,560 words, not one word about affordability, not one word
about how to bring down costs for the American people.
They are not even trying. We have a President who just doesn't care
about the average American family and the affordability crisis. Don't
take my word for it. Take the President's own words. ``I don't think
about Americans' financial situation.''
[[Page H5129]]
This bill reflects that fact. We have in this bill almost $100
billion in new deficit spending. Yes, that is right. The same crowd
that loves to cry crocodile tears about deficit and debt whenever there
is a President in the White House who is a Democrat, cumulatively now
they have added $5 trillion to our national debt, more than any other
18-month period in the history of Congress. They are about to add $100
billion more.
Most of that spending is for President Trump's Iran war, a reckless
decision with absolutely no plan on how to achieve victory and how it
would end.
The American people paid the price for President Trump's war in terms
of dollars and cents. Just look at gas prices. The day before the war
was launched, the national average for a gallon of gas was $2.98.
Today, it is over $4 a gallon and climbing.
Here, we have another reconciliation bill in front of us--nothing in
there whatsoever to bring down costs, nothing to lower gas prices,
nothing to lower food prices, nothing to lower the cost of consumer
goods, just more spending on the most unpopular war in American
history.
That might sound like an exaggeration, a Trumpian exaggeration. No,
it is a fact. Going back to the beginning of polling almost a century
ago, there is no other war in American history in which the American
people, by a more than 2-to-1 margin, disapprove over approve. Only 30
percent of the American people approve of what the President is doing
in Iran.
It is no wonder. They are paying the cost. Of course, as expensive as
it is for the American family, that doesn't measure up to the ultimate
cost: those lives that we have lost already in this war.
Mr. Chair, it is quite clear from the President's own words and the
written text of this bill that this President and the Republican
majority have no plan whatsoever on how to bring costs down for the
American people. What is worse, they are not even trying.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the House Armed Services
Committee.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this
budget resolution. This resolution unlocks $60 billion in critically
needed supplemental funding to support the warfighter and ensure our
military readiness.
Without these funds, military training exercises will be canceled,
maintenance of equipment facilities and weapon systems will be
deferred, munitions procurement will be postponed, and the combat
readiness of our Armed Forces will suffer.
This budget resolution will enable us to move legislation to provide
$1.6 billion to ensure our servicemembers are paid on time; $17 billion
to cover unplanned operational costs such as fuel, training, and
maintenance repairs; and $18 billion to replenish the arsenal of
critical munitions.
Yesterday, you may have noticed Secretary Hegseth testified before
the Senate that, without these funds, we face critical shortfalls that
threaten the Department's ability to pay our servicemembers, rapidly
replenish equipment and munitions, and sustain vital operations without
disruption.
No matter how you feel about the current events, these funds are
necessary to ensure our fighting forces remain ready, our troops are
paid, and our Nation is safe.
Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support the resolution.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, as you heard from our chairman, while our
Democrat colleagues are shutting down the Department of Homeland
Security and blocking the National Defense Authorization Act in the
Senate, we have our troops standing in the gap, risking their lives for
the common defense. They need to be refueled. They need the
replenishment. They need the resources to be successful. They need to
know we are behind them.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a member of the Budget Committee.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chair, this bill should really be known as the
desperation act because Republicans are so desperate to fund an endless
war, so desperate to avoid angering their master at the White House, so
desperate to find a way to exclude from the upcoming election many of
the very voters that are about to vote them out of office.
Obedient Republicans here today are doing nothing to address sky-high
prices that are caused by erratic Trump tariff taxes and unnecessary
conflicts.
American families are paying about $1,100 each in increased costs as
a result of Trump's operation epic folly, and servicemembers are
continuing to pay with their lives. Now, Trump demands that we pay
again for his billions of dollars wasted in a quagmire he hasn't the
slightest idea how to get out of.
Watching Trump blunder along in such a chaotic, irrational manner has
caused many Americans to ask: Is he past his prime, or is he really
sick?
Yet, instead of providing an inquiry or a check on his condition,
Republicans hand him another huge check today to do whatever he
pleases.
To shield themselves from accountability, they also add in this bill
not really voter identification, but voter exclusion. They have it all
backward. We should restrain the would-be tyrant, not restrain the
voters.
This misnamed bill is not about saving America. It represents
Republicans' last-ditch effort, grasping for a life preserver before
they sink.
{time} 1310
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Evans of Colorado). Members are reminded to
refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), our chairman of the House Agriculture
Committee.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong
support of the budget resolution.
This resolution includes $12 billion for our agricultural producers.
As chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, I know exactly how
vital the health of farm country is to our rural communities and our
national food security.
The provisions in last summer's Working Families Tax Cut Act provide
a much-needed, long-term solution by bolstering the farm safety net,
but until those provisions are fully implemented, we will need to help
those who feed and clothe us with short-term assistance.
Additionally, producers across the country have fallen to the whims
of the weather and will need assistance until they can get back on
their feet.
Just as one example, specialty crop producers in my home State of
Pennsylvania are experiencing never-before-seen losses due to a late
season freeze that wiped out almost entire fruit crops. These sustained
losses have plagued producers across the country.
American producers are currently staring down the barrel of $80
billion in uncovered farm losses since 2023. That is even with the
commodity program payments and the Farmer Bridge Assistance program
that President Trump initiated last fall. In total, American producers
have seen $119 billion in farm losses since 2023.
Additional aid is needed to bring our farm economy back to an
equilibrium until the updates from the Working Families Tax Cut Act
kick in. Policies put forth in the Farm, Food, and National Security
Act of 2026, which the House of Representatives passed in April, will
also restore certainty to the farm economy, but our producers need
relief now.
President Trump answered the call with his recent supplemental
request, and I look forward to working with my committee members and
the Conference to hear their priorities as we move through the budget
reconciliation process.
I appreciate Chairman Arrington for hearing the needs of farmers,
ranchers, and foresters in rural America, actually hearing the needs of
our great country. When it comes to the agriculture space, if you vote
against this bill, you are really voting for food insecurity which
leads to national insecurity.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
You heard the chairman of the Agriculture Committee. He is talking
about
[[Page H5130]]
emergency support for our farmers and ranchers who, by no fault of
their own, are being pummeled by drought, natural disasters of all
kinds, diseases like the screwworm.
This will affect the food supply. We don't want to depend on China or
any country. We don't want to beg any foreign country to feed our
families. I thank him for his leadership, and I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), the distinguished Democratic
leader of the House.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, I also thank the distinguished top
Democrat on the House Budget Committee, Representative Brendan Boyle,
for yielding and for his incredible leadership.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to this America-last
Republican budget that will provide billions of additional dollars to
Operation Epic Fury in the Middle East, which has been a complete and
total disaster for the American people.
Donald Trump's reckless and costly war of choice in Iran has
skyrocketed gas prices on everyday Americans who are already suffering
from the failed Republican economy and drowning in its poor management.
Now, Donald Trump has made several promises to the American people
upon his return to the White House, all of which it appears to me he
has failed to keep.
Donald Trump promised to lower the high cost of living on day one,
but costs in America haven't gone down. Costs have gone up, in part as
a result of the reckless Trump tariffs that have increased costs on
everyday Americans by thousands of dollars per year.
Donald Trump promised to love and cherish Medicaid, but instead
turned around and, as a result of the Republicans' one big, ugly bill,
cut Medicaid by $1 trillion, costing more than 14 million Americans'
access to health insurance and causing hospitals, nursing homes, and
community-based health centers, particularly in rural America, to
close.
Donald Trump promised the American people that ICE enforcement would
be focused on the worst of the worst and would only target violent
felons. That is not what has happened. Donald Trump and his violent
masked deportation machine are spending billions of dollars for ICE to
brutalize and kill American citizens or to violently target law-abiding
immigrants, as we just saw in Maine and in Houston.
Donald Trump, of course, promised that he was elected not to start
endless wars in the Middle East but to stop them, and then turned
around and has gotten us involved in a potentially endless war in Iran,
a reckless war of choice that has made life more expensive for the
American people while making us less safe, with Iran being stronger
now, having a stranglehold over the Strait of Hormuz, a stronger Iran
now than they were before Donald Trump's reckless and costly war of
choice.
I stand in strong opposition to this America-last, reckless
Republican budget, this effort to waste tens of billions of dollars
more on operation epic failure in the Middle East.
Mr. Chairman, we express our heartfelt condolences to the additional
family members of those soldiers and members of the Armed Forces who
have lost their lives needlessly in the Middle East, and we all have a
responsibility to continue to stand with them in their time of mourning
and their time of great need but simultaneously make sure that no
additional heroic, patriotic, brave American servicemen or -women need
to die overseas in Donald Trump's reckless and costly war of choice.
We stand in strong opposition to this America-last budget. One of the
most important things Members of Congress are solemnly given by the
Framers of the Constitution is the responsibility to determine issues
of war and peace. One of the most important things that we can do is
stand against this reckless war of choice in the Middle East so no more
servicemembers have to be sent home dead to their families who have
been left behind.
What we should be doing in this Congress is actually using our
taxpayer dollars to make life more affordable for the American people,
and that is our commitment as House Democrats.
Unfortunately, Donald Trump and our Republican colleagues don't share
that commitment. That is not a hypothetical. It is not hype. It is not
hyperbole. Look at their own words. Donald Trump, of course, has said:
Because we are fighting wars, we can't prioritize things like daycare,
Medicaid, or Medicare. That is exactly what is happening right now.
{time} 1320
Republicans, in their one big, ugly bill, enacted the largest cut to
Medicaid in American history, ripping healthcare away from more than 14
million Americans all across the country, in rural America, urban
America, small-town America, the heartland of America, and Black and
Brown America. No one has been untouched by the Republican assault on
healthcare.
Why is this happening?
It is so that Donald Trump can fund this reckless and costly war of
choice in the Middle East.
The reality is, in his own words, he doesn't give a damn about the
economic well-being of the American people.
How do we know that?
Donald Trump, in his own words, said that the affordability crisis is
a hoax. Donald Trump, in his own words, said: I don't think about the
personal financial situation of the American people.
Donald Trump, in his own words, said: ``I love the inflation.''
Mr. Chair, we don't have to wonder why things aren't going well for
everyday Americans in the United States right now. It is because, in my
humble opinion, President Trump and Republicans in this House continue
to act indifferent to the economic well-being of the American people
and to actively do things that are hurting everyday Americans
financially like this reckless and costly war of choice, which is why
we stand aggressively against it.
On issue after issue throughout this Congress, Republicans have
adopted extreme policies to make life worse for everyday Americans and
to actively hurt the American people. The Trump tariffs are actively
hurting the American people, raising costs, including on farm country,
by thousands of dollars per year.
The refusal to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits raised
health insurance premiums on everyday Americans, more than 20 million
people across this country, some by as much as $1,000 in additional
expense per month.
People are suffocating and drowning in this Trump economy.
Donald Trump and Republicans in the one big, ugly bill enacted the
largest cut to nutritional assistance in American history, a $186
billion cut at the same time that they are funding this reckless and
costly war of choice. Republicans have literally ripped food from the
mouths of hungry children, seniors, and veterans to sustain the Trump
war machine. Republican extremists apparently have money for wars but
can't feed the poor.
Our message to the American people is: Don't lose faith. Help is on
the way. Regime change is coming to the House of Representatives in
November, so keep your head up.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Crawford), who is my friend and the chair of the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chair, I thank the distinguished chairman of the
Budget Committee for his hard work, as always.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the budget resolution. First off, I
want to thank Chairman Arrington and the members of the Budget
Committee for producing this budget.
Republican Members of Congress, working closely with President Trump,
are the only ones serious in Washington about attacking wasteful
Federal spending.
As chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I am fighting waste,
fraud, and abuse in the classified budget.
HPSCI Republicans are working to force the intelligence community to
achieve clean financial audits, and we are working to create a culture
of accountability.
In my opinion, there can be no doubt that this administration is also
serious
[[Page H5131]]
about going after waste, fraud, and abuse. The screaming from the other
side of the aisle is proof that this is the case. The flak is always
heaviest when you are directly over the target.
Democrats oppose this budget, and they oppose every action of this
House because they want unelected Washington officials to be in charge
until President Trump's term expires. Obstruction is their priority
because their porkbarrel spending has been exposed and their slush
funds are being drained.
To fight their obstruction, we need a budget resolution. We need to
stand united as a Republican Conference so that we can have a
functioning government.
We need to empower the running of the executive branch by the
President the American people elected.
The resolution doesn't include everything each of us might ask for,
but it is necessary to keep us moving forward. And I urge all Members
to support the resolution.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the budget views and estimates
letter of the House Intelligence Committee.
House of Representatives, Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence,
June 5, 2026.
Hon. Jodey Arrington,
Committee on the Budget,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
Dear Chairman Arrington: Pursuant to Section 301(d) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and rule X, clause 11(c) of
the Rules of the House of Representatives, and in response to
your letter dated May 7, 2026, the Permanent Select Committee
on Intelligence (hereafter ``the Committee'') herewith
provides its views and estimates for Fiscal Year (FY) 2027.
In your letter to the Committee, you requested information
on policy reforms related to improper payments and we have
identified specific proposals within our jurisdiction that we
believe directly relate to the detection of improper
payments, as well as measures needed to improve financial
accountability across the Intelligence Community.
You have also asked us to examine spending to determine if
savings are possible. There is a single program within the
Committee's jurisdiction that falls within the category of
mandatory spending. It is the Central Intelligence Agency
Retirement and Disability System (CIARDS). The CIARDS, which
was established in 1964 and is authorized at $514 million
annually, is a retirement account that has been closed to new
participants for more than 40 years.
The Committee has requested a Government Accountability
Office (GAO) review of CIARDS to ensure its financial
integrity and operational efficiency. Should any potential
for savings be identified, we will pursue them. At this time,
we believe annual appropriations remain necessary at their
current level to provide earned benefits to retirees.
The rest of the classified budget of the Intelligence
Community is authorized in two large programs--the National
Intelligence Program (NIP) and the Military Intelligence
Program (MIP), which are funded through annual discretionary
spending. The NIP includes the budgets of the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence
Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency,
the National Reconnaissance Office, the intelligence
components of the military services (Air Force, Army, Marine
Corps, Navy, Space Force) and the intelligence components of
the Departments of Energy, Homeland Security (including Coast
Guard), Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of
Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration), State,
and Treasury. The MIP provides additional funding to support
specific requirements of the military services and combatant
commands.
While detailed funding levels for FY 2027 remain
classified, the topline budget requests for both the NIP and
MIP have been publicly released. The total funding requested
for the NIP is $81.9 billion, which is unchanged from the
prior year request. The MIP budget request is $50.0 billion,
which is an increase of $17.0 billion or 34 percent from the
prior year request.
Improving Congressional Oversight of the Classified Budget
By longstanding policy, the Congress has agreed to
authorize, and fund classified intelligence programs without
disclosing to the public the specific funding amounts or
nature of such programs or activities to protect the national
security of the United States. To support the classified
budget, complex mechanisms within the executive branch have
long been leveraged to enable the development, execution, and
performance evaluation of the secret budget and to protect
the classified programs of the Intelligence Community from
discovery by foreign adversaries. Over time, congressional
leaders have sought to balance the need for secrecy with the
need for appropriate financial controls and reporting.
The National Security Act of 1947 prohibits the
Intelligence Community from spending federal funds on any
intelligence or intelligence-related activity unless
specifically authorized by Congress and, when authorized,
only according to the conditions specified by Congress. Each
year, the congressional intelligence committees of the House
and Senate pursue passage of the Intelligence Authorization
Act to provide this required authorization. The most recent
authorization was enacted in December of 2025 as part of the
National Defense Authorization Act. Additionally, there are
statutory requirements for the Intelligence Community to keep
congress fully and currently informed, to submit classified
budget justification materials, and to conduct independent
financial audits.
In 2022, amendments to the National Security Act sponsored
by the Committee clarified that the Director of National
Intelligence must ensure that the programs and activities of
the Intelligence Community are structured and executed in a
manner that enables budget traceability. Statutory changes
also sought to align the Federal Bureau of Investigation's
intelligence budget, as well as those of other intelligence
programs, with the National Intelligence Strategy and the
requirements specified in the National Intelligence
Priorities Framework. Alignment is necessary to improve
accountability and to implement performance measures tied to
requirements established by the President.
However, despite existing statutory requirements, the
Committee continues to identify challenges in oversight of
the secret budget, including a heightened risk of waste,
fraud, abuse, or mismanagement. These challenges stem from
insufficient budget documentation, as well as inadequate
financial systems and related controls. To further improve
oversight and accountability of the budget, the Committee
will be considering legislation clarifying current law to
ensure that the classified budget justification submitted
under section 506J of the National Security Act provides full
and accurate budget documentation (including full and
accurate cost information) for each program, project, and
activity. Proposed changes will also prohibit the withholding
of budget information from the congressional intelligence
committees absent a specific national security determination
by the President--a determination that must be transmitted to
Congress.
Enactment of these changes to law will assist the Committee
in resolving longstanding challenges to congressional
oversight of the budget, most notably the budgets of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and certain highly classified
programs of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Committee
will also be examining additional changes to ensure that the
development, execution, and performance evaluation of the
classified budget can occur with appropriate levels of
security in compliance with laws and policies necessary to
ensure transparency and accountability.
Financial Management
The Committee is also seeking to address the fact that only
one element of the Intelligence Community has achieved an
unmodified or ``clean'' financial audit. Independent audits
of the classified budget have been a requirement under the
National Security Act since 2014. While the Committee
acknowledges ongoing efforts to achieve auditable finances,
we have noted a longstanding failure by the Intelligence
Community to pursue business system modernization,
transformation and integration required since 2010.
The Government Accountability Office initially documented
the transformation and integration failure in 2018 and
continues to affirm that no significant actions have been
undertaken to achieve the policy established by law.
Modernization and integration are necessary to improve
confidence in the accuracy of the classified budget, to
support budget accountability and to protect the continued
secrecy of classified programs. For this reason, the
Committee will pursue changes to statute clarifying
responsibility for action and will prioritize investments
necessary to achieve the required transformation.
Publicly Available Information and Commercially Available Information
The Committee is also seeking to better understand and to
more effectively conduct oversight related to the acquisition
and use of publicly available information (PAI) and
commercially available information (CAI) across the
Intelligence Community. PAI and CAI are large and growing
centers of expenditure within the classified budget and are
increasingly central to intelligence analysis, strategic
warning, economic security, sanctions enforcement, military
planning, and strategic competition. However, the Committee
has found that budget justification materials submitted to
Congress provide limited visibility into this spending.
A number of efforts are being undertaken by the Committee
to improve budget documentation and related financial
reporting related to PAI and CAI expenditures. This includes
examination of changes to law that would expand enterprise
governance and safeguarding measures for sensitive
commercially available information, particularly datasets
that may contain United States person information.
Accountability Within the Intelligence Community
While there is no indication of pervasive fraud or abuse
associated with the classified budget, it is critical that
those found to have
[[Page H5132]]
committed crimes face justice. However, the Committee has
learned that there is a substantially lower likelihood of
prosecution of fraud that occurs within the Intelligence
Community. As of 2025, the Department of Justice pursued only
25 percent of the Intelligence Community Inspector General's
criminal referrals.
In the coming months, the Committee will consider the
extension of law enforcement authority to the Inspector
General of the Intelligence Community with the objective of
increasing successful prosecution rates. Such authority has
been granted to other inspectors general across the U.S.
Government and has merit based on the unique challenges
associated with investigations into personnel affiliated with
classified programs.
Spending Increase Needed to Address Counterintelligence Threats
While reforms are needed to address budget transparency,
financial reporting, and accountability, the Committee cannot
ignore the growing threats associated with foreign
intelligence activities within the homeland. The magnitude of
threats to national and economic security associated with
foreign adversaries and their proxies operating within the
homeland, and against our interests globally, is greater
today and more complex than at any time during the Cold War.
The Committee has determined that--
Foreign intelligence penetrations consistently outpace the
ability of the current counterintelligence enterprise to
detect threats and to act on a strategic level to impose cost
and deter adversary operations.
The United States lacks a sufficiently funded and
coordinated, national-level strategic response to the
counterintelligence threats posed by the People's Republic of
China, Russia, and other foreign adversaries.
To address these problems, the Committee will consider
enhanced budget authority to enable the National
Counterintelligence and Security Center (NCSC) to coordinate
the integration of all instruments of national power to
protect the homeland to counter foreign intelligence
activities. This is a critical statutory responsibility of
the NCSC, which has not been sufficiently funded.
The Committee will also consider options to provide
additional budget authority across the U.S. Government to:
(1) enhance the counterintelligence workforce of Federal
departments and agencies; (2) support programs and
operational activities to achieve national strategic outcomes
(undertaken under the authority and direction of the various
departments and agencies, including those in partnership with
State, local and tribal governments); (3) support the
construction, expansion or modernization of Sensitive
Compartmented Information Facilities to support interagency
cooperation (including with State, local and tribal
governments); (4) support research and development of
counterintelligence capabilities and tradecraft to address
the strategic threats and opportunities associated with
advanced technology; and (5) to support the modernization of
technical security countermeasures capabilities across the
government.
Additional information concerning the counterintelligence
budget will be provided via appropriate channels to protect
classified information. In addition, the Committee is
prepared to work with you to provide the Budget Committee
with the information necessary to understand current threats,
which we believe justifies our recommendation for additional
funding.
Critical Investments in Artificial Intelligence
The final matter on which the Committee will share its
views is related to the rapid advancement of artificial
intelligence. The Committee agrees with the President's
declaration that the United States is in a race to achieve
global dominance in artificial intelligence and supports
additional spending authority to meet this important
challenge.
The Intelligence Community must make investments, pursuant
to the strict oversight of Congress, in recognition of the
dramatic shifts that are occurring in artificial
intelligence. However, absent additional budget authority for
the rapid fielding of capabilities--capabilities emerging
within the commercial marketplace today--there is a risk that
the Intelligence Community and Department of Defense will be
outpaced by adversaries, most notably China.
To be clear, this is not a problem of innovation in
America, which is leading in this critical field. Instead, we
see a serious problem associated with the adoption of this
technology by those charged with protecting the national
security of the United States. Specific information
concerning artificial intelligence investments planned by the
Intelligence Community in FY 2027 is classified and can be
made available separately.
Conclusion
In the coming months, the Committee will consider statutory
changes to improve oversight and accountability with respect
to the classified budget. We will also work to ensure budget
authority is appropriate to address unprecedented and growing
threats, particularly threats associated with foreign
adversary operations within the homeland and the rapid
advancement of artificial intelligence.
Thank you for your support as we work to bring these issues
forward in the House. If you or the Members of the Budget
Committee have any questions about the views and estimates
expressed in this letter, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Eric A ``Rick'' Crawford,
Chairman.
Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate all the support of the
distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), who is the distinguished
ranking member of the Education and Workforce Committee. He is also a
member of the Budget Committee.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, prices are already too high for
groceries, housing, healthcare, childcare, and other everyday expenses.
However, instead of focusing on lowering costs for working families,
the Trump administration and my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle are presenting this resolution which will continue policies which
have actually made things worse.
With the passage of their big, ugly bill, they cut healthcare, food
assistance, and education funding all while adding $4.7 trillion to the
national debt, and now they want to add another $95 billion to the debt
to continue waging an endless war.
We have a choice. We can invest in working families and ensure that
people have access to food, Medicare, Medicaid, daycare, and education,
but my colleagues instead are choosing an endless war. That is the
wrong choice.
Mr. Chair, we should, therefore, oppose this resolution.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let's not believe the hype, Mr. Chairman. Let's look at the stats
from the nonpartisan CBO. The deficit per GDP has gone down by over 10
percent for the first time--because this continues to be their
perpetual talking point. In 10 years we haven't seen the deficit to GDP
go down.
Republicans came to this town, and we drained the swamp of waste,
fraud, and abuse to the tune of $1.6 trillion. That is twice as much as
this town has ever cut in the history of the United States of America.
It was Republicans who put forward the Fiscal Responsibility Act and,
according to the nonpartisan CBO, saved $2 trillion. Then we put
progrowth policies in that big, beautiful bill and unleashed American
investment, which is up 10 percent; and growth, which is up. We had a
3.8 and 4.3 in the third and fourth quarter or second and third before
the Democrats shut the government down. Wages are up. Inflation and
interest are coming down. More money is in people's pockets.
I would say: Promises made, promises delivered.
Mr. Chair, I want to introduce to you the great chairman of the House
Administration Committee.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Steil).
Mr. STEIL. Mr. Chair, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Arrington), who is the chair of the Budget Committee, for his work
in this regard.
Mr. Chair, we are here today because we can advance commonsense
election integrity.
House Republicans have pushed two key commonsense reforms that are
not yet across the line.
First, Mr. Chair, you should be a citizen to vote in this country.
You have to prove that when you register. Second, Mr. Chair, when you
head to the polls to cast your ballot, you have to verify your identity
with a photo ID.
Mr. Chair, now is the time for election integrity. It was just
revealed in New Jersey that 6,600 noncitizens were admitted and
registered to vote. According to The New York Times, nearly 400 of
those noncitizens cast a ballot.
Federal law requires States to give voter registration materials to
everyone when they get a driver's license. It is a problem.
During the Biden administration, millions of illegal aliens poured
into our country. In many blue States, of course, they can get a
driver's license.
What is to stop them from registering to vote? Currently, that is by
checking a box that they are not a citizen. That is not enough.
Stories like what happened in New Jersey undermine confidence in our
elections. It is time to take action. Our commonsense proposals will
boost voter confidence, increase voter participation, and ensure that
it remains easy to vote but hard to cheat. We have
[[Page H5133]]
a real opportunity before us to strengthen election integrity in all 50
States.
Mr. Chair, I urge passage of this resolution.
{time} 1330
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, interestingly enough, Chuck Schumer,
Democratic leader in the Senate, agrees. In 2018, he was talking about
Russian interference. It turned out to be a conspiracy and debunked. He
said that they are actively trying to do it again. Russia is trying to
do it again. We must wake up to this fact--these are his words: ``We
won't be able as a nation to fight back against foreign interference in
our elections if the Commander in Chief''--Donald Trump at the time--
``doesn't even acknowledge that it is a real problem.''
I think this President has acknowledged it is a real problem, and I
think the American people have acknowledged it is a real problem. I
thank the gentleman for his leadership to restore confidence and
integrity to the United States electoral system.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, it is interesting. We have been
having this debate for a little while now. I haven't heard one word
from the other side about how their resolution is going to lower costs
for the American people. They haven't said one word, which is very
consistent with the resolution that they are pushing. Because their
resolution also doesn't say one word or have one idea or one plan on
how we can bring down costs for the American people.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Panetta), a distinguished member of the Budget Committee.
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chair, the President made some simple promises to
get elected: release the Epstein files, end forever wars, and reduce
costs.
Instead, as we have seen, the administration has done the exact
opposite, which has led to corruption, incompetence, and to increase
costs, all demonstrating that this President does not care.
Yet, rather than pushback and prioritize the American people, it
appears the majority does not care, as it has put forward a budget
resolution that spends more and borrows more just to please the
President and promote his pet projects.
This third budget resolution allows for another $95 billion to
support the President's war in Iran, paper over damaging trade
policies, and pass legislation that will deter legally eligible voters.
I remind my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that the purpose of
the budget reconciliation process is supposed to be deficit reduction.
Instead, this legislation expands long-term deficits and even violates
legal requirements.
I get that for over the past decade Congress has abandoned any sense
of normal budgeting process and rejected any talk of serious deficit
reduction, but this budget could have been an opportunity for this
Congress to advance policies that reduce our debt and actually make
life more affordable.
Instead, the President, once again, pushed the Republican majority to
put forward a purely partisan resolution that does nothing to lower
costs, nothing to strengthen our economy, and in no way exercises
fiscal responsibility.
Mr. Chair, that is why I am against this reconciliation legislation.
It not only shows that the President doesn't care about Americans, but
it also shows that the majority doesn't care about our growing debt and
deficit and that Congress' responsibility is to the future of this
country.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, here is the irony: My Democrat
colleagues, every single one of them, voted for $200 billion for
Ukraine, for their war that would have been prevented, quite frankly,
if we had a strong, competent, Commander in Chief at the time. We
didn't. It started. They have sent $200 billion without batting an eye
and without giving a penny to offset it. Now they want to talk about
offsets when we want to give our troops the money they need to finish
the job, be safe, come home. We are proud of them. We stand with them.
We are going to support them.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Carter), my friend and fellow Budget Committee member.
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Today, I rise in support of the SAVE America Act and the Protect
America Act because it is about security, and it is getting back to
common sense.
The American people are tired. They are tired of Washington playing
political games. They want to secure elections. They want us to finish
the job in Iran. They want to know that the government is standing with
the farmers, ranchers, and producers who put food on our tables every
single day.
This resolution does exactly that. It strengthens confidence in our
elections with commonsense voter ID protections, gives the troops the
tools they need to defend this country, and provides certainty for our
agricultural community because food security is national security.
People back home in Georgia understand that freedom isn't free. They
will understand elections should be secure, and that our farmers
deserve policies that help them succeed.
This is about putting America first, doing what the American people
sent us up here to do, and delivering real results, instead of
Democratic political theater.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the SAVE America
Act and the Protect America Act.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar), a distinguished member of the
Budget Committee
Ms. ESCOBAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this
resolution.
Every day Americans are being confronted with skyrocketing prices at
the gas pump and grocery store, and this resolution does absolutely
nothing to address the economic crisis created by Donald Trump's
economic policies, including his tariffs and an illegal war.
Instead, Republicans in Congress are dumping nearly $100 billion into
the budget to fund this illegal war--$100 billion. That could pay the
salaries of 1 million elementary school teachers, medical care for 7
million veterans, enough to fund nearly 10 years of school lunches for
every child, and so much more.
Budgets are representative of our values and our priorities. It is
absolutely clear that neither the President nor congressional
Republicans value or prioritize the needs of the American public.
Americans want a Congress that is willing to fix the economy that
Donald Trump broke. We are willing every day of the week to do that
hard work, to come together to address these pressing issues. $100
billion for something Americans don't want? We have to reject it.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, while my Democratic colleagues are
counting the pennies on this defense supplemental, remember, baseline
battlefield readiness. That is it, just what they need to do their job.
It is actually about $67 billion.
Meanwhile, the open-border policies of our Democrat colleagues have
flooded our country with millions of illegals. According to NumbersUSA,
that is $9,000 per illegal in taxpayer social services, to people who
aren't here legally, aren't our citizens, and that is more than we
spend on our most vulnerable for Medicaid.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Smucker), my dear friend and great vice chairman of the Budget
Committee.
Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman for yielding and all of
his work on this, what I call, commonsense resolution, a simple
resolution, really, addressing three priorities that the American
people support, three priorities that are core functions of government
and that are very, very important.
Number one is election security, ensuring that our elections are
conducted fairly, securely, and that only American citizens are voting.
Voter ID, the American people support that.
Mr. Chair, 80 to 90 percent of the American people support the idea
of showing voter ID when you show up to vote.
Number two, this is instruction to the committees. It begins the
process
[[Page H5134]]
of providing our servicemembers with the resources they need to meet
growing threats around the world and keeping the American people safe.
These individuals who are serving us are putting their lives in
harm's way every day. The least we can do is ensure they have the tools
and equipment they need to do their jobs and to keep us safe.
Finally, the third point in this resolution is ensuring our food
supply is secure. Our American farmers work very, very hard every
single day to feed America--really, feed the world. They have had some
tough times, and this provides the help they need at this time to
ensure that they can continue to feed America.
Unfortunately, every Democrat on the House Budget Committee voted
against these commonsense provisions in this resolution. The American
people sent us here to deliver.
They sent us here to deliver on these priorities. It is a great
resolution.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the SAVE America Act as it
moves through the House.
{time} 1340
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, we gave the Democrats, our friends on the
other side of the aisle, opportunity after opportunity multiple times
to support what 83 percent of the American people support, which is
photo identification to vote in elections in this country.
You need an ID to check in at a hotel and to fly on an airplane--in
Mamdani's New York, you need it to shovel snow--but it is not important
enough for the cornerstone of this democratic Republic.
The American people aren't fooled. We are not fooled. We are going to
do this so that we can continue with this great country of ours and
with the confidence of the American people in the outcome of the
elections.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I
may consume. This has been a remarkable debate. It seems the other side
wants to talk about pretty much any other issue than affordability.
They want to talk about Ukraine, which I heard cited.
Let me just correct what the chair said a few minutes ago. This is
not the Democrats' war in Ukraine. It is Mr. Putin's war in Ukraine
because he launched a brutal, unprovoked invasion on the people of
Ukraine. The reason why the United States and our NATO allies have
stood together in financially supporting freedom in Ukraine is because
it is not just about Ukraine. It is about whether we will have peace in
Europe or whether we will repeat the mistakes that got us into World
War II.
That used to be a bipartisan consensus, by the way, in this country
for the last 80 years until this recent President.
We also then heard an absurd charge that somehow the folks on the
other side have brought down the deficit and debt. They even cited the
CBO. That is funny because they have tended to ignore the bipartisan
Congressional Budget Office when the CBO pointed out their bill last
year, their big reconciliation 1.0, according to the CBO, added $4.7
trillion to our national debt, the biggest debt buster bill in American
history.
We can talk about all of these ancillary issues, or we can talk about
what is the number one issue on people's minds, which is that things
are too damn expensive. They want costs to come down. Instead, under
this Republican Congress, costs are only going through the roof.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota
(Ms. Omar), a very distinguished member of the Budget Committee.
Ms. OMAR. Mr. Chair, Mr. Arrington recently said that Democrats are
counting pennies. That feels like an insult because $95 billion is what
Chairman Arrington and the Republicans are asking Congress to approve.
Here is where the money goes: tens of billions of dollars for the
Pentagon, billions more for the CIA to continue funding this illegal
war with Trump, and billions to help States implement the SAVE Act,
legislation that could make it harder for millions of eligible
Americans to vote.
Meanwhile, working families are struggling to put food on the table
and gas in their tanks, pay their rent, and afford healthcare. Instead
of investing in the actual needs of the American people, this
resolution pours more money into war and Trump's voter suppression
agenda.
This is not counting pennies. This is our tax dollars that you are
wasting on death and destruction. This resolution does nothing to help
lower costs or help struggling Americans. This resolution does not
speak to the values that we should carry or the priorities that we
should have when we put forth a budget. This resolution gets our
priorities wrong.
Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to vote against it.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Just to be clear, when the Democrats had total control, they heaped
taxes and regulations on our job creators. They attacked, with a whole-
of-government force, against domestic energy producers. They waived
work requirements for able-bodied adults. They allowed illegals onto
our social safety net. They did give a tax break to green energy
corporations. They gave tax subsidies to the tune of $800 billion,
along with hundreds of billions of dollars in wasted stimulus checks.
Juxtapose that with 127 million Americans getting a doubled standard
deduction, 40 million families getting an enhanced child tax credit, 35
million seniors getting the double deduction for seniors, an average of
$7,500. Mr. Chair, 7.5 million filers got the no tax on tips, and 29
million filers got overtime breaks, on average over $3,000. By the way,
wages are up.
That is what is happening because our policies are delivering for the
American people and working families.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Moore), my friend and another member of the Budget Committee from
the Tar Heel State.
Mr. MOORE of North Carolina. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong
support of the House budget resolution.
This resolution in this reconciliation package builds on the working
families tax cuts that were passed into law last year that have lowered
taxes for more Americans than probably any tax bill in decades.
I will talk about one thing, though, that seems to get glossed over
by my friends on the other side, and that is the SAVE America Act that
is in here.
The overwhelming majority of Americans support voter ID when it comes
to voting. My home State in North Carolina, a little over a decade ago,
adopted it, and we have actually seen even greater voter participation
since doing so.
I raise the question to some of my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle: Have they not seen the news that just showed where 6,600
votes were cast in New Jersey by noncitizens?
Voter fraud is happening. That has been discovered. That is
documented. The SAVE America Act--which is a part of this, voter ID--
makes it very clear that for someone to vote, they need to be a citizen
as required by the Constitution. They also must present a form of ID.
This is easy, simple stuff. That is in this resolution, as well.
Those who vote against this resolution also vote against this
commonsense reform where we want it easy to vote but hard to cheat.
I will say, Mr. Chair, that I am very proud of what the Budget
Committee has done in building a responsible budget that funds critical
needs right now with our military, with threats that we have against us
from around the world, and, at the same time, responsibly spends money
and maintains these tax cuts that we passed.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko), a distinguished member of the
Budget Committee.
Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, Republican leadership has claimed that this
proposal will address our Nation's most immediate priorities. That
could not be further from the truth.
This budget gives this administration a blank check to continue their
war of choice with Iran. It makes it harder for Americans to exercise
their fundamental right to vote. Most importantly, it fails to
meaningfully improve the lives of everyday Americans.
[[Page H5135]]
Those are certainly not the priorities my constituents have asked me
to fight for. My constituents worry about their ability to go to their
doctor, yet this budget doesn't have a dime for healthcare.
They worry about their ability to put food on the table, yet this
budget will do nothing to lower the cost of groceries.
They worry about their utility costs and how much it might cost to
fill up their car with gas, yet this budget makes no effort to lower
energy costs and will keep gas costs high by continuing President
Trump's senseless war with Iran.
They worry about Presidential overreach, yet there is nothing to rein
in this lawless administration.
This budget does not have anything for the people of New York's 20th
Congressional District, so I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this
farce of a budget. Let's stop the pain. Let's stop the consequence.
Let's go forward with progress. Defeat this resolution.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chair, I mentioned earlier that the Republican
Party is united and unrelenting in delivering for the American people.
That doesn't happen without a fearless leader and the legend from
Louisiana, my dear friend, Mr. Steve Scalise.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr.
Scalise).
{time} 1350
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my dear colleague from Texas for
yielding.
I am truly going to miss him, but he has got a lot of great work left
to do as the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, not the least of
which is this important resolution, which is being brought forward, Mr.
Chairman, a resolution that is critical to ensuring the hallmark of
democracy, and that is the right to vote: one person, one vote.
If we look at all of the things that we have been working with
President Trump to do to make life more affordable for working
families, over and over again, we see nothing but obstruction from
Democrats. It is sad to say. It is sad to see.
The American people are watching a party that has become a rudderless
ship running off the left edge, socialists taking over. Watching what
is going on to that other party, look at some of the things we have
been able to do, even with their obstruction: working to produce more
energy in America so we can lower costs for American families, while
every Democrat voted no, and working to lower tax rates for working
families. Yes, no tax on overtime is a benefit that has helped over 30
million Americans. These aren't the millionaires and the billionaires
that Democrats go fight for every day. These are hardworking families
making under $100,000 a year, many of them shift workers and law
enforcement officers.
Maybe they voted against that bill because they want to defund the
police, not help police officers and firefighters have a little bit
more money in their pockets. With no tax on overtime, no tax on tips,
somebody making $32,000 a year on average has thousands more in their
pocket now because of the work Republicans did.
How did Republicans pay for it, Mr. Chairman? It was paid for by
putting antifraud measures in that bill--yes, going after theft of
American taxpayer dollars and not just small-time folks.
There are foreign countries operating with criminal organizations in
States like Minnesota. We saw it. We documented it. It couldn't be
stopped because we needed the measures. We tried to work with Democrats
on it, but for whatever reason, every step of the way they blocked it.
They blocked it until we put it in the reconciliation bill. Then when
the tools were in place, President Trump was able to go out and recoup
not millions but billions and tens of billions of dollars that we were
able to take out of the hands of people stealing your money, and we put
it in the pockets of hardworking families.
Overtime workers, waiters, waitresses, senior citizens who now have a
tax credit, all of that we paid for with money that was being stolen.
Every step of the way, Democrats opposed it. They would rather the
theft of your tax dollars go to fraudsters than hardworking families
have their money back. Their obstruction is nothing new, Mr. Chairman.
Then we get to today, where we say: Shouldn't we make sure our men
and women in uniform have the tools they need to do their job safely?
Shouldn't we make sure that our farmers get the relief they need so we
can keep working to lower food costs? Oh, by the way, can't we ensure
the integrity of the American vote?
These are basic things that most Americans understand. Democrats in
Washington don't. They go back home and give Fourth of July speeches.
Then they get on an airplane, and a transformation happens. They get up
here, and they start voting against the wishes of the American people
over and over again. Why? Not just to defend fraudsters.
If we know that requiring a picture ID, just something so basic that
every American understands--which, by the way, those same Democrats
have to show that picture ID to get on the airplane to come up here and
vote for socialist policies. But they don't want that to be the case
when you vote. They would say: Don't worry. There is no fraud. There is
no fraud.
Well, why is it just that today's New York Post uncovered yet again
what we have known all along? In New Jersey, they just admitted 6,600
noncitizens are on their rolls, many of them voting, voting in
elections, illegals on their rolls voting. They document in this
article many elections that were decided by just a small number of
votes. In fact, the margin of the theft, the stolen votes are that
margin. This can be stopped just by requiring a picture ID.
Then some would say, well, then, why would anybody be against that?
They will hide behind all of these other ruses, but they will vote
``no.''
We have got a bill later today to say: Well, let's ban Members of
Congress from trading stocks, and people are going to watch the board
on an issue that every American understands. Almost every Democrat is
going to vote ``no.'' People will say why is that? Because it requires
a photo ID.
What is so harmful about that? A person can't go get an unlimited
bowl of pasta at Olive Garden without showing a photo ID. Can we at
least have the Olive Garden standard when we protect democracy and the
franchise that we have to keep this great democracy? That is just
requiring that you prove you are who you say you are.
This, Mr. Chairman, is such a fundamental principle. It is not hard
to explain to the American people, but it is actively opposed by
Democrats in Congress.
It just begs the question: Why? Who are they protecting? Who are they
protecting with the ``no'' vote, Mr. Chairman? If they know illegals
are voting in many of these States where they don't require photo ID,
then why would they vote against the requirement? Why?
It is a great question. Every American, Mr. Chairman, is going to be
able to watch this vote and know where their Member of Congress is.
It is critically important for accountability that we all stand up
and be counted. I am strongly for this. I think it is critical we
protect the sanctity of every American's right to vote. If somebody
else is stealing your vote because they are voting illegally--
thousands in New Jersey--then it takes away your right to vote, Mr.
Chairman. We ought to be protecting everybody's right to vote,
especially those people who are legally allowed to vote, not people who
shouldn't be allowed by law to vote.
Let's pass this important resolution and get it over to the Senate so
they can do their job and get this to the President's desk.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, our majority leader actually just referenced something
in which I can report to the House I have personal experience. Having
ordered the bottomless pit of pasta at Olive Garden, I can confirm, no,
you do not need an ID. What an absurd claim.
This is what we have heard throughout this entire debate. Republicans
talk about Olive Garden. They talk about IDs. They talk about Biden.
They talk about Ukraine. They talk about anything and everything to
distract from this core fact: They have absolutely no plan or agenda
whatsoever
[[Page H5136]]
to bring down costs for the American people.
According to the Joint Economic Committee, Trump's inflation all
told--the combination of his tariff taxes, the combination of all of
the laws that they passed for the last 1\1/2\ years, the combination of
increased gas prices because of this reckless war in Iran--all told,
the average American family has paid out of pocket $3,100 more for
goods and services as a result of the Trump Republican inflation.
So I can understand why, with that abysmal record, Republicans wish
to talk about anything except for the number one issue on the minds of
the American people.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr.
McGarvey), a distinguished member of the Committee on the Budget.
Mr. McGARVEY. Mr. Chairman, there is a great scene in the movie
``Jurassic Park'' where the scientist says: You guys are so preoccupied
with whether you could, you forgot to ask whether you should.
I think the Republicans have been so preoccupied with counting votes
to see if they can do the President's bidding that they have forgotten
to ask whether they should.
First, they brought a budget bill to the floor of this House that
took away people's healthcare and food so they could give billionaires
and corporations the largest permanent tax break in American history.
Next, President Trump said: I need $70 billion more for the ICE
agents acting as my personal police force. They are going around and
using kids as bait, ripping apart families, murdering American citizens
on the streets of our country. Republicans said: Fine, we will do that.
Now, Trump wants another $95 billion for his forever war in the
Middle East. Mr. Chairman, 18 Americans are dead. There is a 19-year-
old coming home in a coffin this week, never to spend another holiday
or birthday with her family.
Everything from gas to groceries has gone up, and America is less
safe because of it. But Republicans say: Absolutely, no problem. We
will do it.
Is there anything Trump wants that Republicans will say no to? I
think the answer is no.
Democrats offered commonsense amendments that said let's lower the
cost of healthcare, let's lower the cost of goods, and let's end
corruption. Republican Members said no to all of them. I even offered
an amendment that said you can't use $400 million of taxpayer money to
build your ballroom vanity project. What did Republicans say? Fine with
us. We will do it because we can. But should you? No.
{time} 1400
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I respect my friend from the
Commonwealth of Kentucky, but this false narrative is perpetuated every
time Republicans actually go after the waste in this town and the fraud
that is being perpetrated on the taxpayers and the vulnerable who need
these programs. They start saying that we are kicking the vulnerable
off and we are throwing them into the streets.
All I ask you to do is look to the nonpartisan CBO, once again, and I
include this letter in the Record, Mr. Chairman.
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, June 24, 2025.
Re Information Concerning Medicaid-Related Provisions in
Title IV of H.R. 1.
Hon. Jodey Arrington,
Chairman, Committee on the Budget,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Brett Guthrie,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Arrington and Chairman Guthrie: You have
asked the Congressional Budget Office for information
concerning changes to insurance coverage that would occur
under H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as passed by
the House of Representatives on May 22, 2025. You asked
specifically about changes related to Medicaid under title
IV, Energy and Commerce.
CBO estimates that enacting the Medicaid provisions in
title IV would increase the number of people without health
insurance by 7.8 million in 2034 relative to baseline
projections under current law. Of that number:
About 4.8 million would be able-bodied adults between the
ages of 19 and 64 who have no dependents and who do not meet
the community engagement requirement in section 44141 for
participating in work-related activities at least 80 hours a
month.
About 1.4 million would be people who do not meet
citizenship and immigration status requirements for Medicaid
enrollment but who would be covered under current law in
programs funded by the states.
About 2.2 million would become uninsured because of other
provisions in H.R. 1, including provisions increasing the
frequency of verification of eligibility to enroll in
Medicaid or those that would lead states to change their
Medicaid enrollment requirements in response to federal
policy changes.
CBO estimates that the interactions among the policies
would, on net, reduce the number of people without health
insurance by 600,000 in 2034 relative to the sum of the
estimated effects of the individual policies because some
people would become uninsured under more than one policy.
You asked several questions about the number of people who
would be enrolled in Medicaid under the legislation and about
the number of people who would not have health insurance
under H.R. 1. You also asked about the effects on state
Medicaid spending under H.R. 1.
For the number of individuals estimated to be without
health insurance in 2034 as a result of the Medicaid policies
in H.R. 1, what share would be eligible for other health
insurance subsidies but would be estimated to not
participate?
CBO estimates that of the projected increase of 7.8 million
people without health insurance in 2034, 1.6 million would
have access to, but would not take up, other forms of
subsidized coverage, such as premium tax credits for
insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by
the Affordable Care Act or employment-based coverage; that
number also includes people who would remain eligible for
Medicaid but would not enroll.
For which provisions in H.R. 1 does CBO estimate that there
would be an increase in the number of people without health
insurance resulting from state discretion in the management
of enrollment within their own Medicaid programs? What does
CBO estimate would be the effect on the number of people
without health insurance under those policies?
CBO estimates that enacting several sections would reduce
resources available to states to fund their Medicaid programs
or state-funded insurance programs:
Section 44107 would eliminate the authority of the Centers
for Medicare & Medicaid Services to waive penalties for
payment errors and would reduce federal funding to states for
errors in eligibility determinations.
Section 44111 would reduce the federal matching rate for
people enrolled in Medicaid under the expansion of the
program provided in the Affordable Care Act from 90 percent
to 80 percent for any state that uses its own funds to
provide coverage to certain immigrants through state
programs.
Section 44132 would prevent states from increasing current
tax rates on providers and bar them from creating new tax
arrangements for providers.
Section 44134 would make additional changes to what
constitutes a permissible provider tax and would effectively
limit collections of those taxes in certain states.
CBO expects that in response to those provisions, states
would modify their Medicaid or state-funded insurance
programs to curtail their spending by reducing provider
payment rates, reducing the scope or amount of optional
services, and reducing Medicaid enrollment.
CBO estimates that state responses to those provisions
would increase the number of people without health insurance
by a total of 2.0 million in 2034.
Does CBO estimate that the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1
would result in a net decrease in state spending on the
Medicaid program, before accounting for how states respond to
the federal policy changes, and if so by how much?
CBO estimates that, if combined, enacting all of the
Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1 would reduce the states' total
share of spending on Medicaid by $13.1 billion, on net, over
the 2025-2034 period. Some provisions would reduce state
spending, and some would increase it. CBO estimates that over
the 2025-2034 period, provisions that make changes to program
eligibility and enrollment processes, as well as some payment
changes, would cause states' spending to decline by $214.4
billion. Reductions in federal or other resources available
to state programs would cause states' spending to rise by
$201.3 billion.
What is the number of individuals whose citizenship,
nationality, or satisfactory immigration status is not
verified, but would be covered under current law in programs
funded by states?
CBO estimates that enacting section 44111 would increase
the number of people without health insurance by 1.4 million
in 2034 because, in order to maintain the 90 percent federal
matching rate, most states would stop using state-only funds
to provide health insurance coverage to people who do not
meet citizenship and immigration status requirements for
Medicaid enrollment.
What are the changes in the number of uninsured people that
would be associated with provisions aimed at verifying
eligibility for the Medicaid program, specifically sections
44102 and 44108 of H.R. 1?
Section 44102 would prevent one part of what is termed the
Eligibility and Enrollment final rule from being implemented,
administered, or enforced through the end of 2034. That part
of the rule changes the way
[[Page H5137]]
that states process applications and renewals for coverage
under Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.
For example, the rule specifies that states can only conduct
eligibility determinations for people who are aged, blind,
and disabled once a year--less frequently than under some
states' prior practices. The rule also specifies that states
cannot require in-person interviews during eligibility
redeterminations for that group of enrollees. CBO expects
that enacting section 44102 of H.R. 1 would reduce enrollment
as states returned to earlier administrative practices.
CBO estimates that enacting section 44102 would increase
the number of people without health insurance by 600,000 in
2034.
Section 44108 would require states to redetermine Medicaid
eligibility every six months, instead of once a year, for
some enrollees. CBO expects that enacting the section would
result in some people being removed from the program sooner
than would occur under current law.
CBO estimates that enacting section 44108 would increase
the number of people without health insurance by 700,000 in
2034.
In CBO's baseline, how many individuals are enrolled in
Medicaid in 2025 and how many are enrolled in 2034? How many
would be enrolled in 2034 under H.R. 1?
In CBO's January 2025 baseline projections, 85.0 million
people will be enrolled in Medicaid this year, rising to 90.0
million in 2034. CBO estimates that under H.R. 1, 79.5
million people would be enrolled in Medicaid in 2034--10.5
million fewer than under current-law projections.
In CBO's baseline, what is total federal Medicaid spending
in 2025 and in 2034? What would total federal Medicaid
spending be in each of those years accounting for the effects
of H.R. 1?
In CBO's January 2025 baseline, the agency estimates $655.9
billion in Medicaid spending in 2025, increasing to $985.7
billion by 2034. CBO estimates that enacting the Medicaid
provisions of H.R. 1 would reduce Medicaid spending by $125.2
billion in 2034, to total $860.5 billion that year.
I hope this information is useful to you. Please contact me
if you have further questrons.
Sincerely,
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director.
CBO'S ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL CHANGES IN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE UNDER TITLE VII, PUBLIC LAW 119-21
Millions of people--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1. Medicaid
Subchapter A. Reducing Fraud and Improving Enrollment
Processes:
Sec. 71102--Moratorium on Implementation of Rule Relating 0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
to Eligibility and Enrollment for Medicaid, CHIP and the
Basic Health Program.....................................
Sec. 71106--Payment Reduction Related to Certain Erroneous O O O 0 * 0.1 0.2 * * 0.1
Excess Payments Under Medicaid...........................
Sec. 71107--Eligibility Redeterminations.................. O O O.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
Sec. 71109--Alien Medicaid Eligibility.................... * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Sec. 71110--Expansion FMAP for Emergency Medicaid......... 0 * * * * * * * * *
Subchapter B. Preventing Wasteful Spending:
Sec. 71112--Reducing State Medicaid Costs................. 0 0 * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Subchapter C. Stopping Abusive Finance Practices:
Sec. 71114--Sunsetting Increased FMAP Incentive........... 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Sec. 71115--Provider Taxes................................ 0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1
Sec. 71117--Requirements Regarding Waiver of Uniform Tax * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Requirement for Medicaid Provider Tax....................
Sec. 71118--Requiring Budget Neutrality for Medicaid 0 * * * * * * * * *
Demonstration Projects Under Section 1115................
Subchapter D. Increasing Personal Accountability:
Sec. 71119--Requirement for States to Establish Medicaid O O 2.2 3.0 4.7 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.3
Community Engagement Requirements for Certain Individuals
Chapter 2. Medicare
Subchapter A. Strengthening Eligibility Requirements:
Sec. 71201--Limiting Medicare Coverage of Certain 0 0 * * * * * * 0.1 0.1
Individuals..............................................
Chapter 3. Health Tax
Subchapter A. Improving Eligibility Criteria:
Sec. 71301--Permitting Premium Tax Credit Only for Certain O 0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Individuals..............................................
Sec. 71302--Disallowing Premium Tax Credit During Periods 0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
of Medicaid Ineligibility Due to Alien Status............
Subchapter B. Preventing Waste, Fraud, and Abuse:
Sec. 71303--Requiring Verification of Eligibility for O O O 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
Premium Tax Credit.......................................
Sec. 71304--Disallowing Premium Tax Credit in Case of 0 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Certain Coverage Enrolled in During Special Enrollment
Period...................................................
Sec. 71305--Eliminating Limitation on Recapture of Advance O * * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Payment of Premium Tax Credit............................
Interactions, All Policies................................ * * -0.2 -0.4 -0.5 -0.6 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
Total Annual Change................................... * 1.3 5.2 6.8 8.6 9.2 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0
Memorandum:
Source of the Change
Medicaid Policies..................................... * 0.8 3.7 4.5 6.3 6.8 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.5
Medicare Policies..................................... 0 0 * * * * * * 0.1 0.1
Policies Related to the Health Insurance Marketplaces. 0 0.5 1.4 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.1
Interactions Among Policies........................... 0 * 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3
Total Change...................................... * 1.3 5.2 6.8 8.6 9.2 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0
Share With Access to Federally Subsidized:
Health Insurance (Percent)a............................... n.a. 53 38 38 33 33 35 36 36 37
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Congressional Budget Office.
These estimates are subject to considerable uncertainty.
CHIP = Children's Health Insurance Program; FMAP = federal medical assistance percentage; n.a.; not applicable; * = fewer than 50,000 people.
CBO's cost estimate for P.L. 119-21 is available online. See Congressional Budget Office, estimated budgetary effects of Public Law 119-21, to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II
of H. Con. Res. 14, relative to CBO's January 2025 baseline (July 21, 2025), www.cbo.gov/publication/61570.
a. Subsidized health insurance consists of the premium tax credit available to some enrollees for insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act, as well
as Medicaid and employment-based coverage.
This table presents supplemental data for Congressional Budget Office, letter to the Honorable Brendan F. Boyle, the Honorable Hakeem Jeffries, the Honorable Jeffrey A. Merkley, and the
Honorable Charles E. Schumer concerning the distributional effects of Public Law 119-21 (August 11, 2025), www.cbo.gov/publication/61367.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, the only people who aren't on the
Medicaid rolls today who were on them before were illegals in this
country that Joe Biden and Democrats allowed to siphon money away from
Americans, people who were ineligible, or people who were able to work
but who refused to work for the generous support of hardworking
taxpayers.
We stand on that proudly. We stand by it, and I believe the American
people support us at every step of the way.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Stutzman), my friend from the Hoosier State and another proud member of
the Budget Committee.
Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Budget
Committee for this strong resolution.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the House budget resolution.
This framework is an important step of protecting our elections as well
as supporting our troops. As Members of Congress, we have a
responsibility to the American people to safeguard the electoral
process. Yet, the Senate has been unable to do so.
Over 80 percent of Americans agree that you must show proof of
citizenship and ID to vote, and this budget framework moves us closer
to enacting these reforms.
In addition to protecting our elections at home, U.S. servicemembers
are working day and night to be sure that Americans are safe from a
nuclear bomb in Iran and to advance peace in the Middle East. Our
military is the most lethal fighting force known to man, and they are
depending on us to help them finish the job. We must be courageous to
support these men and women by supplying the resources they need.
We owe Americans secure elections along with a strong national
defense to preserve our great Nation. Therefore, I
[[Page H5138]]
urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much
time is remaining.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Crawford). The gentleman from Pennsylvania has
9 minutes remaining.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to
the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Amo), a very distinguished member
of the Budget Committee.
Mr. AMO. Mr. Chairman, is this Groundhog Day? We must be stuck in
some kind of infinite time loop because Republicans are trying to ram
through a third unpopular, deficit-busting resolution that does nothing
to lower costs for Americans. This is on top of cuts to healthcare and
their continued investments in cruelty.
Unfortunately, this is actually happening. Republicans are trying to
pass another bad budget, and all this for the farm aid that Republicans
are touting as necessary because Trump's illegal war in Iran and
chaotic tariffs jacked up costs for farmers.
The billions in defense funding that Republicans claim is necessary
for Trump's choice to wage the illegal Iran war depleted our
stockpiles, and the only necessary action that my constituents are
imploring Republicans to take, lowering costs for the American people,
is completely missing from this failing effort.
Republicans are running up billions of dollars on America's credit
card so that they can send our servicemembers to fight another forever
war in the Middle East. They are working to pass a voter suppression
bill that won't secure our elections but will make it harder for
Americans to vote.
My Republican colleagues tell Americans that they are working for
them. The American people are smarter than that. They know what
Republicans are doing, and they will not forgive them for what they
have done.
I urge every Member to vote ``no'' on this latest bad budget.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. McClintock), my dear friend and another proud member of
the House Budget Committee.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I think we can all agree that this is
not what a budget resolution should be used for, but, unfortunately,
necessity commands it.
Reconciliation gives us a powerful tool to bring mandatory spending
in line with revenues. Unfortunately, the exigencies that we face have
left us with no choice but to use this process to assure that we can
replenish our arsenals and strengthen the integrity of our elections.
The minority Democrats have vowed to obstruct these necessities in
the Senate at a time when we are at war with Iran and at a time when
public confidence in our election process is at an all-time low.
Reconciliation, which this solution sets in motion, is the only path
that we can take to achieve these vital measures. I regret the
circumstances that force us to employ reconciliation for this purpose,
and I pray for the day when Congress fulfills its legal duty to enact a
real budget resolution that sets our country back on the road to fiscal
health.
Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I will correct the Record.
Moments ago, the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee
referenced a letter from CBO on June 24, which he alleges, according to
him, cited that the only people who lost their Medicaid coverage
because of the bill they passed last summer were illegals.
That is not at all what the letter says. I have it here in front of
me, and I will be happy to submit it to the Record at the end of this
debate.
Mr. Chairman, it is quite clear, however, that what CBO has found is
that the bill they passed last summer, reconciliation 1.0, will kick
more than 15 million Americans off of their healthcare coverage.
Already, 8 million have lost their healthcare coverage with at least
another 7 million to go.
This is a healthcare crisis in this country. It was entirely created
by the other side.
Mr. Chairman, I thank all of the speakers who we have heard from in
this debate for their comments.
Mr. Chair, the choice could not be more clear. The American people
asked us to lower their costs. Instead, this Republican majority has
delivered higher prices, less healthcare, more debt, and now tens of
billions of dollars for a reckless and unnecessary war.
This reconciliation effort does nothing to lower the cost of
groceries or the cost of housing, healthcare, energy, or gas. Not one
provision provides meaningful relief to working families. They don't
even attempt to do so. There is not one word on any of the things I
just cited.
What it does do, however, is add nearly $100 billion to the deficit,
make new voting restrictions, and hand President Trump another massive
check to continue a war that is driving up prices here at home and
exacting a devastating human toll.
Sadly, three American servicemembers lost their lives this past
weekend, bringing the total number killed in this conflict to 18. We
mourn them. I think I can speak for the entire House when I say this.
We mourn them. We honor their service and sacrifice, and we keep their
families and loved ones in our thoughts.
Yet, the best way to honor their memory and to protect the brave men
and women who are still serving our country is not to continue sending
them into harm's way without a coherent strategy, a clear objective,
and an achievable endgame. It is to end this war that President Trump
has so badly botched.
Democrats stand ready to work with anyone serious about lowering
costs and improving the lives of the American people. This resolution
does neither. We have a gentleman in the White House who campaigned on
the slogan: America First.
Does the Chair remember that? Their bill in front of us is America
last.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I yield back
the balance of my time.
{time} 1410
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to make this quick because I want to say something about my
ranking member. In case I don't have time, let me say it now: what a
gentleman, what a statesman. This place would work a lot better if you
had the tone, the commitment to civility and to just being constructive
around here. When you can agree--we don't agree on this. He is
impassioned. I am impassioned. What a good man. The people of
Pennsylvania must be very proud of Brendan Boyle. I am.
We need to support our troops. This is emergency funding. We need to
support our producers who give us food security. That is a national
security issue. We do it every year.
We need to give the American people the confidence that this and
every election going forward is fair and accurate. We need that for
this great Republic to succeed and to thrive in the future.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my fellow Members of Congress to support
this important piece of legislation. I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of
Rules Committee Print 119-37 shall be considered as adopted. The
concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be considered as read.
The text of the concurrent resolution, as amended, is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 113
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2027.
(a) Declaration.--The Congress determines and declares that
prior concurrent resolutions on the budget are replaced as of
fiscal year 2027 and that this concurrent resolution
establishes the budget for fiscal year 2027 and sets forth
the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2028
through 2036.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this
concurrent resolution is as follows:
Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2027.
TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS
Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Major functional categories.
TITLE II--RECONCILIATION
Sec. 201. Reconciliation in the House of Representatives.
[[Page H5139]]
TITLE III--RESERVE FUND
Sec. 301. Reserve fund for reconciliation legislation in the House of
Representatives.
TITLE IV--OTHER MATTERS
Sec. 401. Enforcement filing.
Sec. 402. Budgetary treatment of administrative expenses.
Sec. 403. Application and effect of changes in allocations and
aggregates.
Sec. 404. Adjustments to reflect changes in concepts and definitions in
the House of Representatives.
Sec. 405. Adjustment for changes in the baseline.
Sec. 406. Emergency requirements.
Sec. 407. Additional adjustments.
Sec. 408. Exercise of rulemaking powers.
TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS
SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.
The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of
fiscal years 2027 through 2036:
(1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this concurrent resolution:
(A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as
follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $4,481,487,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028: $4,613,874,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029: $4,804,166,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030: $5,019,004,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031: $5,231,798,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032: $5,430,293,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033: $5,629,428,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034: $5,843,060,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035: $6,079,841,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036: $6,340,095,000,000.
(B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal
revenues should be changed are as follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $0.
Fiscal year 2028: $0.
Fiscal year 2029: $0.
Fiscal year 2030: $0.
Fiscal year 2031: $0.
Fiscal year 2032: $0.
Fiscal year 2033: $0.
Fiscal year 2034: $0.
Fiscal year 2035: $0.
Fiscal year 2036: $0.
(2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement
of this concurrent resolution, the appropriate levels of
total new budget authority are as follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $5,970,796,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028: $6,123,042,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029: $6,228,057,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030: $6,510,728,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031: $6,700,183,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032: $6,935,858,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033: $7,317,354,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034: $7,482,024,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035: $7,579,255,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036: $7,982,009,000,000.
(3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of
this concurrent resolution, the appropriate levels of total
budget outlays are as follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $6,083,143,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028: $6,254,653,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029: $6,257,411,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030: $6,522,342,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031: $6,666,776,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032: $6,866,535,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033: $7,267,790,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034: $7,376,820,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035: $7,408,167,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036: $7,855,672,000,000.
(4) Deficits (on-budget).--For purposes of the enforcement
of this concurrent resolution, the amounts of the deficits
(on-budget) are as follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $1,601,656,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028: $1,640,779,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029: $1,453,245,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030: $1,503,338,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031: $1,434,978,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032: $1,436,242,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033: $1,638,362,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034: $1,533,760,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035: $1,328,326,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036: $1,515,577,000,000.
(5) Debt subject to limit.--The appropriate levels of debt
subject to limit are as follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $41,359,068,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028: $43,175,295,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029: $44,745,023,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030: $46,283,651,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031: $47,654,383,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032: $49,104,237,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033: $51,011,090,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034: $52,813,480,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035: $54,443,781,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036: $56,170,252,000,000.
(6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of
debt held by the public are as follows:
Fiscal year 2027: $33,935,518,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028: $35,822,138,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029: $37,506,696,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030: $39,222,225,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031: $40,815,075,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032: $42,396,377,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033: $44,125,126,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034: $45,697,043,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035: $47,008,876,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036: $48,476,264,000,000.
SEC. 102. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.
The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate
levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years
2027 through 2036 for each major functional category are:
(1) National Defense (050):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $955,085,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $978,947,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $982,359,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $992,690,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $1,007,889,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $996,559,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $1,029,810,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,015,126,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $1,053,576,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,030,291,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $1,079,344,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,048,606,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $1,105,691,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,081,405,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $1,131,379,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,097,992,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $1,157,331,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,112,803,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $1,184,416,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,148,892,000,000.
(2) International Affairs (150):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $60,346,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $50,221,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $62,670,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $53,816,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $65,885,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $61,625,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $67,295,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $62,196,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $68,779,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $63,496,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $70,272,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $64,937,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $71,782,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $66,509,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $73,349,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $67,971,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $74,913,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $69,451,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $76,562,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $70,914,000,000.
(3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $42,383,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,604,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $43,346,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,665,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $44,317,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,250,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $45,255,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,932,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $46,239,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,982,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $47,230,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,791,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $48,222,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,754,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $49,249,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,750,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $50,288,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $48,768,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $51,371,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $49,807,000,000.
(4) Energy (270):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $22,037,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $26,556,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $19,254,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $27,302,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $19,067,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $25,974,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $18,036,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $21,993,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $17,812,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,225,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $19,580,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,269,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $19,831,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,011,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $20,154,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,262,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $20,772,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $18,817,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $21,304,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $19,283,000,000.
(5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $67,830,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $77,459,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $69,086,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $77,893,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $69,959,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $77,970,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $70,257,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $75,843,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
[[Page H5140]]
(A) New budget authority, $71,477,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $75,005,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $72,684,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $74,386,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $74,618,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $75,378,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $76,513,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $74,748,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $77,417,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $75,511,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $79,379,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $76,948,000,000.
(6) Agriculture (350):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $41,847,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $50,233,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $41,600,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $46,906,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $41,499,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,828,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $39,255,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $38,754,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $39,267,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $38,063,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $39,994,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $38,476,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $40,606,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $39,517,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $40,870,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,249,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $41,269,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,042,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $41,827,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $41,211,000,000.
(7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $25,633,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,626,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, -$57,105,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$82,333,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $27,701,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $8,112,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $26,621,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $4,237,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $26,516,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $2,212,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $26,534,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $848,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $20,492,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$6,635,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $29,326,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $284,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $29,727,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$853,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $30,424,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$2,080,000,000.
(8) Transportation (400):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $166,534,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $163,408,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $169,908,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $170,876,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $171,775,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $173,510,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $170,989,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $173,079,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $173,090,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $175,852,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $178,360,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $181,371,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $180,675,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $184,337,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $183,042,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $186,059,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $185,346,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $188,036,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $187,775,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $192,319,000,000.
(9) Community and Regional Development (450):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $41,195,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $66,116,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $41,946,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $63,807,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $42,857,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $55,194,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $43,734,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $49,744,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $44,625,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $47,110,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $45,494,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $45,585,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $46,332,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,128,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $47,237,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,653,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $48,218,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $43,582,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $49,251,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $44,176,000,000.
(10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services
(500):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $136,286,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $139,557,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $138,324,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $136,177,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $140,974,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $138,114,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $143,692,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $140,448,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $146,554,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $143,133,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $149,749,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $146,147,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $152,984,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $149,233,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $155,900,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $152,119,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $158,838,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $155,006,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $161,864,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $157,933,000,000.
(11) Health (550):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $1,012,489,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $991,303,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $1,017,963,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,009,904,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $1,043,294,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,026,048,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $1,068,044,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,056,193,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $1,090,585,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,087,706,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $1,133,789,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,125,873,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $1,180,147,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,169,326,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $1,225,708,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,213,058,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $1,275,106,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,260,928,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $1,329,236,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,314,489,000,000.
(12) Medicare (570):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $1,149,338,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,148,649,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $1,294,352,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,293,601,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $1,214,269,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,213,516,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $1,366,819,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,366,064,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $1,447,843,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,447,086,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $1,537,619,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,536,866,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $1,766,981,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,766,187,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $1,771,433,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,770,648,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $1,745,418,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,744,596,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $1,982,616,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,981,764,000,000.
(13) Income Security (600):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $721,101,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $715,202,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $734,371,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $734,156,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $734,872,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $719,411,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $754,343,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $744,691,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $769,512,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $758,425,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $787,995,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $775,944,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $809,966,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $805,125,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $820,962,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $809,124,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $829,297,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $807,646,000,000.
[[Page H5141]]
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $853,928,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $840,186,000,000.
(14) Social Security (650):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $71,135,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $71,135,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $74,970,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $74,970,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $82,084,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $82,084,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $87,394,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $87,394,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $91,336,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $91,336,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $95,906,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $95,906,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $101,080,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $101,080,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $106,598,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $106,598,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $112,559,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $112,559,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $118,538,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $118,538,000,000.
(15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $450,026,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $449,840,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $472,729,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $494,955,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $495,351,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $468,176,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $516,490,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $513,230,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $533,555,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $529,785,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $554,300,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $550,972,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $576,778,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $601,751,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $600,111,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $598,973,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $624,549,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $589,870,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $649,609,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $645,497,000,000.
(16) Administration of Justice (750):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $91,423,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $111,372,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $90,880,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $118,929,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $92,952,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $120,040,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $95,468,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $121,409,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $97,296,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $114,659,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $104,427,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $115,579,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $107,057,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $108,068,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $109,246,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $108,546,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $111,973,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $109,286,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $114,820,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $112,048,000,000.
(17) General Government (800):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $31,675,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $37,393,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $32,811,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $37,741,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $33,865,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $37,977,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $35,194,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $38,526,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $36,045,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $38,220,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $37,220,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $37,252,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $38,030,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $37,927,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $38,859,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $38,433,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $39,736,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $39,249,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $40,681,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $40,112,000,000.
(18) Net Interest (900):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $1,146,866,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,146,866,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $1,236,463,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,236,463,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $1,313,485,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,313,485,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $1,383,390,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,383,390,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $1,454,965,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,454,965,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $1,519,836,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,519,836,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $1,588,216,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,588,216,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $1,658,335,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,658,335,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $1,719,369,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,719,369,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $1,786,098,000,000.
(B) Outlays, $1,786,098,000,000.
(19) Allowances (920):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, $0.
(B) Outlays, $0.
(20) Government-Wide Savings (930):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, -$124,103,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$49,236,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, -$199,332,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$134,368,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, -$261,367,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$194,791,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, -$286,812,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$250,361,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, -$333,253,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$318,138,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, -$380,167,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$371,801,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, -$427,358,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$423,751,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, -$476,296,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$476,031,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, -$543,471,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$548,098,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, -$594,536,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$599,310,000,000.
(21) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
Fiscal year 2027:
(A) New budget authority, -$138,330,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$138,108,000,000.
Fiscal year 2028:
(A) New budget authority, -$143,553,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$143,497,000,000.
Fiscal year 2029:
(A) New budget authority, -$152,671,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$152,671,000,000.
Fiscal year 2030:
(A) New budget authority, -$164,546,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$164,546,000,000.
Fiscal year 2031:
(A) New budget authority, -$175,637,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$175,637,000,000.
Fiscal year 2032:
(A) New budget authority, -$184,308,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$184,308,000,000.
Fiscal year 2033:
(A) New budget authority, -$184,776,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$184,776,000,000.
Fiscal year 2034:
(A) New budget authority, -$179,951,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$179,951,000,000.
Fiscal year 2035:
(A) New budget authority, -$179,401,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$179,401,000,000.
Fiscal year 2036:
(A) New budget authority, -$183,154,000,000.
(B) Outlays, -$183,154,000,000.
TITLE II--RECONCILIATION
SEC. 201. RECONCILIATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
(a) Submissions.--In the House of Representatives, not
later than September 11, 2026, the committees named in
subsection (b) shall submit their recommendations on changes
in laws within their jurisdictions to the Committee on the
Budget of the House of Representatives to carry out this
section.
(b) Instructions.--
(1) Committee on agriculture.--The Committee on Agriculture
shall submit changes in
[[Page H5142]]
laws within its jurisdiction that increase the deficit by not
more than $12,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2027
through 2036.
(2) Committee on armed services.--The Committee on Armed
Services shall submit changes in laws within its jurisdiction
that increase the deficit by not more than $60,000,000,000
for the period of fiscal years 2027 through 2036.
(3) Permanent select committee on intelligence.--The
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence shall submit
changes in laws within its jurisdiction that increase the
deficit by not more than $13,000,000,000 for the period of
fiscal years 2027 through 2036.
(4) Committee on house administration.--The Committee on
House Administration shall submit changes in laws within its
jurisdiction that increase the deficit by not more than
$10,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2027 through
2036.
TITLE III--RESERVE FUND
SEC. 301. RESERVE FUND FOR RECONCILIATION LEGISLATION IN THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
(a) In General.--In the House of Representatives, the chair
of the Committee on the Budget may revise the allocations of
a committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate
levels in this resolution for any bill or joint resolution
considered pursuant to section 201 containing the
recommendations of one or more committees, or for one or more
amendments to, a conference report on, or an amendment
between the Houses in relation to such a bill or joint
resolution, by the amounts necessary to accommodate the
budgetary effects of the legislation, if the budgetary
effects of the legislation comply with the reconciliation
instructions under this concurrent resolution.
(b) Determination of Compliance.--For purposes of this
section, compliance with the reconciliation instructions
under this concurrent resolution shall be determined by the
chair of the Committee on the Budget of the House of
Representatives.
TITLE IV--OTHER MATTERS
SEC. 401. ENFORCEMENT FILING.
In the House of Representatives, if a concurrent resolution
on the budget for fiscal year 2027 is adopted without the
appointment of a committee of conference on the disagreeing
votes of the two Houses with respect to this concurrent
resolution on the budget, for the purpose of enforcing the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et seq.) and
applicable rules and requirements set forth in the concurrent
resolution on the budget, the allocations provided for in
this subsection shall apply in the House of Representatives
in the same manner as if such allocations were in a joint
explanatory statement accompanying a conference report on the
budget for fiscal year 2027. The chair of the Committee on
the Budget of the House of Representatives shall submit a
statement for publication in the Congressional Record
containing--
(1) for the Committee on Appropriations, committee
allocations for fiscal year 2027 consistent with title I for
the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633); and
(2) for all committees other than the Committee on
Appropriations, committee allocations consistent with title I
for fiscal year 2027 and for the period of fiscal years 2027
through 2036 for the purpose of enforcing section 302 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633).
SEC. 402. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.
(a) In General.--In the House of Representatives,
notwithstanding section 302(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633(a)(1)), section 13301 of the Budget
Enforcement Act of 1990, and section 2009a of title 39,
United States Code, the report, joint explanatory statement,
or the statement filed pursuant to section 401, as
applicable, accompanying this concurrent resolution shall
include in its allocation to the Committee on Appropriations
under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
(2 U.S.C. 633(a)) amounts for the discretionary
administrative expenses of the Social Security Administration
and the United States Postal Service.
(b) Special Rule.--In the House of Representatives, for
purposes of enforcing section 302(f) of the Congressional
Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633(f)), estimates of the levels
of total new budget authority and total outlays provided by a
measure shall include any discretionary amounts described in
subsection (a).
SEC. 403. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS
AND AGGREGATES.
(a) Application.--In the House of Representatives, any
adjustments of the allocations, aggregates, and other
budgetary levels made pursuant to this concurrent resolution
shall--
(1) apply while that measure is under consideration;
(2) take effect upon the enactment of that measure; and
(3) be published in the Congressional Record as soon as
practicable.
(b) Effect of Changed Allocations and Aggregates.--Revised
allocations, aggregates, and other budgetary levels resulting
from these adjustments shall be considered for the purposes
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 621 et
seq.) as the allocations, aggregates, or other budgetary
levels contained in this concurrent resolution.
(c) Budget Committee Determinations.--For purposes of this
concurrent resolution, the budgetary levels for a fiscal year
or period of fiscal years shall be determined on the basis of
estimates made by the chair of the Committee on the Budget of
the House of Representatives.
(d) Aggregates, Allocations and Application.--In the House
of Representatives, for purposes of this concurrent
resolution and budget enforcement, the consideration of any
bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto or conference
report thereon, for which the chair of the Committee on the
Budget makes adjustments or revisions in the allocations,
aggregates, and other budgetary levels of this concurrent
resolution shall not be subject to the point of order set
forth in clause 10 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
SEC. 404. ADJUSTMENTS TO REFLECT CHANGES IN CONCEPTS AND
DEFINITIONS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
In the House of Representatives, the chair of the Committee
on the Budget may adjust the appropriate aggregates,
allocations, and other budgetary levels in this concurrent
resolution for any change in budgetary concepts and
definitions consistent with section 251(b)(1) of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C.
901(b)(1)).
SEC. 405. ADJUSTMENT FOR CHANGES IN THE BASELINE.
In the House of Representatives, the chair of the Committee
on the Budget may adjust the allocations, aggregates, and
other appropriate budgetary levels in this concurrent
resolution to reflect changes resulting from the
Congressional Budget Office's update to its baseline for
fiscal years 2027 through 2036.
SEC. 406. EMERGENCY REQUIREMENTS.
(a) In General.--If a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report making appropriations for discretionary
amounts contains a provision providing new budget authority
and outlays, and a designation of such provision as an
emergency requirement, the chair of the Committee on the
Budget of the House shall not count the budgetary effects of
such provision for any purpose in the House.
(b) Application.--
(1) Exclusion.--A proposal to strike a designation under
subsection (a) shall be excluded from an evaluation of
budgetary effects for any purpose in the House.
(2) Amendment.--An amendment offered under subsection (a)
that also proposes to reduce each amount appropriated or
otherwise made available by the pending measure that is not
required to be appropriated or otherwise made available shall
be in order at any point in the reading of the pending
measure in the House.
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the
following definitions apply:
(1) Emergency.--The term ``emergency'' means a situation
that--
(A) requires new budget authority and outlays (or new
budget authority and the outlays flowing therefrom) for the
prevention or mitigation of, or response to, loss of life or
property, or a threat to national security; and
(B) is unanticipated.
(2) Unanticipated.--The term ``unanticipated'' means that
the underlying situation is--
(A) sudden, which means quickly coming into being or not
building up over time;
(B) urgent, which means a pressing and compelling need
requiring immediate action;
(C) unforeseen, which means not predicted or anticipated as
an emerging need; and
(D) temporary, which means not of a permanent duration.
SEC. 407. ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENTS.
(a) Adjustment for Disaster Relief.--The chair of the
Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives may
adjust the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate
budgetary levels in this concurrent resolution as follows:
(1) In general.--If a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report makes discretionary appropriations that
Congress designates as being for disaster relief, the
adjustment for fiscal year 2027 shall be the total of such
appropriations for fiscal year 2027 designated as being for
disaster relief, but not to exceed the amount equal to the
total amount calculated for fiscal year 2027 in accordance
with the formula in section 251(b)(2)(D)(i) of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C.
901(b)(2)(D)(i)) except that such formula shall be applied by
substituting ``fiscal year 2027'' for ``fiscal years 2024 and
2025''.
(2) Definition.--As used in this subsection, the term
``disaster relief'' means activities carried out pursuant to
a determination under section 102(2) of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 5122(2)).
(b) Adjustment for Wildfire Suppression.--The chair of the
Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives may
adjust the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate
budgetary levels in this concurrent resolution as follows:
(1) In general.--If a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report making discretionary appropriations for
fiscal year 2027 specifies an amount for wildfire suppression
operations in the Wildland Fire Management accounts at the
Department of Agriculture or the Department of the Interior,
then the adjustment shall be the amount of additional new
budget authority specified in such measure as being for
wildfire suppression operations for fiscal year 2027, but
shall not exceed $2,950,000,000.
(2) Definitions.--As used in this subsection, the terms
``additional new budget authority'' and ``wildfire
suppression operations'' have the meanings specified in
subclauses (I) and (II), respectively, of section
251(b)(2)(F)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)(F)(ii)(I) and (II)).
(c) Adjustment for Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control.--
The chair of the Committee on the Budget of the House of
Representatives may adjust the allocations, aggregates, and
other appropriate budgetary levels in this concurrent
resolution as follows:
(1) In general.--If a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report making discretionary appropriations for
fiscal year 2027 specifies an amount for the health care
fraud and
[[Page H5143]]
abuse control program at the Department of Health and Human
Services (75-8393-0-7-571), then the adjustment shall be the
amount of additional new budget authority specified in such
measure for such program for fiscal year 2027, but shall not
exceed $658,000,000.
(2) Definition.--As used in this subsection, the term
``additional new budget authority'' means the amount provided
for fiscal year 2027, in excess of $311,000,000, in a bill,
joint resolution, amendment, or conference report making
discretionary appropriations and specified to pay for the
costs of the health care fraud and abuse control program.
(d) Adjustment for Continuing Disability Reviews and
Redeterminations.--The chair of the Committee on the Budget
of the House of Representatives may adjust the allocations,
aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary levels in this
concurrent resolution as follows:
(1) In general.--If a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report making discretionary appropriations for
fiscal year 2027 specifies an amount for continuing
disability reviews under titles II and XVI of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq., 1381 et seq.), for the
cost associated with conducting redeterminations of
eligibility under title XVI of the Social Security Act, for
the cost of co-operative disability investigation units, and
for the cost associated with the prosecution of fraud in the
programs and operations of the Social Security Administration
by Special Assistant United States Attorneys, then the
adjustment shall be the additional new budget authority
specified in such measure for such expenses for fiscal year
2027, but shall not exceed $2,124,000,000.
(2) Definitions.--As used in this subsection--
(A) the term ``continuing disability reviews'' means
continuing disability reviews under sections 221(i) and
1614(a)(4) of the Social Security Act, including work-related
continuing disability reviews to determine whether earnings
derived from services demonstrate an individual's ability to
engage in substantial gainful activity;
(B) the term ``redetermination'' means redetermination of
eligibility under sections 1611(c)(1) and 1614(a)(3)(H) of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1382(c)(1),
1382c(a)(3)(H)); and
(C) the term ``additional new budget authority'' means the
amount provided for fiscal year 2027, in excess of
$273,000,000, in a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report and specified to pay for the costs of
continuing disability reviews, redeterminations, co-operative
disability investigation units, and fraud prosecutions under
the heading ``Limitation on Administrative Expenses'' for the
Social Security Administration.
(e) Adjustment for Reemployment Services and Eligibility
Assessments.--The chair of the Committee on the Budget of the
House of Representatives may adjust the allocations,
aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary levels in this
concurrent resolution as follows:
(1) In general.--If a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or
conference report making discretionary appropriations for
fiscal year 2027 specifies an amount for grants to States
under section 306 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 506)
for claimants of regular compensation, as defined in such
section, including those who are profiled as most likely to
exhaust their benefits, then the adjustment shall be the
additional new budget authority specified in such measure for
such grants for fiscal year 2027, but shall not exceed
$400,000,000.
(2) Definitions.--As used in this subsection, the term
``additional new budget authority'' means the amount provided
for fiscal year 2027, in excess of $117,000,000, in a bill,
joint resolution, amendment, or conference report making
discretionary appropriations and specified to pay for grants
to States under section 306 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 506) for claimants of regular compensation, as defined
in such section, including those who are profiled as most
likely to exhaust their benefits.
SEC. 408. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.
Congress adopts the provisions of this title--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such
they shall be considered as part of the rules of each House
or of that House to which they specifically apply, and such
rules shall supersede other rules only to the extent that
they are inconsistent with such other rules; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
either the Senate or the House of Representatives to change
those rules (insofar as they relate to that House) at any
time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as is the
case of any other rule of the Senate or House of
Representatives.
The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Crawford) having assumed the chair, Mr. Alford, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the concurrent
resolution (H. Con. Res. 113) establishing the congressional budget for
the United States Government for fiscal year 2027 and setting forth the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2028 through 2036, and,
pursuant to House Resolution 1438, he reported the concurrent
resolution, as amended by that resolution, back to the House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
The question is on adoption of the concurrent resolution.
Under clause 10 of rule XX, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question
will be postponed.
____________________