[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 4013-4083]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014


                             General Leave

  Mr. MULVANEY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 25, currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from South Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 122 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the 
concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 25.
  Will the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) kindly resume the 
chair.

                              {time}  1243


                     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 further consideration of 
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 25) establishing the budget for 
the United States Government for fiscal year 2014 and setting forth 
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2015 through 2023, with 
Mr. Hastings of Washington in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
  The CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Tuesday, March 19, 
2013, time for general debate had expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the concurrent resolution shall be considered 
for amendment under the 5-minute rule and is considered read.
  The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 25

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

     SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL 
                   YEAR 2014.

       (a) Declaration.--The Congress determines and declares that 
     this concurrent resolution establishes the budget for fiscal 
     year 2014 and sets forth appropriate budgetary levels for 
     fiscal years 2015 through 2023.
       (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 2014.

                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.

  TITLE III--RECOMMENDED LEVELS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2030, 2040, AND 2050

Sec. 301. Long-term budgeting.

                        TITLE IV--RESERVE FUNDS

Sec. 401. Reserve fund for the repeal of the 2010 health care laws.
Sec. 402. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for the reform of the 2010 
              health care laws.
Sec. 403. Deficit-neutral reserve fund related to the Medicare 
              provisions of the 2010 health care laws.
Sec. 404. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for the sustainable growth rate 
              of the Medicare program.
Sec. 405. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for reforming the tax code.
Sec. 406. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for trade agreements.
Sec. 407. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for revenue measures.
Sec. 408. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for rural counties and schools.
Sec. 409. Implementation of a deficit and long-term debt reduction 
              agreement.

                 TITLE V--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

Sec. 501. Direct spending.

                      TITLE VI--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 601. Limitation on advance appropriations.
Sec. 602. Concepts and definitions.
Sec. 603. Adjustments of aggregates, allocations, and appropriate 
              budgetary levels.
Sec. 604. Limitation on long-term spending.
Sec. 605. Budgetary treatment of certain transactions.
Sec. 606. Application and effect of changes in allocations and 
              aggregates.
Sec. 607. Congressional Budget Office estimates.
Sec. 608. Transfers from the general fund of the treasury to the 
              highway trust fund that increase public indebtedness.
Sec. 609. Separate allocation for overseas contingency operations/
              global war on terrorism.
Sec. 610. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

                      TITLE VII--POLICY STATEMENTS

Sec. 701. Policy statement on economic growth and job creation.
Sec. 702. Policy statement on tax reform.
Sec. 703. Policy statement on Medicare.
Sec. 704. Policy statement on Social Security.
Sec. 705. Policy statement on higher education affordability.
Sec. 706. Policy statement on deficit reduction through the 
              cancellation of unobligated balances.
Sec. 707. Policy statement on responsible stewardship of taxpayer 
              dollars.
Sec. 708. Policy statement on deficit reduction through the reduction 
              of unnecessary and wasteful spending.
Sec. 709. Policy statement on unauthorized spending.

               TITLE VIII--SENSE OF THE HOUSE PROVISIONS

Sec. 801. Sense of the House on the importance of child support 
              enforcement.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

     SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

       The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of 
     fiscal years 2014 through 2023:

[[Page 4014]]

       (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this concurrent resolution:
       (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
     follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,270,932,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,606,592,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,778,891,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,903,673,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,028,951,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,149,236,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,284,610,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,457,009,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,650,699,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,832,145,000,000.
       (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
     revenues should be changed are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $0.
       Fiscal year 2015: $0.
       Fiscal year 2016: $0.
       Fiscal year 2017: $0.
       Fiscal year 2018: $0.
       Fiscal year 2019: $0.
       Fiscal year 2020: $0.
       Fiscal year 2021: $0.
       Fiscal year 2022: $0.
       Fiscal year 2023: $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 2014: $2,769,406,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,681,581,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,857,258,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,988,083,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,104,777,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,281,142,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,414,838,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,540,165,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,681,407,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,768,151,000,000.
       (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this concurrent resolution, the appropriate levels of total 
     budget outlays are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,815,079,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,736,849,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,850,434,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,958,619,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,079,296,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,231,642,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,374,336,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,495,489,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,667,532,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,722,071,000,000.
       (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 2014: -$544,147,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: -$130,257,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: -$71,544,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: -$54,947,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: -$50,345,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: -$82,405,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: -$89,726,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: -$38,480,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: -$16,833,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $110,073,000,000.
       (5) Debt subject to limit.--The appropriate levels of the 
     public debt are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $17,776,278,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $18,086,450,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $18,343,824,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $18,635,129,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $18,938,669,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $19,267,212,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $19,608,732,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $19,900,718,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $20,162,755,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $20,319,503,000,000.
       (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of 
     debt held by the public are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $12,849,621,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $13,069,788,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $13,225,569,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $13,362,146,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $13,485,102,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $13,648,470,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $13,836,545,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021; $13,992,649,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $14,154,363,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $14,210,984,000,000.

     SEC. 102. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

       The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate 
     levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years 
     2014 through 2023 for each major functional category are:
       (1) National Defense (050):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,225,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $579,235,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $574,359,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $563,976,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $585,556,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $570,288,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $598,822,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $575,457,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $612,125,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $582,678,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $625,445,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $600,508,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $639,780,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $614,250,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $654,096,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $628,265,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $671,181,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $649,221,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $688,640,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $660,461,000,000.
       (2) International Affairs (150):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $41,010,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $42,005,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,357,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,876,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,355,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,019,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $41,343,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,821,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,342,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,922,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,349,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,248,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,366,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,070,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,898,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,970,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,240,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,208,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,304,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,030,000,000.
       (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,733,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,811,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,318,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,193,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,994,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,641,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,677,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,251,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,386,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,932,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,088,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,798,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,275,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,506,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,886,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,244,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,609,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,991,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,344,000,000.
       (4) Energy (270):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$1,218,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,366,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,527,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,024,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,433,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $984,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,570,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,091,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,764,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,331,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,932,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,612,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,121,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,200,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,039,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,105,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,989,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$12,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$147,000,000.
       (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $38,146,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,002,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,457,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,169,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,445,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,860,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,295,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,612,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $38,120,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,378,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $38,552,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,655,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,530,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,167,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,730,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,332,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,124,000,000.

[[Page 4015]]

       (B) Outlays, $40,330,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,792,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,382,000,000.
       (6) Agriculture (350):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,731,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,377,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,737,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $16,452,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,254,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,827,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,344,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $18,856,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $18,776,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $18,238,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,087,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $18,461,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,380,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $18,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,856,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,365,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,736,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,244,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,335,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,859,000,000.
       (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,548,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$9,000,000,000..
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$7,818,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$19,413,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$7,398,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$21,697,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$6,328,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$22,908,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$2,946,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$20,314,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$866,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$23,410,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$579,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$22,954,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$295,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$17,517,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$1,076,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$19,406,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$1,200,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$20,654,000,000.
       (8) Transportation (400):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $87,056,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $93,142,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,030,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $82,089,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $81,453,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $74,235,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $91,498,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $85,791,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $68,776,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $84,548,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $92,602,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $82,681,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $72,693,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $84,625,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $92,988,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $85,244,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $74,694,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $85,945,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,499,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $86,906,000,000.
       (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,533,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,669,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,401,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,978,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,341,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $16,911,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,442,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $13,910,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,556,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $10,925,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,766,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,787,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $8,962,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,418,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $9,172,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,283,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $9,424,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,209,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $9,641,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,271,000,000.
       (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
     (500):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $56,440,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $77,310,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $73,848,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $77,042,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $85,577,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $84,250,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $95,462,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $93,615,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $100,910,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $99,755,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $95,734,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $95,741,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $97,329,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $97,270,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $98,900,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $98,917,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,965,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $100,219,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $101,606,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $101,780,000,000.
       (11) Health (550):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $363,762,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $378,695,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $358,156,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $353,470,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $359,280,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $362,833,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $375,308,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $375,956,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $387,073,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $386,264,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $393,079,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $392,141,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $422,229,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $410,876,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $420,834,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $419,365,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $441,207,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $439,353,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $456,935,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $455,134,000,000.
       (12) Medicare (570):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $515,944,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $515,713,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $534,494,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $534,400,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $581,788,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $581,834,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $597,570,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $597,637,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $621,384,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $621,480,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $679,457,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $679,661,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $723,313,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $723,481,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $770,764,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $771,261,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $845,828,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $843,504,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $875,417,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $874,988,000,000.
       (13) Income Security (600):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $509,418,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $508,082,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $480,285,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $476,897,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $487,623,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $487,046,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $484,222,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $479,516,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $484,653,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $475,612,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $495,065,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $490,660,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $501,101,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $496,983,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $505,927,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $501,832,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $515,637,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $516,362,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:

[[Page 4016]]

       (A) New budget authority, $510,654,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $506,354,000,000.
       (14) Social Security (650):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,506,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,616,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,233,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,308,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,369,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,407,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,691,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,691,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,005,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,005,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,421,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,421,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,954,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,954,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,474,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,474,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,235,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $54,235,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,441,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $58,441,000,000.
       (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $145,730,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $145,440,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $149,792,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $149,313,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $162,051,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $161,441,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $160,947,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $160,117,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $159,423,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $158,565,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $171,032,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $170,144,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $175,674,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $174,791,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $179,585,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $178,655,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $191,294,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $190,344,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $187,945,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $186,882,000,000.
       (16) Administration of Justice (750):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $51,933,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $53,376,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,116,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,918,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $56,644,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $55,745,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $56,712,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $57,949,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,586,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $59,859,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $60,495,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $60,666,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $62,400,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $61,878,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $64,507,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $63,950,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $70,150,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $69,561,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $72,809,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $72,195,000,000.
       (17) General Government (800):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,225,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,172,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,922,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,749,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,263,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,559,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,814,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,435,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,573,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,158,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,454,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,803,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,293,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $25,645,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,178,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,566,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,821,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,219,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,717,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,116,000,000.
       (18) Net Interest (900):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $341,099,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $341,099,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $367,647,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $367,647,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $405,960,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $405,960,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $476,448,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $476,448,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $555,772,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $555,772,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $613,411,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $613,411,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $661,810,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $661,810,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $694,647,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $694,647,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $723,923,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $723,923,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $745,963,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $745,963,000,000.
       (19) Allowances (920):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$59,061,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$44,044,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$58,840,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$53,255,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$65,587,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$59,258,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$71,859,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$65,151,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$77,299,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$71,278,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$82,155,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$76,769,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$85,543,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$81,785,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$89,377,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$85,845,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$88,897,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$85,661,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$92,469,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$89,323,000,000.
       (20) Government-wide savings (930):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$9,407,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$6,660,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$21,577,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$9,971,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$17,617,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$8,873,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$13,371,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$6,739,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$11,556,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$3,340,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$9,584,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$703,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$8,457,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,740,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$7,094,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $3,666,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$21,151,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$2,703,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$35,807,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$13,555,000,000.
       (21) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$75,946,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$75,946,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$80,864,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$80,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$86,525,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$86,525,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,525,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,525,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$91,645,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$91,645,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$99,220,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$99,220,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$101,316,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$101,316,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$106,332,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$106,332,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$109,276,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$109,276,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$115,049,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$115,049,000,000.
       (22) Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism (970):

[[Page 4017]]

       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $93,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,621,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,851,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,948,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $38,789,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,451,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,570,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,431,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,466,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $38,102,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,694,000,000.

                        TITLE II--RECONCILIATION

     SEC. 201. RECONCILIATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

       (a) Submissions of Spending Reduction.--The House 
     committees named in subsection (b) shall submit, not later 
     than ______, 2013, recommendations to the Committee on the 
     Budget of the House of Representatives. After receiving those 
     recommendations, such committee shall report to the House a 
     reconciliation bill carrying out all such recommendations 
     without substantive revision.
       (b) Instructions.--
       (1) Committee on agriculture.--The Committee on Agriculture 
     shall submit changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
     sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 
     for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (2) Committee on education and the workforce.--The 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce shall submit changes 
     in laws within its jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the 
     deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2023.
       (3) Committee on energy and commerce.--The Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (4) Committee on financial services.--The Committee on 
     Financial Services shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (5) Committee on the judiciary.--The Committee on the 
     Judiciary shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (6) Committee on natural resources.--The Committee on 
     Natural Resources shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (7) Committee on oversight and government reform.--The 
     Committee on Oversight and Government Reform shall submit 
     changes in laws within its jurisdiction sufficient to reduce 
     the deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 for the period of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (8) Committee on ways and means.--The Committee on Ways and 
     Means shall submit changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
     sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 
     for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

  TITLE III--RECOMMENDED LEVELS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2030, 2040, AND 2050

     SEC. 301. LONG-TERM BUDGETING.

       The following are the recommended revenue, spending, and 
     deficit levels for each of fiscal years 2030, 2040, and 2050 
     as a percent of the gross domestic product of the United 
     States:
       (1) Federal revenues.--The appropriate levels of Federal 
     revenues are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2030: 19.1 percent.
       Fiscal year 2040: 19.1 percent.
       Fiscal year 2050: 19.1 percent.
       (2) Budget outlays.--The appropriate levels of total budget 
     outlays are not to exceed:
       Fiscal year 2030: 19.1 percent.
       Fiscal year 2040: 19.1 percent.
       Fiscal year 2050: 19.1 percent.
       (3) Deficits.--The appropriate levels of deficits are not 
     to exceed:
       Fiscal year 2030: 0 percent.
       Fiscal year 2040: 0 percent.
       Fiscal year 2050: 0 percent.

                        TITLE IV--RESERVE FUNDS

     SEC. 401. RESERVE FUND FOR THE REPEAL OF THE 2010 HEALTH CARE 
                   LAWS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that only consists of a full 
     repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the 
     health care-related provisions of the Health Care and 
     Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

     SEC. 402. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR THE REFORM OF THE 
                   2010 HEALTH CARE LAWS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that reforms or replaces the 
     Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or the Health Care 
     and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, if such measure 
     would not increase the deficit for the period of fiscal years 
     2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 403. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND RELATED TO THE 
                   MEDICARE PROVISIONS OF THE 2010 HEALTH CARE 
                   LAWS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that repeals all or part of the 
     decreases in Medicare spending included in the Patient 
     Protection and Affordable Care Act or the Health Care and 
     Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, if such measure would 
     not increase the deficit for the period of fiscal years 2014 
     through 2023.

     SEC. 404. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR THE SUSTAINABLE 
                   GROWTH RATE OF THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that includes provisions 
     amending or superseding the system for updating payments 
     under section 1848 of the Social Security Act, if such 
     measure would not increase the deficit for the period of 
     fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 405. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR REFORMING THE TAX 
                   CODE.

       In the House, if the Committee on Ways and Means reports a 
     bill or joint resolution that reforms the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any such bill or joint resolution, or amendment 
     thereto or conference report thereon, if such measure would 
     not increase the deficit for the period of fiscal years 2014 
     through 2023.

     SEC. 406. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution reported by the 
     Committee on Ways and Means, or amendment thereto or 
     conference report thereon, that implements a trade agreement, 
     but only if such measure would not increase the deficit for 
     the period of fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 407. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR REVENUE MEASURES.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution reported by the 
     Committee on Ways and Means, or amendment thereto or 
     conference report thereon, that decreases revenue, but only 
     if such measure would not increase the deficit for the period 
     of fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 408. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR RURAL COUNTIES AND 
                   SCHOOLS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels and limits in this resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that makes changes to or 
     provides for the reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
     393) by the amounts provided by that legislation for those 
     purposes, if such legislation requires sustained yield timber 
     harvests obviating the need for funding under P.L. 106-393 in 
     the future and would not increase the deficit or direct 
     spending for fiscal year 2014, the period of fiscal years 
     2014 through 2018, or the period of fiscal years 2014 through 
     2023.

     SEC. 409. IMPLEMENTATION OF A DEFICIT AND LONG-TERM DEBT 
                   REDUCTION AGREEMENT.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution to accommodate the 
     enactment of a deficit and long-term debt reduction agreement 
     if it includes permanent spending reductions and reforms to 
     direct spending programs.

                 TITLE V--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

     SEC. 501. DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Means-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For means-tested direct spending, the average rate of 
     growth in the total level of

[[Page 4018]]

     outlays during the 10-year period preceding fiscal year 2014 
     is 6.7 percent.
       (2) For means-tested direct spending, the estimated average 
     rate of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-
     year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 6.2 percent 
     under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for means-tested direct spending:
       (A) In 1996, a Republican Congress and a Democratic 
     president reformed welfare by limiting the duration of 
     benefits, giving States more control over the program, and 
     helping recipients find work. In the five years following 
     passage, child-poverty rates fell, welfare caseloads fell, 
     and workers' wages increased. This budget applies the lessons 
     of welfare reform to both the Supplemental Nutrition 
     Assistance Program and Medicaid.
       (B) For Medicaid, this budget converts the Federal share of 
     Medicaid spending into a flexible State allotment tailored to 
     meet each State's needs, indexed for inflation and population 
     growth. Such a reform would end the misguided one-size-fits-
     all approach that has tied the hands of State governments. 
     Instead, each State would have the freedom and flexibility to 
     tailor a Medicaid program that fits the needs of its unique 
     population. Moreover, this budget repeals the Medicaid 
     expansions in the President's health care law, relieving 
     State governments of its crippling one-size-fits-all 
     enrollment mandates.
       (C) For the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, this 
     budget converts the program into a flexible State allotment 
     tailored to meet each State's needs, increases in the 
     Department of Agriculture Thrifty Food Plan index and 
     beneficiary growth. Such a reform would provide incentives 
     for States to ensure dollars will go towards those who need 
     them most. Additionally, it requires that more stringent work 
     requirements and time limits apply under the program.
       (b) Nonmeans-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the average rate 
     of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 5.9 percent.
       (2) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the estimated 
     average rate of growth in the total level of outlays during 
     the 10-year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 5.3 
     percent under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for nonmeans-tested direct spending:
       (A) For Medicare, this budget advances policies to put 
     seniors, not the Federal Government, in control of their 
     health care decisions. Those in or near retirement will see 
     no changes, while future retirees would be given a choice of 
     private plans competing alongside the traditional fee-for-
     service Medicare program. Medicare would provide a premium-
     support payment either to pay for or offset the premium of 
     the plan chosen by the senior, depending on the plan's cost. 
     The Medicare premium-support payment would be adjusted so 
     that the sick would receive higher payments if their 
     conditions worsened; lower-income seniors would receive 
     additional assistance to help cover out-of-pocket costs; and 
     wealthier seniors would assume responsibility for a greater 
     share of their premiums. Putting seniors in charge of how 
     their health care dollars are spent will force providers to 
     compete against each other on price and quality. This market 
     competition will act as a real check on widespread waste and 
     skyrocketing health care costs.
       (B) In keeping with a recommendation from the National 
     Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, this budget 
     calls for Federal employees--including Members of Congress 
     and congressional staff--to make greater contributions toward 
     their own retirement.

                      TITLE VI--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 601. LIMITATION ON ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) The Veterans Health Care Budget and Reform Transparency 
     Act of 2009 provides advance appropriations for the following 
     veteran medical care accounts: Medical Services, Medical 
     Support and Compliance, and Medical Facilities.
       (2) The President has yet to submit a budget request as 
     required under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States 
     Code, including the request for the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, for fiscal year 2014, hence the request for veteran 
     medical care advance appropriations for fiscal year 2015 is 
     unavailable as of the writing of this concurrent resolution.
       (3) This concurrent resolution reflects the most up-to-date 
     estimate on veterans' health care needs included in the 
     President's fiscal year 2013 request for fiscal year 2015.
       (b) In General.--In the House, except as provided for in 
     subsection (c), any bill or joint resolution, or amendment 
     thereto or conference report thereon, making a general 
     appropriation or continuing appropriation may not provide for 
     advance appropriations.
       (c) Exceptions.--An advance appropriation may be provided 
     for programs, projects, activities, or accounts referred to 
     in subsection (d)(1) or identified in the report to accompany 
     this concurrent resolution or the joint explanatory statement 
     of managers to accompany this concurrent resolution under the 
     heading ``Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations''.
       (d) Limitations.--For fiscal year 2015, the aggregate level 
     of advance appropriations shall not exceed--
       (1) $55,483,000,000 for the following programs in the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs--
       (A) Medical Services;
       (B) Medical Support and Compliance; and
       (C) Medical Facilities accounts of the Veterans Health 
     Administration; and
       (2) $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority for all 
     programs identified pursuant to subsection (c).
       (e) Definition.--In this section, the term ``advance 
     appropriation'' means any new discretionary budget authority 
     provided in a bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, making general appropriations 
     or any new discretionary budget authority provided in a bill 
     or joint resolution making continuing appropriations for 
     fiscal year 2015.

     SEC. 602. CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS.

       Upon the enactment of any bill or joint resolution 
     providing for a change in budgetary concepts or definitions, 
     the chair of the Committee on the Budget may adjust any 
     allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this 
     concurrent resolution accordingly.

     SEC. 603. ADJUSTMENTS OF AGGREGATES, ALLOCATIONS, AND 
                   APPROPRIATE BUDGETARY LEVELS.

       (a) Adjustments of Discretionary and Direct Spending 
     Levels.--If a committee (other than the Committee on 
     Appropriations) reports a bill or joint resolution, or 
     amendment thereto or conference report thereon, providing for 
     a decrease in direct spending (budget authority and outlays 
     flowing therefrom) for any fiscal year and also provides for 
     an authorization of appropriations for the same purpose, upon 
     the enactment of such measure, the chair of the Committee on 
     the Budget may decrease the allocation to such committee and 
     increase the allocation of discretionary spending (budget 
     authority and outlays flowing therefrom) to the Committee on 
     Appropriations for fiscal year 2014 by an amount equal to the 
     new budget authority (and outlays flowing therefrom) provided 
     for in a bill or joint resolution making appropriations for 
     the same purpose.
       (b) Adjustments to Implement Discretionary Spending Caps 
     and to Fund Veterans' Programs and Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism.--
       (1) Findings.--(A) The President has not submitted a budget 
     for fiscal year 2014 as required pursuant to section 1105(a) 
     of title 31, United States Code, by the date set forth in 
     that section.
       (B) In missing the statutory date by which the budget must 
     be submitted, this will be the fourth time in five years the 
     President has not complied with that deadline.
       (C) This concurrent resolution reflects the levels of 
     funding for veterans' medical programs as set forth in the 
     President's fiscal year 2013 budget request.
       (2) President's budget submission.--In order to take into 
     account any new information included in the budget submission 
     by the President for fiscal year 2014, the chair of the 
     Committee on the Budget may adjust the allocations, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary levels for 
     veterans' programs, Overseas Contingency Operations/Global 
     War on Terrorism, or the 302(a) allocation to the Committee 
     on Appropriations set forth in the report of this concurrent 
     resolution to conform with section 251(c) of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (as adjusted 
     by section 251A of such Act).
       (3) Revised congressional budget office baseline.--The 
     chair of the Committee on the Budget may adjust the 
     allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary 
     levels to reflect changes resulting from technical and 
     economic assumptions in the most recent baseline published by 
     the Congressional Budget Office.
       (c) Determinations.--For the purpose of enforcing this 
     concurrent resolution on the budget in the House, the 
     allocations and aggregate levels of new budget authority, 
     outlays, direct spending, new entitlement authority, 
     revenues, deficits, and surpluses for fiscal year 2014 and 
     the period of fiscal years 2014 through fiscal year 2023 
     shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the 
     chair of the Committee on the Budget and such chair may 
     adjust such applicable levels of this concurrent resolution.

     SEC. 604. LIMITATION ON LONG-TERM SPENDING.

       (a) In General.--In the House, it shall not be in order to 
     consider a bill or joint resolution reported by a committee 
     (other than the Committee on Appropriations), or an amendment 
     thereto or a conference report thereon, if the provisions of 
     such measure have the net effect of increasing direct 
     spending in excess of $5,000,000,000 for any period described 
     in subsection (b).
       (b) Time Periods.--The applicable periods for purposes of 
     this section are any of the four consecutive ten fiscal-year 
     periods beginning with fiscal year 2024.

     SEC. 605. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 302(a)(1) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of

[[Page 4019]]

     1974, section 13301 of the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, 
     and section 4001 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
     1989, the report accompanying this concurrent resolution on 
     the budget or the joint explanatory statement accompanying 
     the conference report on any concurrent resolution on the 
     budget shall include in its allocation under section 302(a) 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to the Committee on 
     Appropriations amounts for the discretionary administrative 
     expenses of the Social Security Administration and the United 
     States Postal Service.
       (b) Special Rule.--For purposes of applying sections 302(f) 
     and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, estimates of 
     the level of total new budget authority and total outlays 
     provided by a measure shall include any off-budget 
     discretionary amounts.
       (c) Adjustments.--The chair of the Committee on the Budget 
     may adjust the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels for legislation reported by the Committee on Oversight 
     and Government Reform that reforms the Federal retirement 
     system, if such adjustments do not cause a net increase in 
     the deficit for fiscal year 2014 and the period of fiscal 
     years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 606. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS 
                   AND AGGREGATES.

       (a) Application.--Any adjustments of the allocations, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate 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 and aggregates resulting from these adjustments 
     shall be considered for the purposes of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 as allocations and aggregates included in 
     this concurrent resolution.
       (c) Budget Compliance.--(1) 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 appropriate levels of this concurrent 
     resolution shall not be subject to the points of order set 
     forth in clause 10 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives or section 604.
       (2) Section 314(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     shall not apply in the House of Representatives to any bill, 
     joint resolution, or amendment that provides new budget 
     authority for a fiscal year or to any conference report on 
     any such bill or resolution, if--
       (A) the enactment of that bill or resolution;
       (B) the adoption and enactment of that amendment; or
       (C) the enactment of that bill or resolution in the form 
     recommended in that conference report;

     would not cause the appropriate allocation of new budget 
     authority made pursuant to section 302(a) of such Act for 
     that fiscal year to be exceeded or the sum of the limits on 
     the security and non-security category in section 251A of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act as reduced 
     pursuant to such section.

     SEC. 607. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATES.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) Costs of Federal housing loans and loan guarantees are 
     treated unequally in the budget. The Congressional Budget 
     Office uses fair-value accounting to measure the costs of 
     Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but determines the cost of other 
     Federal housing programs on the basis of the Federal Credit 
     Reform Act of 1990 (``FCRA'').
       (2) The fair-value accounting method uses discount rates 
     which incorporate the risk inherent to the type of liability 
     being estimated in addition to Treasury discount rates of the 
     proper maturity length. In contrast, cash-basis accounting 
     solely uses the discount rates of the Treasury, failing to 
     incorporate risks such as prepayment and default risk.
       (3) The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the $635 
     billion of loans and loan guarantees issued in 2013 alone 
     would generate budgetary savings of $45 billion over their 
     lifetime using FCRA accounting. However, these same loans and 
     loan guarantees would have a lifetime cost of $11 billion 
     under fair-value methodology.
       (4) The majority of loans and guarantees issued in 2013 
     would show deficit reduction of $9.1 billion under FCRA 
     methodology, but would increase the deficit by $4.7 billion 
     using fair-value accounting.
       (b) Fair Value Estimates.--Upon the request of the chair or 
     ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, any estimate 
     prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
     for a measure under the terms of title V of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, ``credit reform'', as a supplement to 
     such estimate shall, to the extent practicable, also provide 
     an estimate of the current actual or estimated market values 
     representing the ``fair value'' of assets and liabilities 
     affected by such measure.
       (c) Fair Value Estimates for Housing Programs.--Whenever 
     the Director of the Congressional Budget Office prepares an 
     estimate pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974 of the costs which would be incurred in carrying 
     out any bill or joint resolution and if the Director 
     determines that such bill or joint resolution has a cost 
     related to a housing or residential mortgage program under 
     the FCRA, then the Director shall also provide an estimate of 
     the current actual or estimated market values representing 
     the ``fair value'' of assets and liabilities affected by the 
     provisions of such bill or joint resolution that result in 
     such cost.
       (d) Enforcement.--If the Director of the Congressional 
     Budget Office provides an estimate pursuant to subsection (b) 
     or (c), the chair of the Committee on the Budget may use such 
     estimate to determine compliance with the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 and other budgetary enforcement controls.

     SEC. 608. TRANSFERS FROM THE GENERAL FUND OF THE TREASURY TO 
                   THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND THAT INCREASE PUBLIC 
                   INDEBTEDNESS.

       For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, or 
     the rules or orders of the House of Representatives, a bill 
     or joint resolution, or an amendment thereto or conference 
     report thereon, that transfers funds from the general fund of 
     the Treasury to the Highway Trust Fund shall be counted as 
     new budget authority and outlays equal to the amount of the 
     transfer in the fiscal year the transfer occurs.

     SEC. 609. SEPARATE ALLOCATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY 
                   OPERATIONS/GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM.

       (a) Allocation.--In the House, there shall be a separate 
     allocation to the Committee on Appropriations for overseas 
     contingency operations/global war on terrorism. For purposes 
     of enforcing such separate allocation under section 302(f) of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the ``first fiscal 
     year'' and the ``total of fiscal years'' shall be deemed to 
     refer to fiscal year 2014. Such separate allocation shall be 
     the exclusive allocation for overseas contingency operations/
     global war on terrorism under section 302(a) of such Act. 
     Section 302(c) of such Act shall not apply to such separate 
     allocation. The Committee on Appropriations may provide 
     suballocations of such separate allocation under section 
     302(b) of such Act. Spending that counts toward the 
     allocation established by this section shall be designated 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
       (b) Adjustment.--In the House, for purposes of subsection 
     (a) for fiscal year 2014, no adjustment shall be made under 
     section 314(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 if any 
     adjustment would be made under section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of 
     the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985.

     SEC. 610. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       The House adopts the provisions of this title--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
     Representatives and as such they shall be considered as part 
     of the rules of the House of Representatives, and these rules 
     shall supersede other rules only to the extent that they are 
     inconsistent with other such rules; and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     the House of Representatives to change those rules at any 
     time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as in the 
     case of any other rule of the House of Representatives.

                      TITLE VII--POLICY STATEMENTS

     SEC. 701. POLICY STATEMENT ON ECONOMIC GROWTH AND JOB 
                   CREATION.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) Although the U.S. economy technically emerged from 
     recession roughly four years ago, the recovery has felt more 
     like a malaise than a rebound with the unemployment rate 
     still elevated and real economic growth essentially flat in 
     the final quarter of 2012.
       (2) The enormous build-up of Government debt in the past 
     four years has worsened the already unsustainable course of 
     Federal finances and is an increasing drag on the U.S. 
     economy.
       (3) During the recession and early stages of recovery, the 
     Government took a variety of measures to try to boost 
     economic activity. Despite the fact that these stimulus 
     measures added over $1 trillion to the debt, the economy 
     continues to perform at a sub-par trend.
       (4) Investors and businesses make decisions on a forward-
     looking basis. They know that today's large debt levels are 
     simply tomorrow's tax hikes, interest rate increases, or 
     inflation - and they act accordingly. It is this debt 
     overhang, and the uncertainty it generates, that is weighing 
     on U.S. growth, investment, and job creation.
       (5) Economists have found that the key to jump-starting 
     U.S. economic growth and job creation is tangible action to 
     rein in the growth of Government spending with the aim of 
     getting debt under control.
       (6) Stanford economist John Taylor has concluded that 
     reducing Government spending now would ``reduce the threats 
     of higher taxes, higher interest rates and a fiscal crisis'', 
     and would therefore provide an immediate stimulus to the 
     economy.

[[Page 4020]]

       (7) Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has stated that 
     putting in place a credible plan to reduce future deficits 
     ``would not only enhance economic performance in the long 
     run, but could also yield near-term benefits by leading to 
     lower long-term interest rates and increased consumer and 
     business confidence.''
       (8) Lowering spending would boost market confidence and 
     lessen uncertainty, leading to a spark in economic expansion, 
     job creation, and higher wages and income.
       (b) Policy on Economic Growth and Job Creation.--It is the 
     policy of this resolution to promote faster economic growth 
     and job creation. By putting the budget on a sustainable 
     path, this resolution ends the debt-fueled uncertainty 
     holding back job creators. Reforms to the tax code put 
     American businesses and workers in a better position to 
     compete and thrive in the 21st century global economy. This 
     resolution targets the regulatory red tape and cronyism that 
     stack the deck in favor of special interests. All of the 
     reforms in this resolution serve as means to the larger end 
     of growing the economy and expanding opportunity for all 
     Americans.

     SEC. 702. POLICY STATEMENT ON TAX REFORM.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) A world-class tax system should be simple, fair, and 
     promote (rather than impede) economic growth. The U.S. tax 
     code fails on all three counts - it is notoriously complex, 
     patently unfair, and highly inefficient. The tax code's 
     complexity distorts decisions to work, save, and invest, 
     which leads to slower economic growth, lower wages, and less 
     job creation.
       (2) Since 2001 alone, there have been more than 3,250 
     changes to the code. Many of the major changes over the years 
     have involved carving out special preferences, exclusions, or 
     deductions for various activities or groups. These loopholes 
     add up to more than $1 trillion per year and make the code 
     unfair, inefficient, and very complex.
       (3) These tax preferences are disproportionately used by 
     upper-income individuals. For instance, the top 1 percent of 
     taxpayers reap about 3 times as much benefit from special tax 
     credits and deductions (excluding refundable credits) than 
     the middle class and 13 times as much benefit than the lowest 
     income quintile.
       (4) The large amount of tax preferences that pervade the 
     code end up narrowing the tax base by as much as 50 percent. 
     A narrow tax base, in turn, requires much higher tax rates to 
     raise a given amount of revenue.
       (5) The National Taxpayer Advocate reports that taxpayers 
     spent 6.1 billion hours in 2012 complying with tax 
     requirements.
       (6) Standard economic theory shows that high marginal tax 
     rates dampen the incentives to work, save, and invest, which 
     reduces economic output and job creation. Lower economic 
     output, in turn, mutes the intended revenue gain from higher 
     marginal tax rates.
       (7) Roughly half of U.S. active business income and half of 
     private sector employment are derived from business entities 
     (such as partnerships, S corporations, and sole 
     proprietorships) that are taxed on a ``pass-through'' basis, 
     meaning the income flows through to the tax returns of the 
     individual owners and is taxed at the individual rate 
     structure rather than at the corporate rate. Small businesses 
     in particular tend to choose this form for Federal tax 
     purposes, and the top Federal rate on such small business 
     income reaches 44.6 percent. For these reasons, sound 
     economic policy requires lowering marginal rates on these 
     pass-through entities.
       (8) The U.S. corporate income tax rate (including Federal, 
     State, and local taxes) sums to just over 39 percent, the 
     highest rate in the industrialized world. The total Federal 
     marginal tax rate on corporate income now reaches 55 percent, 
     when including the shareholder-level tax on dividends and 
     capital gains. Tax rates this high suppress wages and 
     discourage investment and job creation, distort business 
     activity, and put American businesses at a competitive 
     disadvantage with foreign competitors.
       (9) By deterring potential investment, the U.S. corporate 
     tax restrains economic growth and job creation. The U.S. tax 
     rate differential with other countries also fosters a variety 
     of complicated multinational corporate behaviors intended to 
     avoid the tax, which have the effect of moving the tax base 
     offshore, destroying American jobs, and decreasing corporate 
     revenue.
       (10) The ``worldwide'' structure of U.S. international 
     taxation essentially taxes earnings of U.S. firms twice, 
     putting them at a significant competitive disadvantage with 
     competitors with more competitive international tax systems.
       (11) Reforming the U.S. tax code to a more competitive 
     international system would boost the competitiveness of U.S. 
     companies operating abroad and it would also greatly reduce 
     tax avoidance.
       (12) The tax code imposes costs on American workers through 
     lower wages, on consumers in higher prices, and on investors 
     in diminished returns.
       (13) Revenues have averaged 18 percent of the economy 
     throughout modern American history. Revenues rise above this 
     level under current law to 19.1 percent of the economy, and - 
     if the spending restraints in this budget are enacted - this 
     level is sufficient to fund Government operations over time.
       (14) Attempting to raise revenue through tax increases to 
     meet out-of-control spending would sink the economy.
       (15) Closing tax loopholes to fund spending does not 
     constitute fundamental tax reform.
       (16) The goal of tax reform should be to curb or eliminate 
     loopholes and use those savings to lower tax rates across the 
     board - not to fund more wasteful Government spending. Tax 
     reform should be revenue-neutral and should not be an excuse 
     to raise taxes on the American people.
       (b) Policy on Tax Reform.--It is the policy of this 
     resolution that Congress should enact legislation during 
     fiscal year 2014 that provides for a comprehensive reform of 
     the U.S. tax code to promote economic growth, create American 
     jobs, increase wages, and benefit American consumers, 
     investors, and workers through revenue-neutral fundamental 
     tax reform, which should be reported by the Committee on Ways 
     and Means to the House not later than December 31, 2013, 
     that--
       (1) simplifies the tax code to make it fairer to American 
     families and businesses and reduces the amount of time and 
     resources necessary to comply with tax laws;
       (2) substantially lowers tax rates for individuals, with a 
     goal of achieving a top individual rate of 25 percent and 
     consolidating the current seven individual income tax 
     brackets into two brackets with a first bracket of 10 
     percent;
       (3) repeals the Alternative Minimum Tax;
       (4) reduces the corporate tax rate to 25 percent; and
       (5) transitions the tax code to a more competitive system 
     of international taxation.

     SEC. 703. POLICY STATEMENT ON MEDICARE.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) More than 50 million Americans depend on Medicare for 
     their health security.
       (2) The Medicare Trustees Report has repeatedly recommended 
     that Medicare's long-term financial challenges be addressed 
     soon. Each year without reform, the financial condition of 
     Medicare becomes more precarious and the threat to those in 
     or near retirement becomes more pronounced. According to the 
     Congressional Budget Office--
       (A) the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will be exhausted in 
     2023 and unable to pay scheduled benefits; and
       (B) Medicare spending is growing faster than the economy 
     and Medicare outlays are currently rising at a rate of 6.2 
     percent per year, and under the Congressional Budget Office's 
     alternative fiscal scenario, direct spending on Medicare is 
     projected to exceed 7 percent of GDP by 2040 and reach 13 
     percent of GDP by 2085.
       (3) The President's health care law created a new Federal 
     agency called the Independent Payment Advisory Board 
     (``IPAB'') empowered with unilateral authority to cut 
     Medicare spending. As a result of that law--
       (A) IPAB will be tasked with keeping the Medicare per 
     capita growth below a Medicare per capita target growth rate. 
     Prior to 2018, the target growth rate is based on the five-
     year average of overall inflation and medical inflation. 
     Beginning in 2018, the target growth rate will be the five-
     year average increase in the nominal Gross Domestic Product 
     (GDP) plus one percentage point;
       (B) the fifteen unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats of 
     IPAB will make decisions that will reduce seniors access to 
     care;
       (C) the nonpartisan Office of the Medicare Chief Actuary 
     estimates that the provider cuts already contained in the 
     Affordable Care Act will force 15 percent of hospitals, 
     skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies to close 
     in 2019; and
       (D) additional cuts from the IPAB board will force even 
     more health care providers to close their doors, and the 
     Board should be repealed.
       (4) Failing to address this problem will leave millions of 
     American seniors without adequate health security and younger 
     generations burdened with enormous debt to pay for spending 
     levels that cannot be sustained.
       (b) Policy on Medicare Reform.--It is the policy of this 
     resolution to protect those in or near retirement from any 
     disruptions to their Medicare benefits and offer future 
     beneficiaries the same health care options available to 
     Members of Congress.
       (c) Assumptions.--This resolution assumes reform of the 
     Medicare program such that:
       (1) Current Medicare benefits are preserved for those in or 
     near retirement.
       (2) For future generations, when they reach eligibility, 
     Medicare is reformed to provide a premium support payment and 
     a selection of guaranteed health coverage options from which 
     recipients can choose a plan that best suits their needs.
       (3) Medicare will maintain traditional fee-for-service as 
     an option.
       (4) Medicare will provide additional assistance for lower-
     income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks.
       (5) Medicare spending is put on a sustainable path and the 
     Medicare program becomes solvent over the long-term.

     SEC. 704. POLICY STATEMENT ON SOCIAL SECURITY.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:

[[Page 4021]]

       (1) More than 55 million retirees, individuals with 
     disabilities, and survivors depend on Social Security. Since 
     enactment, Social Security has served as a vital leg on the 
     ``three-legged stool'' of retirement security, which includes 
     employer provided pensions as well as personal savings.
       (2) The Social Security Trustees Report has repeatedly 
     recommended that Social Security's long-term financial 
     challenges be addressed soon. Each year without reform, the 
     financial condition of Social Security becomes more 
     precarious and the threat to seniors and those receiving 
     Social Security disability benefits becomes more pronounced:
       (A) In 2016, the Disability Insurance Trust Fund will be 
     exhausted and program revenues will be unable to pay 
     scheduled benefits.
       (B) In 2033, the combined Old-Age and Survivors and 
     Disability Trust Funds will be exhausted, and program 
     revenues will be unable to pay scheduled benefits.
       (C) With the exhaustion of the Trust Funds in 2033, 
     benefits will be cut 25 percent across the board, devastating 
     those currently in or near retirement and those who rely on 
     Social Security the most.
       (3) The recession and continued low economic growth have 
     exacerbated the looming fiscal crisis facing Social Security. 
     The most recent CBO projections find that Social Security 
     will run cash deficits of $1.319 trillion over the next 10 
     years.
       (4) Lower-income Americans rely on Social Security for a 
     larger proportion of their retirement income. Therefore, 
     reforms should take into consideration the need to protect 
     lower-income Americans' retirement security.
       (5) The Disability Insurance program provides an essential 
     income safety net for those with disabilities and their 
     families. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 
     between 1970 and 2012, the number of people receiving 
     disability benefits (both disabled workers and their 
     dependent family members) has increased by over 300 percent 
     from 2.7 million to over 10.9 million. This increase is not 
     due strictly to population growth or decreases in health. 
     David Autor and Mark Duggan have found that the increase in 
     individuals on disability does not reflect a decrease in 
     self-reported health. CBO attributes program growth to 
     changes in demographics, changes in the composition of the 
     labor force and compensation, as well as Federal policies.
       (6) If this program is not reformed, families who rely on 
     the lifeline that disability benefits provide will face 
     benefit cuts of up to 25 percent in 2016, devastating 
     individuals who need assistance the most.
       (7) Americans deserve action by the President, the House, 
     and the Senate to preserve and strengthen Social Security. It 
     is critical that bipartisan action be taken to address the 
     looming insolvency of Social Security. In this spirit, this 
     resolution creates a bipartisan opportunity to find solutions 
     by requiring policymakers to ensure that Social Security 
     remains a critical part of the safety net.
       (b) Policy Statement on Social Security.--It is the policy 
     of this resolution that Congress should work on a bipartisan 
     basis to make Social Security sustainably solvent. This 
     resolution assumes reform of a current law trigger, such 
     that:
       (1) If in any year the Board of Trustees of the Federal 
     Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal 
     Disability Insurance Trust Fund annual Trustees Report 
     determines that the 75-year actuarial balance of the Social 
     Security Trust Funds is in deficit, and the annual balance of 
     the Social Security Trust Funds in the 75th year is in 
     deficit, the Board of Trustees shall, no later than September 
     30 of the same calendar year, submit to the President 
     recommendations for statutory reforms necessary to achieve a 
     positive 75-year actuarial balance and a positive annual 
     balance in the 75th-year. Recommendations provided to the 
     President must be agreed upon by both Public Trustees of the 
     Board of Trustees.
       (2) Not later than December 1 of the same calendar year in 
     which the Board of Trustees submit their recommendations, the 
     President shall promptly submit implementing legislation to 
     both Houses of Congress including his recommendations 
     necessary to achieve a positive 75-year actuarial balance and 
     a positive annual balance in the 75th year. The Majority 
     Leader of the Senate and the Majority Leader of the House 
     shall introduce the President's legislation upon receipt.
       (3) Within 60 days of the President submitting legislation, 
     the committees of jurisdiction to which the legislation has 
     been referred shall report the bill which shall be considered 
     by the full House or Senate under expedited procedures.
       (4) Legislation submitted by the President shall--
       (A) protect those in or near retirement;
       (B) preserve the safety net for those who count on Social 
     Security the most, including those with disabilities and 
     survivors;
       (C) improve fairness for participants;
       (D) reduce the burden on, and provide certainty for, future 
     generations; and
       (E) secure the future of the Disability Insurance program 
     while addressing the needs of those with disabilities today 
     and improving the determination process.

     SEC. 705. POLICY STATEMENT ON HIGHER EDUCATION AFFORDABILITY.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) A well-educated workforce is critical to economic, job, 
     and wage growth.
       (2) More than 21 million students are enrolled in American 
     colleges and universities.
       (3) Over the last decade, tuition and fees have been 
     growing at an unsustainable rate. Between the 2001-2002 
     Academic Year and the 2011-2012 Academic Year:
       (A) Published tuition and fees for in-State students at 
     public four-year colleges and universities increased at an 
     average rate of 5.6 percent per year beyond the rate of 
     general inflation.
       (B) Published tuition and fees for in-State students at 
     public two-year colleges and universities increased at an 
     average rate of 3.8 percent per year beyond the rate of 
     general inflation.
       (C) Published tuition and fees for in-State students at 
     private four-year colleges and universities increased at an 
     average rate of 2.6 percent per year beyond the rate of 
     general inflation.
       (4) Over that same period, Federal financial aid has 
     increased 140 percent beyond the rate of general inflation.
       (5) This spending has failed to make college more 
     affordable.
       (6) In his 2012 State of the Union Address, President Obama 
     noted that, ``We can't just keep subsidizing skyrocketing 
     tuition; we'll run out of money.''
       (7) American students are chasing ever-increasing tuition 
     with ever-increasing debt. According to the Federal Reserve 
     Bank of New York, student debt nearly tripled between 2004 
     and 2012, and now stands at nearly $1 trillion. Student debt 
     now has the second largest balance after mortgage debt.
       (8) Students are carrying large debt loads and too many 
     fail to complete college or end up defaulting on these loans 
     due to their debt burden and a weak economy and job market.
       (9) Based on estimates from the Congressional Budget 
     Office, the Pell Grant Program will face a fiscal shortfall 
     beginning in fiscal year 2015 and continuing in each 
     subsequent year in the current budget window.
       (10) Failing to address these problems will jeopardize 
     access and affordability to higher education for America's 
     young people.
       (b) Policy on Higher Education Affordability.--It is the 
     policy of this resolution to address the root drivers of 
     tuition inflation, by--
       (1) targeting Federal financial aid to those most in need;
       (2) streamlining programs that provide aid to make them 
     more effective;
       (3) maintaining the maximum Pell grant award level at 
     $5,645 in each year of the budget window; and
       (4) removing regulatory barriers in higher education that 
     act to restrict flexibility and innovative teaching, 
     particularly as it relates to non-traditional models such as 
     online coursework and competency-based learning.

     SEC. 706. POLICY STATEMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION THROUGH THE 
                   CANCELLATION OF UNOBLIGATED BALANCES.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) According to the last available estimate from the 
     Office of Management and Budget, Federal agencies were 
     expected to hold $698 billion in unobligated balances at the 
     close of fiscal year 2013.
       (2) These funds represent direct and discretionary spending 
     made available by Congress that remains available for 
     expenditure beyond the fiscal year for which they are 
     provided.
       (3) In some cases, agencies are granted funding and it 
     remains available for obligation indefinitely.
       (4) The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 
     1974 requires the Office of Management and Budget to make 
     funds available to agencies for obligation and prohibits the 
     Administration from withholding or cancelling unobligated 
     funds unless approved by an act of Congress.
       (5) Greater congressional oversight is required to review 
     and identify potential savings from unneeded balances of 
     funds.
       (b) Policy Statement on Deficit Reduction Through the 
     Cancellation of Unobligated Balances.--Congressional 
     committees shall through their oversight activities identify 
     and achieve savings through the cancellation or rescission of 
     unobligated balances that neither abrogate contractual 
     obligations of the Government nor reduce or disrupt Federal 
     commitments under programs such as Social Security, veterans' 
     affairs, national security, and Treasury authority to finance 
     the national debt.
       (c) Deficit Reduction.--Congress, with the assistance of 
     the Government Accountability Office, the Inspectors General, 
     and other appropriate agencies should make it a high priority 
     to review unobligated balances and identify savings for 
     deficit reduction.

     SEC. 707. POLICY STATEMENT ON RESPONSIBLE STEWARDSHIP OF 
                   TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) The House of Representatives cut budgets for Members of 
     Congress, House committees, and leadership offices by 5 
     percent in 2011 and an additional 6.4 percent in 2012.

[[Page 4022]]

       (2) The House of Representatives achieved savings of $36.5 
     million over three years by consolidating House operations 
     and renegotiating contracts.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of this resolution that:
       (1) The House of Representatives must be a model for the 
     responsible stewardship of taxpayer resources and therefore 
     must identify any savings that can be achieved through 
     greater productivity and efficiency gains in the operation 
     and maintenance of House services and resources like 
     printing, conferences, utilities, telecommunications, 
     furniture, grounds maintenance, postage, and rent. This 
     should include a review of policies and procedures for 
     acquisition of goods and services to eliminate any 
     unnecessary spending. The Committee on House Administration 
     should review the policies pertaining to the services 
     provided to Members and committees of the House, and should 
     identify ways to reduce any subsidies paid for the operation 
     of the House gym, barber shop, salon, and the House dining 
     room.
       (2) No taxpayer funds may be used to purchase first class 
     airfare or to lease corporate jets for Members of Congress.

     SEC. 708. POLICY STATEMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION THROUGH THE 
                   REDUCTION OF UNNECESSARY AND WASTEFUL SPENDING.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) The Government Accountability Office (``GAO'') is 
     required by law to identify examples of waste, duplication, 
     and overlap in Federal programs, and has so identified dozens 
     of such examples.
       (2) In testimony before the Committee on Oversight and 
     Government Reform, the Comptroller General has stated that 
     addressing the identified waste, duplication, and overlap in 
     Federal programs ``could potentially save tens of billions of 
     dollars.''
       (3) In 2011 and 2012, the Government Accountability Office 
     issued reports showing excessive duplication and redundancy 
     in Federal programs including--
       (A) 209 ``Science, Technology, Engineering, and 
     Mathematics'' (``STEM'') education programs in 13 different 
     Federal agencies at a cost of $3 billion annually;
       (B) 200 separate Department of Justice crime prevention and 
     victim services grant programs with an annual cost of $3.9 
     billion in 2010;
       (C) 20 different Federal entities administer 160 housing 
     programs and other forms of Federal assistance for housing 
     with a total cost of $170 billion in 2010;
       (D) 17 separate Homeland Security preparedness grant 
     programs that spent $37 billion between fiscal year 2011 and 
     2012;
       (E) 13 programs, 3 tax benefits, and one loan program to 
     reduce diesel emissions; and
       (F) 94 different initiatives run by 11 different agencies 
     to encourage ``green building'' in the private sector.
       (4) The Federal Government spends about $80 billion each 
     year for information technology. GAO has identified broad 
     acquisition failures, waste, and unnecessary duplication in 
     the Government's information technology infrastructure. 
     Experts have estimated that eliminating these problems could 
     save 25 percent - or $20 billion - of the Government's annual 
     information technology budget.
       (5) Federal agencies reported an estimated $108 billion in 
     improper payments in fiscal year 2012.
       (6) Under clause 2 of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives, each standing committee must hold at least 
     one hearing during each 120 day period following its 
     establishment on waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in 
     Government programs.
       (7) According to the Congressional Budget Office, by fiscal 
     year 2014, 42 laws will expire, possibly resulting in $685 
     billion in unauthorized appropriations. Timely 
     reauthorizations of these laws would ensure assessments of 
     program justification and effectiveness.
       (8) The findings resulting from congressional oversight of 
     Federal Government programs should result in programmatic 
     changes in both authorizing statutes and program funding 
     levels.
       (b) Policy Statement on Deficit Reduction Through the 
     Reduction of Unnecessary and Wasteful Spending.--Each 
     authorizing committee annually shall include in its Views and 
     Estimates letter required under section 301(d) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 recommendations to the 
     Committee on the Budget of programs within the jurisdiction 
     of such committee whose funding should be reduced or 
     eliminated.

     SEC. 709. POLICY STATEMENT ON UNAUTHORIZED SPENDING.

       It is the policy of this resolution that the committees of 
     jurisdiction should review all unauthorized programs funded 
     through annual appropriations to determine if the programs 
     are operating efficiently and effectively. Committees should 
     reauthorize those programs that in the committees' judgment 
     should continue to receive funding.

               TITLE VIII--SENSE OF THE HOUSE PROVISIONS

     SEC. 801. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON THE IMPORTANCE OF CHILD 
                   SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT.

       It is the sense of the House that--
       (1) additional legislative action is needed to ensure that 
     States have the necessary resources to collect all child 
     support that is owed to families and to allow them to pass 
     100 percent of support on to families without financial 
     penalty; and
       (2) when 100 percent of child support payments are passed 
     to the child, rather than administrative expenses, program 
     integrity is improved and child support participation 
     increases.

  The CHAIR. No amendment shall be in order except those printed in 
House Report 113-21.
  Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall 
be considered as read, and shall be debatable for the time specified in 
the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent. The adoption of an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
shall constitute the conclusion of consideration of the concurrent 
resolution for amendment.
  After conclusion of consideration of the concurrent resolution for 
amendment, there shall be a final period of general debate which shall 
not exceed 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget.


 Amendment No. 1 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Mulvaney

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in 
House Report 113-21.
  Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                   2014.

       (a) Declaration.--Congress declares that this resolution is 
     the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2014 
     and that this resolution sets forth the appropriate budgetary 
     levels for fiscal years 2013 and 2015 through 2023.
       (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 2014.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Social Security.
Sec. 103. Postal Service discretionary administrative expenses.
Sec. 104. Major functional categories.

                        TITLE II--RECONCILIATION

Sec. 201. Reconciliation in the Senate.

                        TITLE III--RESERVE FUNDS

Sec. 301. Deficit-neutral reserve fund to replace sequestration.
Sec. 302. Deficit-neutral reserve funds to promote employment and job 
              growth.
Sec. 303. Deficit-neutral reserve funds to assist working families and 
              children.
Sec. 304. Deficit-neutral reserve funds for early childhood education.
Sec. 305. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for tax relief.
Sec. 306. Reserve fund for tax reform.
Sec. 307. Deficit-neutral reserve fund to invest in clean energy and 
              preserve the environment.
Sec. 308. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for investments in America's 
              infrastructure.
Sec. 309. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for America's servicemembers and 
              veterans.
Sec. 310. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for higher education.
Sec. 311. Deficit-neutral reserve funds for health care.
Sec. 312. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for investments in our Nation's 
              counties and schools.
Sec. 313. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for a farm bill.
Sec. 314. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for investments in water 
              infrastructure and resources.
Sec. 315. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for pension reform.
Sec. 316. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for housing finance reform.
Sec. 317. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for national security.
Sec. 318. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for overseas contingency 
              operations.
Sec. 319. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for terrorism risk insurance.
Sec. 320. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for postal reform.
Sec. 321. Deficit-reduction reserve fund for Government reform and 
              efficiency.

[[Page 4023]]

                        TITLE IV--BUDGET PROCESS

                     Subtitle A--Budget Enforcement

Sec. 401. Discretionary spending limits for fiscal years 2013 and 2014, 
              program integrity initiatives, and other adjustments.
Sec. 402. Point of order against advance appropriations.
Sec. 403. Adjustments for sequestration or sequestration replacement.

                      Subtitle B--Other Provisions

Sec. 411. Oversight of Government performance.
Sec. 412. Budgetary treatment of certain discretionary administrative 
              expenses.
Sec. 413. Application and effect of changes in allocations and 
              aggregates.
Sec. 414. Adjustments to reflect changes in concepts and definitions.
Sec. 415. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

                 TITLE V--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

Sec. 501. Direct spending.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

     SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

       The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023:
       (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution:
       (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
     follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $2,038,311,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,290,932,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,646,592,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,833,891,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,973,673,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,111,061,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,245,117,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,400,144,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,592,212,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,800,500,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,991,775,000,000.
       (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
     revenues should be changed are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $0,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $20,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $40,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $55,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $70,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $82,110,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $95,881,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $115,534,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $135,203,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $149,801,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $159,630,000,000.
       (2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new 
     budget authority are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $3,054,195,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,963,749,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,046,506,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,211,506,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,386,445,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,568,528,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,779,446,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,973,331,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,136,110,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,350,282,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,492,138,000,000.
       (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget 
     outlays are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $2,956,295,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,997,884,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,082,375,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,240,376,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,382,809,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,542,197,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,749,797,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,926,818,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,103,496,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,323,224,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,451,446,000,000.
       (4) Deficits.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
     resolution, the amounts of the deficits are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $917,984,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $706,952,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $435,783,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $406,486,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $409,137,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $431,136,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $504,680,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $526,674,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $511,283,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $522,724,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $459,672,000,000.
       (5) Public debt.--Pursuant to section 301(a)(5) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the appropriate levels of 
     the public debt are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $17,113,638,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $18,008,333,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $18,626,857,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $19,222,298,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $19,871,057,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $20,558,744,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $21,312,959,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $22,094,877,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $22,863,179,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $23,634,787,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $24,364,925,000,000.
       (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of 
     debt held by the public are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $12,274,763,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $13,059,985,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $13,588,003,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $14,081,252,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $14,574,683,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $15,081,187,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $15,669,625,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $16,297,499,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $16,929,319,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $17,600,005,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $18,229,414,000,000.

     SEC. 102. SOCIAL SECURITY.

       (a) Social Security Revenues.--For purposes of Senate 
     enforcement under sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, the amounts of revenues of the Federal 
     Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal 
     Disability Insurance Trust Fund are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $669,920,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $731,717,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $766,392,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $812,200,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $861,554,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $908,130,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $951,691,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $994,855,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $1,038,909,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $1,083,586,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $1,129,163,000,000.
       (b) Social Security Outlays.--For purposes of Senate 
     enforcement under sections 302 and 311 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, the amounts of outlays of the Federal 
     Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal 
     Disability Insurance Trust Fund are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $634,822,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $711,355,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $756,949,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $805,969,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $856,933,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $907,679,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $962,040,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $1,022,374,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $1,086,431,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $1,154,554,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $1,227,009,000,000.
       (c) Social Security Administrative Expenses.--In the 
     Senate, the amounts of new budget authority and budget 
     outlays of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust 
     Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund for 
     administrative expenses are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,643,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,658,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,782,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,801,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,966,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,941,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,174,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,144,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,390,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,358,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,617,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,584,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,844,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,810,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $7,070,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $7,036,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $7,301,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $7,266,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $7,541,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $7,505,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $7,789,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $7,751,000,000.

     SEC. 103. POSTAL SERVICE DISCRETIONARY ADMINISTRATIVE 
                   EXPENSES.

       In the Senate, the amounts of new budget authority and 
     budget outlays of the Postal Service for discretionary 
     administrative expenses are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $255,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $255,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $262,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $262,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $272,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $272,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $284,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $283,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $295,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $294,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $308,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $307,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $319,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $318,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $332,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $331,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $345,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $344,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $357,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $356,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $371,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $370,000,000.

[[Page 4024]]



     SEC. 104. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

       Congress determines and declares that the appropriate 
     levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years 
     2013 through 2023 for each major functional category are:
       (1) National Defense (050):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $648,215,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $658,250,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,243,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $599,643,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $567,553,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $575,701,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $575,019,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $575,203,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $582,648,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $573,557,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $590,411,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $574,884,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $598,867,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $587,226,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $607,454,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $595,192,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $616,137,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $603,369,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $625,569,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $617,186,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $636,480,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $621,603,000,000.
       (2) International Affairs (150):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,425,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,716,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,883,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,508,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,367,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,830,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,521,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,580,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $48,666,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,792,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $49,831,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,157,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $51,004,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,707,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,194,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,729,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,898,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $49,801,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,417,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $51,209,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $55,664,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,212,000,000.
       (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,154,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,949,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,700,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,426,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,301,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,022,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,019,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,553,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,749,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,229,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,508,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,962,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,264,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,655,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,030,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,408,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,795,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,073,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,590,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,851,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,396,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $35,643,000,000.
       (4) Energy (270):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,243,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,122,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,365,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,264,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,061,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,068,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,185,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $3,543,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,309,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $3,786,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,489,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,079,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,622,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,312,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,803,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,536,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,875,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,696,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,862,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,072,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,913,000,000.
       (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,150,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,682,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,919,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,021,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,872,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,165,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,055,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,394,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $45,500,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $45,681,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,245,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,014,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $48,036,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,112,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $49,596,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $49,435,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,174,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,074,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $51,331,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,862,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,759,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $51,703,000,000.
       (6) Agriculture (350):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,373,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,777,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,550,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $21,136,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,180,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,909,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,717,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,283,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,780,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,289,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,613,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,087,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,908,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,301,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,379,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,878,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,588,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,116,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,105,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,626,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,421,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,959,000,000.
       (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $-30,498,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-24,504,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,201,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,408,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $10,733,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-2,394,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $11,112,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-4,110,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $11,827,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-5,624,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,224,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-3,938,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,885,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-6,483,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,984,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-6,238,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,099,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-981,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,226,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-2,004,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,334,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-3,032,000,000.
       (8) Transportation (400):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $100,501,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $93,656,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $88,556,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $94,621,000,000.

[[Page 4025]]

       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $88,419,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $95,092,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $89,319,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $95,855,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $90,186,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $96,577,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $91,115,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $96,478,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $91,977,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $97,757,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $93,143,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $99,308,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $94,330,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $101,593,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $95,586,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $103,395,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $96,864,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $105,364,000,000.
       (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $51,911,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $38,409,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,992,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,776,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,362,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,033,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,808,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,233,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,360,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,216,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,442,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,660,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,610,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,831,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,212,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,873,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,828,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,154,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,461,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,487,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,098,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,953,000,000.
       (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
     (500):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $77,536,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $82,279,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $78,349,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $86,546,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $89,537,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $96,269,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $106,927,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $98,922,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $117,961,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $111,494,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $123,744,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $122,679,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $119,139,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $117,997,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $120,411,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $119,806,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $122,546,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $121,459,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $124,565,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $123,422,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $126,825,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $125,845,000,000.
       (11) Health (550):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $365,206,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $361,960,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $420,326,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $415,573,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $500,356,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $493,639,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $554,680,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $560,173,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $611,908,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $614,248,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $648,773,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $648,945,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $685,879,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $684,985,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $732,529,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $721,193,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $764,934,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $763,469,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $808,026,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $806,172,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $852,829,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $851,028,000,000.
       (12) Medicare (570):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $511,692,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $511,240,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $535,596,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $535,067,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $540,503,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $540,205,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $586,873,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $586,662,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $602,495,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $602,085,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $626,619,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $626,319,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $687,071,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $686,851,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $734,468,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $734,051,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $782,452,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $782,386,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $855,410,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $855,061,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $883,491,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $883,062,000,000.
       (13) Income Security (600):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $544,094,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $542,998,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $530,103,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $526,954,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $528,197,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $524,043,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $537,117,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $536,196,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $536,006,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $531,153,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $538,914,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $529,716,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $565,188,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $560,677,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $578,159,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $573,775,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $592,348,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $587,965,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $611,644,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $612,070,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $619,422,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $614,921,000,000.
       (14) Social Security (650):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,803,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,883,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,506,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,616,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,233,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,308,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,369,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,407,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,691,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,691,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,005,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,005,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,421,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,421,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,954,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,954,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,474,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,474,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,235,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $54,235,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,441,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $58,441,000,000.
       (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $140,646,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $138,860,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $145,488,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $145,254,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $150,218,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $149,672,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $162,493,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $161,876,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $161,405,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $160,549,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $159,902,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $159,031,000,000.

[[Page 4026]]

       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $171,529,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $170,622,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $176,188,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $175,286,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $180,118,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $179,169,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $191,846,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $190,875,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $188,517,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $187,433,000,000.
       (16) Administration of Justice (750):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,094,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $57,120,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $66,526,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $55,445,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $56,476,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $57,912,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $59,937,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $62,665,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $59,940,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,090,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $61,751,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $63,405,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $63,708,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $63,959,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $65,672,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,153,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $67,840,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $67,246,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $70,695,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $70,066,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $76,218,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $75,564,000,000.
       (17) General Government (800):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,263,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,616,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,527,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,258,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,540,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,995,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,616,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,640,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $25,247,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,497,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,039,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,377,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,724,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,210,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,520,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,089,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,437,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,996,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,353,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,900,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,304,000,000.
       (18) Net Interest (900):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $331,271,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $331,271,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $342,703,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $342,703,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $370,274,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $370,274,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $419,485,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $419,485,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $506,103,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $506,103,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $608,623,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $608,623,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $683,623,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $683,623,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $752,067,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $752,067,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $806,870,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $806,870,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $859,077,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $859,077,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $905,971,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $905,971,000,000.
       (19) Allowances (920):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,868,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $3,853,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,073,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,343,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,469,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,951,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $-35,734,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,231,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $-42,592,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-20,217,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $-51,675,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-36,445,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $-61,088,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-48,906,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $-68,207,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-61,192,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $-76,108,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-70,697,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $-84,378,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-80,463,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $-92,680,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-89,556,000,000.
       (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $-76,489,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-76,489,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $-75,946,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-75,946,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $-80,864,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-80,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $-86,391,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-86,391,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $-90,137,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-90,137,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $-90,503,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-90,503,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $-97,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-97,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $-98,916,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-98,916,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $-103,177,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-103,177,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $-105,117,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-105,117,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $-108,885,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $-108,885,000,000.

                        TITLE II--RECONCILIATION

     SEC. 201. RECONCILIATION IN THE SENATE.

       Not later than October 1, 2013, the Committee on Finance of 
     the Senate shall report changes in laws, bills, or 
     resolutions within its jurisdiction to increase the total 
     level of revenues by $975,000,000,000 for the period of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

                        TITLE III--RESERVE FUNDS

     SEC. 301. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND TO REPLACE 
                   SEQUESTRATION.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels and limits in this 
     resolution for one or more bills, joint resolutions, 
     amendments, motions, or conference reports that amend section 
     251A of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act 
     of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901a) or section 901(e) of the American 
     Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-240) to repeal or 
     revise the enforcement procedures established under those 
     sections, by the amounts provided in such legislation for 
     those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2023. For purposes of determining deficit-
     neutrality under this section, the Chairman may include the 
     estimated effects of any amendment or amendments to the 
     discretionary spending limits in section 251(c) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 
     U.S.C. 901(c)).

     SEC. 302. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUNDS TO PROMOTE EMPLOYMENT 
                   AND JOB GROWTH.

       (a) Employment and Job Growth.--The Chairman of the 
     Committee on the Budget of the Senate may revise the 
     allocations of a committee or committees, aggregates, and 
     other appropriate levels in this resolution for one or more 
     bills, joint resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference 
     reports related to employment and job growth, by the amounts 
     provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided 
     that such legislation would not increase the deficit over 
     either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (b) Small Business Assistance.--The Chairman of the 
     Committee on the Budget of the Senate may revise the 
     allocations of a committee or committees, aggregates, and 
     other appropriate levels in this resolution for one or more 
     bills, joint resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference 
     reports that provide assistance to small businesses, by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     over either the period of the total of fiscal years

[[Page 4027]]

     2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 
     2013 through 2023.
       (c) Unemployment Relief.--The Chairman of the Committee on 
     the Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports that 
     provide assistance to the unemployed, or improve the 
     unemployment compensation program, by the amounts provided in 
     such legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (d) Trade and International Agreements.--The Chairman of 
     the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may revise the 
     allocations of a committee or committees, aggregates, and 
     other appropriate levels in this resolution for one or more 
     bills, joint resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference 
     reports related to trade, including Trade Adjustment 
     Assistance programs or international agreements for economic 
     assistance, by the amounts provided in such legislation for 
     those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 303. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUNDS TO ASSIST WORKING 
                   FAMILIES AND CHILDREN.

       (a) Income Support.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     related to the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG), the 
     Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, child 
     support enforcement programs, or other assistance to working 
     families, by the amounts provided in such legislation for 
     those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (b) Housing Assistance.--The Chairman of the Committee on 
     the Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     related to housing assistance, which may include working 
     family rental assistance, or assistance provided through the 
     Housing Trust Fund, by the amounts provided in such 
     legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (c) Child Welfare.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     related to child welfare programs, which may include the 
     Federal foster care payment system, by the amounts provided 
     in such legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 304. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUNDS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD 
                   EDUCATION.

       (a) Pre-Kindergarten.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     related to a pre-kindergarten program or programs to serve 
     low-income children, by the amounts provided in such 
     legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (b) Child Care.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     related to child care assistance for working families, by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2023.
       (c) Home Visiting.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     related to a home visiting program or programs serving low-
     income mothers-to-be and low-income families, by the amounts 
     provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided 
     that such legislation would not increase the deficit over 
     either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.

     SEC. 305. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR TAX RELIEF.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that provide tax relief, 
     including extensions of expiring tax relief or refundable tax 
     relief, relief that supports innovation by United States 
     enterprises, or relief that expands the ability of startup 
     companies to benefit from the credit for research and 
     experimentation expenses, by the amounts provided in such 
     legislation for those purposes, provided that the provisions 
     in such legislation would not increase the deficit over 
     either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.

     SEC. 306. RESERVE FUND FOR TAX REFORM.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that reform the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 to ensure a sustainable revenue base 
     that leads to a fairer, more progressive, and more efficient 
     tax system than currently exists, and to a more competitive 
     business environment for United States enterprises, by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, 
     provided that the provisions in such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 307. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND TO INVEST IN CLEAN 
                   ENERGY AND PRESERVE THE ENVIRONMENT.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports related to--
       (1) the reduction of our Nation's dependence on imported 
     energy and the investment of receipts from domestic energy 
     production;
       (2) energy conservation and renewable energy development, 
     or new or existing approaches to clean energy financing;
       (3) the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program;
       (4) Federal programs for land and water conservation and 
     acquisition;
       (5) greenhouse gas emissions levels;
       (6) the preservation, restoration, or protection of the 
     Nation's public lands, oceans, coastal areas, or aquatic 
     ecosystems;
       (7) agreements between the United States and jurisdictions 
     of the former Trust Territory;
       (8) wildland fire management activities; or
       (9) the restructure of the nuclear waste program;
     by the amounts provided in such legislation for those 
     purposes, provided that such legislation would not increase 
     the deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 308. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR INVESTMENTS IN 
                   AMERICA'S INFRASTRUCTURE.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that provide for Federal 
     investment in the infrastructure of the United States, which 
     may include projects for transportation, housing, energy, 
     water, telecommunications, or financing through tax credit 
     bonds, by the amounts provided in such legislation for those 
     purposes, provided that such legislation would not increase 
     the deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 309. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR AMERICA'S 
                   SERVICEMEMBERS AND VETERANS.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports related to--
       (1) eligibility for both military retired pay and veterans' 
     disability compensation (concurrent receipt);
       (2) the reduction or elimination of the offset between 
     Survivor Benefit Plan annuities and Veterans' Dependency and 
     Indemnity Compensation;
       (3) the improvement of disability benefits or the process 
     of evaluating and adjudicating benefit claims for members of 
     the Armed Forces or veterans; or
       (4) the infrastructure needs of the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, including constructing or leasing space and 
     maintenance of Department facilities;

[[Page 4028]]

     by the amounts provided in such legislation for those 
     purposes, provided that such legislation would not increase 
     the deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 310. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR HIGHER EDUCATION.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that make higher education 
     more accessible and affordable, which may include legislation 
     to increase college enrollment and completion rates for low-
     income students, or promote college savings, by the amounts 
     provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided 
     that such legislation would not increase the deficit over 
     either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.

     SEC. 311. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUNDS FOR HEALTH CARE.

       (a) Physician Reimbursement.--The Chairman of the Committee 
     on the Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports that 
     increase payments made under, or permanently reform or 
     replace, the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula, 
     by the amounts provided in such legislation for those 
     purposes, provided that the provisions in such legislation 
     would not increase the deficit over either the period of the 
     total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the 
     total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (b) Extension of Expiring Health Care Policies.--The 
     Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may 
     revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that extend expiring Medicare, 
     Medicaid, or other health provisions, by the amounts provided 
     in such legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (c) Health Care Improvement.--The Chairman of the Committee 
     on the Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports that 
     promote improvements to health care delivery systems, which 
     may include changes that increase care quality, encourage 
     efficiency, or improve care coordination, and that improve 
     the fiscal sustainability of health care spending over the 
     long term, by the amounts provided in such legislation for 
     those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (d) Therapy Caps.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports that 
     protect access to outpatient therapy services (including 
     physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech-language 
     pathology services) through measures such as repealing or 
     increasing the current outpatient therapy caps, by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2023.
       (e) Drug Safety.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a 
     committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for one or more bills, joint 
     resolutions, amendments, motions, or conference reports 
     relating to drug safety, which may include legislation that 
     permits the safe importation of prescription drugs approved 
     by the Food and Drug Administration from a specified list of 
     countries, by the amounts provided in such legislation for 
     those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 312. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR INVESTMENTS IN OUR 
                   NATION'S COUNTIES AND SCHOOLS.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that make changes to or 
     provide for the reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
     393) or make changes to chapter 69 of title 31, United States 
     Code (commonly known as the ``Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act 
     of 1976''), or both, by the amounts provided in such 
     legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 313. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR A FARM BILL.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that provide for the 
     reauthorization of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 
     2008 (Public Law 110-246; 122 Stat. 1651) or prior Acts, 
     authorize similar or related programs, provide for revenue 
     changes, or any combination of the purposes under this 
     section, by the amounts provided in such legislation for 
     those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 314. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR INVESTMENTS IN 
                   WATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND RESOURCES.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that relate to water 
     infrastructure programs or make changes to the collection and 
     expenditure of the Harbor Maintenance Tax (subchapter A of 
     chapter 36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2023.

     SEC. 315. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR PENSION REFORM.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports to strengthen and reform the 
     pension system, by the amounts provided in such legislation 
     for those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 316. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR HOUSING FINANCE 
                   REFORM.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that promote appropriate 
     access to mortgage credit for individuals and families or 
     examine the role of government in the secondary mortgage 
     market, which may include legislation to restructure 
     government-sponsored enterprises, or provide for mortgage 
     refinance opportunities, by the amounts provided in such 
     legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 317. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that support Department of 
     Defense auditability and acquisition reform efforts, which 
     may include legislation that limits the use of incremental 
     funding, or that promotes affordability or appropriate 
     contract choice, by the amounts provided in such legislation 
     for those purposes, provided that such legislation would not 
     increase the deficit over either the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 318. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR OVERSEAS 
                   CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels and limits in this 
     resolution for one or more bills, joint resolutions, 
     amendments, motions, or conference reports related to the 
     support of Overseas Contingency Operations, by the amounts 
     provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided 
     that such legislation would not increase the deficit over 
     either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.

     SEC. 319. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR TERRORISM RISK 
                   INSURANCE.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this

[[Page 4029]]

     resolution for one or more bills, joint resolutions, 
     amendments, motions, or conference reports that make changes 
     to or provide for the reauthorization of the Terrorism Risk 
     Insurance Act (Public Law 107-297; 116 Stat. 2322), by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, 
     provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit 
     over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2013 
     through 2023.

     SEC. 320. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR POSTAL REFORM.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports to strengthen and reform the 
     United States Postal Service, by the amounts provided in such 
     legislation for those purposes, provided that such 
     legislation would not increase the deficit over either the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2018 or the 
     period of the total of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.

     SEC. 321. DEFICIT-REDUCTION RESERVE FUND FOR GOVERNMENT 
                   REFORM AND EFFICIENCY.

       The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate 
     may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution 
     for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, 
     motions, or conference reports that achieve savings through 
     the elimination, consolidation, or reform of Federal 
     programs, agencies, offices, and initiatives, or the sale of 
     Federal property, or reduce improper payments, and reduce the 
     deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal years 
     2013 through 2018 or the period of the total of fiscal years 
     2013 through 2023. The Chairman may also make adjustments to 
     the Senate's pay-as-you-go ledger over 6 and 11 years to 
     ensure that the deficit reduction achieved is used for 
     deficit reduction only. The adjustments authorized under this 
     section shall be of the amount of deficit reduction achieved.

                        TITLE IV--BUDGET PROCESS

                     Subtitle A--Budget Enforcement

     SEC. 401. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2013 
                   AND 2014, PROGRAM INTEGRITY INITIATIVES, AND 
                   OTHER ADJUSTMENTS.

       (a) Senate Point of Order.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     resolution, it shall not be in order in the Senate to 
     consider any bill or joint resolution (or amendment, motion, 
     or conference report on that bill or joint resolution) that 
     would cause the discretionary spending limits in this section 
     to be exceeded.
       (2) Supermajority waiver and appeals.--
       (A) Waiver.--This subsection may be waived or suspended in 
     the Senate only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of 
     the Members, duly chosen and sworn.
       (B) Appeals.--Appeals in the Senate from the decisions of 
     the Chair relating to any provision of this subsection shall 
     be limited to 1 hour, to be equally divided between, and 
     controlled by, the appellant and the manager of the bill or 
     joint resolution. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
     Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be 
     required to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a 
     point of order raised under this subsection.
       (b) Senate Discretionary Spending Limits.--In the Senate 
     and as used in this section, the term ``discretionary 
     spending limit'' means--
       (1) for fiscal year 2013--
       (A) for the security category, $684,000,000,000 in budget 
     authority; and
       (B) for the nonsecurity category, $359,000,000,000 in 
     budget authority; and
       (2) for fiscal year 2014--
       (A) for the revised security category, $497,352,000,000 in 
     budget authority; and
       (B) for the revised nonsecurity category, $469,023,000,000 
     in budget authority;
     as adjusted in conformance with the adjustment procedures in 
     this resolution.
       (c) Adjustments in the Senate.--
       (1) In general.--After a bill or joint resolution relating 
     to any matter described in paragraph (2) or (3) is placed on 
     the calendar, or upon the offering of an amendment or motion 
     thereto, or the laying down of an amendment between the 
     Houses or a conference report thereon--
       (A) the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
     Senate may adjust the discretionary spending limits, 
     budgetary aggregates, and allocations pursuant to section 
     302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, by the amount 
     of new budget authority in that measure for that purpose and 
     the outlays flowing therefrom; and
       (B) following any adjustment under subparagraph (A), the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate may report 
     appropriately revised suballocations pursuant to section 
     302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to carry out 
     this subsection.
       (2) Matters described.--Matters referred to in paragraph 
     (1) are as follows:
       (A) Emergency requirements.--Measures making appropriations 
     in a fiscal year for emergency requirements (and so 
     designated pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(i) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985).
       (B) Disability reviews and redeterminations.--Measures 
     making appropriations in a fiscal year for continuing 
     disability reviews and redeterminations (consistent with 
     section 251(b)(2)(B) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985).
       (C) Health care fraud and abuse.--Measures making 
     appropriations in a fiscal year for health care fraud and 
     abuse control (consistent with section 251(b)(2)(C) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985).
       (D) Disaster relief.--Measures making appropriations for 
     disaster relief (and so designated pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(D) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985).
       (3) Adjustments for overseas contingency operations.--
       (A) Adjustments.--The Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may adjust the discretionary spending 
     limits, allocations to the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     Senate, and aggregates for one or more--
       (i) bills reported by the Committee on Appropriations of 
     the Senate or passed by the House of Representatives;
       (ii) joint resolutions or amendments reported by the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
       (iii) amendments between the Houses received from the House 
     of Representatives or Senate amendments offered by the 
     authority of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; 
     or
       (iv) conference reports;
     making appropriations for overseas contingency operations by 
     the amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes 
     (and so designated pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of 
     the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985), up to the amounts specified in subparagraph (B).
       (B) Amounts specified.--The amounts specified are--
       (i) for fiscal year 2013, $99,670,000,000 in budget 
     authority (and outlays flowing therefrom); and
       (ii) for fiscal year 2014, $50,000,000,000 in budget 
     authority (and outlays flowing therefrom).
       (d) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``nonsecurity category'' means all 
     discretionary appropriations not included in the security 
     category;
       (2) the term ``revised nonsecurity category'' means all 
     discretionary appropriations other than in budget function 
     050;
       (3) the term ``revised security category'' means 
     discretionary appropriations in budget function 050; and
       (4) the term ``security category'' means discretionary 
     appropriations associated with agency budgets for the 
     Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, 
     the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Nuclear 
     Security Administration, the intelligence community 
     management account (95-0401-0-1-054), and all budget accounts 
     in budget function 150 (international affairs).

     SEC. 402. POINT OF ORDER AGAINST ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Point of order.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     it shall not be in order in the Senate to consider any bill, 
     joint resolution, motion, amendment, amendment between the 
     Houses, or conference report that would provide an advance 
     appropriation.
       (2) Definition.--In this section, the term ``advance 
     appropriation'' means any new budget authority provided in a 
     bill or joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2014 that first becomes available for any fiscal year 
     after 2014 or any new budget authority provided in a bill or 
     joint resolution making appropriations for fiscal year 2015 
     that first becomes available for any fiscal year after 2015.
       (b) Exceptions.--Advance appropriations may be provided--
       (1) for fiscal years 2015 and 2016 for programs, projects, 
     activities, or accounts identified in the joint explanatory 
     statement of managers accompanying this resolution under the 
     heading ``Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations'' in 
     an aggregate amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new 
     budget authority in each year;
       (2) for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; and
       (3) for the Department of Veterans Affairs for the Medical 
     Services, Medical Support and Compliance, and Medical 
     Facilities accounts of the Veterans Health Administration.
       (c) Supermajority Waiver and Appeal.--
       (1) Waiver.--In the Senate, subsection (a) may be waived or 
     suspended only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
     Members, duly chosen and sworn.
       (2) Appeal.--An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
     Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be 
     required to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a 
     point of order raised under subsection (a).
       (d) Form of Point of Order.--A point of order under 
     subsection (a) may be raised by a Senator as provided in 
     section 313(e) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
       (e) Conference Reports.--When the Senate is considering a 
     conference report on, or

[[Page 4030]]

     an amendment between the Houses in relation to, a bill, upon 
     a point of order being made by any Senator pursuant to this 
     section, and such point of order being sustained, such 
     material contained in such conference report shall be 
     stricken, and the Senate shall proceed to consider the 
     question of whether the Senate shall recede from its 
     amendment and concur with a further amendment, or concur in 
     the House amendment with a further amendment, as the case may 
     be, which further amendment shall consist of only that 
     portion of the conference report or House amendment, as the 
     case may be, not so stricken. Any such motion in the Senate 
     shall be debatable. In any case in which such point of order 
     is sustained against a conference report (or Senate amendment 
     derived from such conference report by operation of this 
     subsection), no further amendment shall be in order.
       (f) Inapplicability.--In the Senate, section 402 of S. Con. 
     Res. 13 (111th Congress) shall no longer apply.

     SEC. 403. ADJUSTMENTS FOR SEQUESTRATION OR SEQUESTRATION 
                   REPLACEMENT.

       (a) Adjustments Under Current Law.--If the enforcement 
     procedures established under section 251A of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 and section 
     901(e) of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 go into, 
     or remain in effect, the Chairman of the Committee on the 
     Budget of the Senate may adjust the allocation called for in 
     section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 
     U.S.C. 633(a)) to the appropriate committee or committees of 
     the Senate, and may adjust all other budgetary aggregates, 
     allocations, levels, and limits contained in this resolution, 
     as necessary, consistent with such enforcement.
       (b) Adjustments if Amended.--If a measure becomes law that 
     amends the discretionary spending limits established under 
     section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985, the adjustments to discretionary 
     spending limits under section 251(b) of that Act, or the 
     enforcement procedures established under section 251A of that 
     Act or section 901(e) of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 
     2012, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
     Senate may adjust the allocation called for in section 302(a) 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 633(a)) to 
     the appropriate committee or committees of the Senate, and 
     may adjust all other budgetary aggregates, allocations, 
     levels, and limits contained in this resolution, as 
     necessary, consistent with such measure.

                      Subtitle B--Other Provisions

     SEC. 411. OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE.

       In the Senate, all committees are directed to review 
     programs and tax expenditures within their jurisdiction to 
     identify waste, fraud, abuse, or duplication, and increase 
     the use of performance data to inform committee work. 
     Committees are also directed to review the matters for 
     congressional consideration identified on the Government 
     Accountability Office's High Risk list and the annual report 
     to reduce program duplication. Based on these oversight 
     efforts and performance reviews of programs within their 
     jurisdiction, committees are directed to include 
     recommendations for improved governmental performance in 
     their annual views and estimates reports required under 
     section 301(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to the 
     Committees on the Budget.

     SEC. 412. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF CERTAIN DISCRETIONARY 
                   ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

       In the Senate, notwithstanding section 302(a)(1) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, section 13301 of the Budget 
     Enforcement Act of 1990, and section 2009a of title 39, 
     United States Code, the joint explanatory statement 
     accompanying the conference report on any concurrent 
     resolution on the budget shall include in its allocations 
     under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     to the Committees on Appropriations amounts for the 
     discretionary administrative expenses of the Social Security 
     Administration and of the Postal Service.

     SEC. 413. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS 
                   AND AGGREGATES.

       (a) Application.--Any adjustments of allocations and 
     aggregates made pursuant to this 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 and aggregates resulting from these adjustments 
     shall be considered for the purposes of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 as allocations and aggregates contained in 
     this resolution.
       (c) Budget Committee Determinations.--For purposes of this 
     resolution the levels of new budget authority, outlays, 
     direct spending, new entitlement authority, revenues, 
     deficits, and surpluses for a fiscal year or period of fiscal 
     years shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by 
     the Committee on the Budget of the Senate.

     SEC. 414. ADJUSTMENTS TO REFLECT CHANGES IN CONCEPTS AND 
                   DEFINITIONS.

       Upon the enactment of a bill or joint resolution providing 
     for a change in concepts or definitions, the Chairman of the 
     Committee on the Budget of the Senate may make adjustments to 
     the levels and allocations in this resolution in accordance 
     with section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985.

     SEC. 415. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       Congress adopts the provisions of this title--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate, 
     and as such they shall be considered as part of the rules of 
     the Senate 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 
     the Senate to change those rules at any time, in the same 
     manner, and to the same extent as is the case of any other 
     rule of the Senate.

                 TITLE V--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

     SEC. 501. DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Means-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For means-tested direct spending, the average rate of 
     growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 6.7 percent.
       (2) For means-tested direct spending, the estimated average 
     rate of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-
     year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 6.2 percent 
     under current law
       (3) No significant reforms to means-tested direct spending 
     are proposed.
       (b) Nonmeans-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the average rate 
     of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 5.9 percent.
       (2) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the estimated 
     average rate of growth in the total level of outlays during 
     the 10-year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 5.3 
     percent.
       (3) No significant reforms to nonmeans-tested direct 
     spending are proposed.
       Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
     setting forth the congressional budget for the United States 
     Government for fiscal year 2014 and including the appropriate 
     budgetary levels for fiscal year 2013 and fiscal years 2015 
     through 2023.''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 122, the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, last year at this time I came before this body and I 
offered as an amendment, as a possible replacement, the budget offered 
by the President of the United States. It failed overwhelmingly. In 
fact, I think it failed to receive a single vote.
  I did that in order to promote a debate, and I think we had that 
debate. I think that was healthy.
  Remember, a budget is more than just a spending document. It is also 
a vision document. I had hoped to be able to do the exact same thing 
this year, to bring forth the President's budget to discuss not only 
the spending levels in that budget, but also the vision contained in 
that particular budget. Imagine my surprise then when this week came 
around and we waited for the President's budget and it was not offered.
  It was not offered for the first time in modern history. This is the 
first time in modern history that a President has failed to offer a 
budget before the United States House of Representatives took up the 
topic. It's the very first time since the Budget Act of 1921. I don't 
know how we're supposed to discuss the President's vision for the 
Nation as contained in the budget when it's not here. I think that's 
wrong.
  It's required by law, Mr. Chairman. The law requires the President to 
submit a budget before today. I believe this is now the third or fourth 
time he's been late during his Presidency. It's inexcusable. It's 
inexcusable, regardless of the party of the President, not to follow 
the law and not to offer a budget.
  So it's with great regret, Mr. Chairman, I'm not able to offer to you 
today for discussion before this body the vision for this Nation 
contained in the President's budget because no such documents exist. I 
actually tried, by the way. I offered a 34-page document full of 
question marks, but appropriately that was ruled out of order as not 
being able to be brought forward to the House. Again, it is with great 
reluctance I'm not able to offer the President's budget.

[[Page 4031]]

  Why am I here? I'm here instead to offer as a substitute the budget 
that passed the Senate Budget Committee last week. It's the first 
budget to be taken up by the Senate, I believe, in 4 years. I would 
like to think it's a direct result of the bipartisan action that this 
body took several weeks ago in passing No Budget, No Pay. The Senate 
assures us, Mr. Chairman, they were going to do a budget anyway. I took 
them at their word. And I'm glad that this body was able to pass out No 
Budget, No Pay in order to give them the additional incentive to do 
that.
  What have they done? What has the Senate offered us? What did the 
Senate pass out of committee last week on entirely partisan lines? They 
offered us a budget that increases taxes by $900 billion over the tax 
window. In fact, that's the smallest amount. That's the amount they 
admit to. If you take the Senate committee at their word, they also 
want to undo the sequester and add an additional $100 billion worth of 
stimulus money, and they want to do that without impacting the deficit. 
You can safely assume, I believe, that it's $1.5 trillion, not $900 
billion, but $1.5 trillion in new taxes out of our colleagues in the 
Senate on the Democratic committee.
  They increased spending by $265 billion over the baseline over the 
next decade, and they also spend $4.9 trillion more than does the 
Republican budget that we'll offer later today. Their spending, as 
offered in their budget, grows by 4.7 percent annually, one of the 
highest rates of growth other than the last several years in the 
history of the Nation.
  The deficit, according to their budget, in the year 2023, will be 
$566 billion. In contrast, the budget that we will be offering will be 
surplus in 2023. It will finally allow us to start paying down the 
debt; and there are no significant reforms at all in Medicare, Medicaid 
and Social Security.
  How you can have a vision for this country going forward and not at 
least discuss possible and reasonable reforms to those programs is 
beyond me, but somehow it passed out of the Senate committee.

                              {time}  1250

  Defense is cut by an additional quarter of a trillion dollars over 
the sequester cuts that we've already had and over the reductions that 
the Defense Department voluntarily took upon itself during the last 
budget process.
  Now, I've come before this body before, Mr. Chairman, and encouraged 
this body, in a bipartisan fashion, to look to the Defense Department 
as possible ways to save money, under the belief that there must be 
some money in the Defense Department that can be saved in a responsible 
fashion. What the Senate has done goes so far beyond that that it's 
hard to fathom--an additional quarter of a trillion dollars in defense 
spending reductions over the next 10 years.
  Finally, perhaps most tellingly and most importantly, the Senate 
budget never balances--ever. It never balances. What does that say? 
They have no plan for ever repaying the debt. You cannot repay the debt 
until we start moving to surplus, and any budget that never goes to 
surplus never pays down the debt. I've said it before and I'll say it 
again: if you borrow money from people and are never intending to pay 
it back, you're not borrowing it from them--you're stealing it from 
them. That's exactly what this budget contemplates: borrowing money and 
borrowing money with no intention--a stated position of no intention--
to ever be able to pay the money back.
  I'm glad they did it. I'm glad to think that they did it of their own 
accord without ``no budget-no pay'' hanging over their heads, and I 
applaud them for at least taking the first step in the last 4 years to 
put forth their vision of spending and of what the future of this 
country should hold. At the same time, I think it's incumbent upon us 
to have this debate and then to send a very strong message to the 
Senate that their ideas are not the right ideas for this country. I 
hope we get a chance to debate this further.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 10 minutes.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I actually had been prepared to come to 
the floor of this House and say this was a refreshing moment, that this 
was going to be a moment of bipartisanship. I commend the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney) for finally offering a balanced plan 
to reduce our long-term deficit and a plan that will make sure our 
economy grows rather than offering a plan that results in over 750,000 
fewer American jobs by the end of this year, and I hope that the 
gentleman will demonstrate his sincerity in the support of his own bill 
by voting for it. We will be able to tell whether this is simply some 
kind of stunt or a genuine effort.
  Mr. Chairman, let me say, with respect to the comments about the 
President's budget, I think everyone in this country knows that this 
Congress was here until January 2 of this year, trying to work out a 
compromise to avoid going over the fiscal cliff, and until we'd 
resolved that, the President had no idea how much revenue would be 
available for the budget. I think most families recognize that you need 
to know how much revenue is available as you put together a budget, 
number one.
  Number two, we've been lurching from one manufactured crisis to 
another. The sequester. You need to know how the sequester is going to 
turn out before you know how much money is going to be available for 
government agencies.
  Finally, when the President has to put together a budget, it's not 
like the budgets Members of Congress put together in which you have one 
amount for all of defense or just one amount for the function for all 
of health care and all of education. The President actually has to 
allocate that money among different agencies. That's part of the 
process. So the President will be submitting a budget now that we know 
what the revenue stream is, now that we have some idea as to where we 
are in terms of those other issues.
  I'm glad the gentleman brought forward this alternative, because it 
is the Senate Democratic proposal for the most part. Just for the 
record, he has left some stuff out, but it's close enough for 
negotiation and discussion purposes here.
  What this measure does is, number one, replaces the sequester. It 
replaces the sequester with a balanced approach to reducing our long-
term deficit so that you avoid the job losses that will result from the 
sequester. Our referees, our umpires--the nonpartisan Congressional 
Budget Office--has told us, if we allow that sequester to remain in 
place, you will have 750,000 fewer Americans working at the end of this 
year. We also know that you'll have 2 million fewer jobs next year.
  So it's a good thing that the gentleman brought to the floor a 
proposal to replace the sequester. After all, in comments last year, 
the Republican leader, Mr. Cantor, called for a plan to replace the 
sequester, so we support that.
  The gentleman talks about the Senate proposal on taxes. What he 
doesn't tell you is what the Senate proposal does. Like the House 
Democratic proposal, it proposes to balance the budget through a 
combination of cuts but also cuts to tax expenditures. These are the 
special preferences and deductions in the Tax Code. We say, yes, we 
should eliminate some of those tax preferences for very high-income 
individuals. Our colleagues tell us there are about $4 trillion worth 
of those that mostly go to high-income individuals. We say, okay, let's 
close some of those tax breaks of about $1 trillion over 10 years to 
help reduce the deficit. What's different between the Republican plan 
and this plan that our colleague has brought up is that they propose to 
provide tax cuts for very wealthy people, financed by increasing the 
tax burden on middle-income people.
  We put that question to the test in the Budget Committee just the 
other day. We said, if your plan doesn't propose to give folks at the 
top a big tax break--because you do in your budget drop it from 39 
percent to 25 percent.

[[Page 4032]]

So a millionaire sees more than a third cut in his rate right off the 
bat. So we said, well, if it's not your intention to finance that by 
increasing middle class taxes, you should support this amendment. It 
was called the Protect the American Middle Class from Tax Increases, 
and it was very simple. It said, as part of tax reform, don't raise 
taxes on middle-income people to finance your tax breaks for folks at 
the very top. Every Republican voted ``no.''
  So, yes, this plan that the gentleman has brought forward today, 
apparently under sort of a mock bipartisanship, will reduce the deficit 
in a balanced way. It calls for shared responsibility, and it certainly 
does not give folks at the very top a tax break financed by middle-
income taxpayers like the Republican proposal does.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MULVANEY. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Campbell).
  Mr. CAMPBELL. I thank the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Sometimes, Mr. Chairman, you live in a neighborhood. You look down 
the street, and there's a neighbor there. They've got new cars, and 
they're remodeling the kitchen, and they take a lot of expensive 
vacations. You look down the street, and you wonder: How are they doing 
that? They live on the same street that we live on. How are they doing 
all that stuff? And you're tempted. You sit there and think, well, why 
don't we get some new cars, and why don't we redo the kitchen and take 
some longer, nicer, more expensive trips. Then, one day, the sticker 
goes up on the window of that house that says that they have to leave. 
The moving van comes up, and the house is foreclosed upon--the cars go 
away; they can't use the kitchen anymore; they're not taking any more 
trips. Then you realize you made the right decision.
  It was a mirage. It looked like they could pay for all that, but they 
couldn't. This is an allegory for what's going on now.
  The United States has neighbors in the world--Greece, Spain, Cyprus, 
Japan--and they have those stickers going up, those foreclosure things 
going up, because they can't pay for what they're doing. The Senate 
budget that's before us follows that same path--a mirage of having a 
lot of what seems to be great things, but you can't pay for them, and 
eventually that eviction and that foreclosure will come.
  We cannot do that. We cannot foreclose on Medicare. We cannot 
foreclose on the things that we provide for people. We cannot foreclose 
on the job engine that is this country. And we don't foreclose on it by 
having a balanced approach, which means balancing the budget, which 
means bringing the budget into balance, into line, so that those 
stickers don't go up on this house we call the United States of 
America.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, the only comparison between these 
budgets we're debating and what's going on in Europe is that the 
Republican budget proposes the same European-style austerity approach 
that many European countries tried, and as a result, they've seen their 
economies slip back into recession. We want to avoid slowing down 
economic growth in this country, which is why we're really glad that 
the gentleman from South Carolina brought this particular budget 
proposal to the floor of the House, and we hope he will vote for it.
  With that, I yield 2 minutes to a terrific member of the Budget 
Committee, the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Castor).

                              {time}  1300

  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague, Mr. Van 
Hollen.
  Mr. Chairman, Democrats and Republicans agree that deficit reduction 
is important; and, in fact, over the past year and a half, we've 
achieved over $2.7 trillion in debt reduction. But now, the Republicans 
want to take us through a charade with this Tea Party budget.
  If enacted, the Republican budget would weaken America's recovery. It 
would undermine what makes America great and what makes America strong, 
like education, the ability of students to attend college, medical 
research and innovation, the ability of our older neighbors to live 
their lives in dignity in their retirement years through Medicare and 
long-term care.
  Now, we get a lot of advice, and economists across the board, in fact 
our own Congressional Budget Office, advise that the best and fastest 
way to reduce the deficit is to make sure that people across America 
have jobs and are working. So it is inexplicable that the Republican 
budget proposes to eliminate jobs in construction, in education, 
scientific research, and instead heap the burden on middle class 
families.
  Experts predict that the Republican budget will result in job losses 
of 2 million fewer jobs next year alone, and that's on top of 750,000 
jobs lost by the end of the year due to the sequester Republicans will 
not replace, just as the economy is improving for our neighbors and 
small businesses back home.
  In contrast, the Democratic alternative will generate 1.2 million 
more jobs and stop the sequester. And in committee, Democrats proposed 
to close those special interest tax loopholes that riddle our Tax Code, 
and Republicans said, no. Democrats proposed to offset unwise 
Republican cuts to medical research like Alzheimer's, cancer, diabetes 
research at NIH; Republicans said, no. Democrats tried to cut the 
special interest spending in the Tax Code to offset Republican cuts to 
students who rely on Pell Grants; but Republicans said, no.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield an additional 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlelady.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. I thank the gentleman.
  Democrats in the Budget Committee proposed to strengthen Medicare and 
replace the Republican plan to turn Medicare into a voucher program. 
All it does is simply shift the cost to our families and older 
neighbors.
  Mr. Chairman, this Republican budget is not consistent with American 
values. It is not fiscally responsible. It is a charade. It is a 
capitulation to the Tea Party. It does not serve us well in economic 
recovery and the ways we want to grow America. It's a plan for economic 
weakness. It's a receding vision of American greatness in education, 
scientific research and infrastructure, and dignity for our parents and 
grandparents in their retirement years.
  I urge you to vote ``no'' on the Republican budget and support the 
balanced Democratic alternative.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from South Carolina has 2 minutes remaining. 
The gentleman from Maryland has 1 minute remaining and the right to 
close.
  Mr. MULVANEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McClintock).
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Our 
fiscal problem can be summed up in just three numbers: 39, 37, and 64. 
Thirty-nine percent is the combined increase of inflation and 
population over the past 10 years. Thirty-seven percent is the increase 
in revenues. The third number is what's killing us: 64 percent is the 
increase in spending. It's nearly twice the rate of inflation and 
population growth.
  This has never been a revenue problem; it has always been a spending 
problem. Yet characteristic of other Democratic budgets, the Senate 
further accelerates spending while trying to chase it with $1 trillion 
of new taxes. And despite $1 trillion of new taxes, they can't ever 
balance their budget. And there's a reason: because it's a spending 
problem, and dogmatically trying to address it on the revenue side will 
simply drive more and more spending until we become Greece or Detroit.
  Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to close, and I yield myself 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, the last time I was at this table and was accused of 
doing something for a political stunt or a gimmick was for No Budget, 
No Pay. So I'll take those criticisms because I think we were able to 
move in the right direction with that particular bill.

[[Page 4033]]

  I would simply ask my friend if he's more bothered by this political 
stunt or by the stunt being perpetrated by the President of the United 
States for not offering a budget. We had time to do one. He had time to 
do one. The President clearly had time to do one and is intentionally 
not delivering it to us, and I think that does a disservice to the 
entire process.
  Finally, all of that said, I want to thank my friend from Maryland 
for reminding us once again that only in Washington, D.C., can a cut 
never cut, can a freeze never freeze, and a balanced approach to a 
budget never balance.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I will just ask our colleagues to take 
a look at the latest analysis put forward by our own Congressional 
Budget Office, the professionals, the referees here. What they tell us 
is that half of the deficit in this year is as a result of the fact 
that millions of Americans are still looking for work. Three-quarters 
of the projected deficit next year is for the very reason, which is why 
we get to the heart of the issue, by going after the jobs deficit and 
then reducing the deficit in a balanced manner over a long period of 
time.
  The issue isn't whether we reduce our deficits dramatically; it is 
how we do it. We call for a balanced approach that, yes, asks the very 
wealthy people to get rid of some of their special interest tax breaks 
which our Republican colleagues concede they have, but get rid of them 
in part to reduce the deficit. Our colleagues refuse to take one penny 
from closing tax loopholes--not one--to help reduce the deficit. 
They'll only do that to help finance tax breaks for higher-income 
individuals.
  So, Mr. Chairman, we focus right now on jobs, growing the economy, 
and a balanced approach to deficit reduction.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney).
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MULVANEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina will be 
postponed.


 Amendment No. 2 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Scott of 
                                Virginia

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in 
House Report 113-21.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the 
Congressional Black Caucus to offer an amendment.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL 
                   YEAR 2014.

       (a) Declaration.--The Congress determines and declares that 
     this concurrent resolution establishes the budget for fiscal 
     year 2014 and sets forth appropriate budgetary levels for 
     fiscal years 2015 through 2023.
       (b) Table of Contents.--

Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2014.
Sec. 2. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 3. Major functional categories.
Sec. 4. Direct spending.

     SEC. 2. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

       The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023:
       (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution:
       (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
     follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,485,132,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,835,492,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,025,191,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,170,973,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,307,451,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,441,437,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,588,909,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,774,309,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,980,999,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,175,445,000,000.
       (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
     revenues should be changed are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $214,200,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $228,900,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $246,300,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $267,300,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $278,500,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $292,200,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $304,300,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $317,300,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $330,300,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $343,300,000,000.
       (2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new 
     budget authority are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $3,325,280,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,188,007,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,291,567,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,442,524,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,623,964,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,820,306,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $4,017,742,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,190,085,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,421,398,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,575,518,000,000.
       (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget 
     outlays are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $3,155,063,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,235,190,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,354,518,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,457,686,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,608,488,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,787,194,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,966,920,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,152,140,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,389,918,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,531,318,000,000.
       (4) Deficits (on-budget).--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the amounts of the deficits (on-budget) 
     are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: -$669,928,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: -$399,697,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: -$329,329,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: -$286,712,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: -$301,036,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: -$345,756,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: -$378,011,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: -$377,831,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: -$408,918,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: -$355,873,000,000.
       (5) Debt subject to limit.--Pursuant to section 301(a)(5) 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the appropriate 
     levels of the public debt are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $17,946,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $18,528,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $19,045,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $19,571,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $20,128,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $20,723,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $21,355,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $21,990,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $22,647,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $23,273,000,000,000.
       (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of 
     debt held by the public are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $13,019,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $13,511,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $13,927,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $14,298,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $14,674,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $15,104,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $15,583,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $16,082,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $16,638,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $17,164,000,000,000.

     SEC. 3. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

       The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate 
     levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years 
     2013 through 2023 for each major functional category are:
       (1) National Defense (050):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,243,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $572,903,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,377,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $561,758,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $567,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $567,443,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $577,839,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $569,830,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $588,142,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $573,817,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $598,961,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $588,374,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $612,296,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $600,383,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $626,112,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $613,415,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $639,937,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $632,154,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $654,717,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $641,132,000,000.
       (2) International Affairs (150):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $51,883,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,386,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,867,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,023,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $48,021,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $45,986,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $49,166,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,842,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,331,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,582,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:

[[Page 4034]]

       (A) New budget authority, $51,504,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,107,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,694,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $49,159,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,398,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,256,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,917,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $51,665,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $56,164,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,685,000,000.
       (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,675,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,435,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,301,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,286,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,019,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $35,513,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,249,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,277,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,008,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,894,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,764,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,229,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,530,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,919,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,295,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,562,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,090,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $35,340,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,896,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,132,000,000.
       (4) Energy (270):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,469,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,409,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,718,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,031,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,844,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,312,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,971,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,464,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,155,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,797,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,291,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,967,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,476,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,197,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,552,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,361,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,680,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,531,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,756,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,586,000,000.
       (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $49,932,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,589,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $48,006,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,779,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,206,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,244,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,167,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,758,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,935,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,420,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $48,747,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $49,103,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,329,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,268,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,924,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,813,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,092,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $51,612,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,536,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,469,000,000.
       (6) Agriculture (350):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,731,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,880,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,359,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,109,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,016,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,594,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,750,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,247,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,892,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,365,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,326,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,689,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,656,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,129,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,031,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,529,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,319,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,816,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,697,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $24,210,000,000.
       (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,268,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,480,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $11,033,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$2,097,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $11,537,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$3,686,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $12,377,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$5,074,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,774,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$3,388,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,435,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$5,933,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,534,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$5,688,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,649,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$431,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,576,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,346,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,684,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,318,000,000.
       (8) Transportation (400):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $226,861,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $163,900,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $158,939,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $169,966,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $114,139,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $143,646,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,306,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $120,816,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $98,555,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $113,910,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,747,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $108,344,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $97,973,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $105,477,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,230,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $106,052,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $100,546,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $107,314,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $101,894,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $109,033,000,000.
       (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,804,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,383,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,030,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,845,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $18,296,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,768,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,564,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,197,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,350,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $18,620,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,222,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $15,720,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,527,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,887,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,846,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,696,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $15,170,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,733,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $15,494,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,895,000,000.
       (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
     (500):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $197,949,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $146,873,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $148,293,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $160,216,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $121,086,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $138,654,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $123,937,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $130,663,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $124,754,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $132,478,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:

[[Page 4035]]

       (A) New budget authority, $120,329,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $122,399,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $121,651,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $121,604,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $123,541,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $122,776,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $125,792,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $124,488,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $128,190,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $126,798,000,000.
       (11) Health (550):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $429,462,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $420,123,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $502,656,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $497,464,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $557,280,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $563,313,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $614,808,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $617,163,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $651,773,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $652,143,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $688,979,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $687,987,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $735,629,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $724,222,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $768,134,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $766,611,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $811,326,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $809,418,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $860,454,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $858,599,000,000.
       (12) Medicare (570):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $524,031,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $523,502,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $526,976,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $526,678,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $581,414,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $581,203,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $599,410,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $599,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $624,422,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $624,122,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $685,561,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $685,341,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $735,048,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $734,631,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $786,326,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $786,260,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $862,941,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $862,592,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $894,656,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $894,227,000,000.
       (13) Income Security (600):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $538,349,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $530,912,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $532,151,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $528,373,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $542,496,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $541,468,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $541,783,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $536,584,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $544,969,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $535,708,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $549,588,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $544,881,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $562,308,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $557,788,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $576,550,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $572,051,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $595,538,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $595,857,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $603,269,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $598,661,000,000.
       (14) Social Security (650):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,504,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,614,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,231,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,306,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,367,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,405,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,689,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,689,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,003,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,003,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,419,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,419,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,951,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,951,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,471,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,471,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,232,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $54,232,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,438,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $58,438,000,000.
       (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $149,837,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $147,441,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $154,547,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $153,083,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $166,800,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $165,755,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $165,689,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $164,565,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $164,161,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $163,218,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $175,764,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $174,786,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $180,399,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $179,426,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $184,304,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $183,285,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $196,006,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $194,967,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $192,651,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $191,499,000,000.
       (16) Administration of Justice (750):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $78,433,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $61,461,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $62,473,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $64,304,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $61,934,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $66,686,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $60,937,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $67,245,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $62,747,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,147,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $64,704,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,192,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $66,668,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $66,172,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $68,836,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $68,221,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $74,870,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $74,220,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $77,591,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $76.916,000,000.
       (17) General Government (800):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,041,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $25,746,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,686,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,450,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,428,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,801,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,078,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,525,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,940,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,430,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,825,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,120,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,663,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,921,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,547,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,843,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,460,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,765,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,369,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,721,000,000.
       (18) Net Interest (900):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $342,387,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $342,387,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $369,800,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $369,800,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $417,006,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $417,006,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $499,379,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $499,379,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $594,921,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $594,921,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $664,007,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $664,007,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $725,547,000,000.

[[Page 4036]]

       (B) Outlays, $725,547,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $773,662,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $773,662,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $820,096,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $820,096,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $861,941,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $861,941,000,000.
       (19) Allowances (920):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,367,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,196,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,428,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,947,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,495,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,313,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,562,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,466,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,635,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,564,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,707,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,636,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,779,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2.708,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,854,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,780,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,927,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,854,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $3,006,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,927,000,000.
       (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$75,946,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$75,946,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$80,864,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$80,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$86,391,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$86,391,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,137,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,137,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,503,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,503,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$97,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$97,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$98,916,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$98,916,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$103,177,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$103,177,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$105,117,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$105,117,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$108,885,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$108,885,000,000.
       (21) Overseas Contingency Operations (970):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $70,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,387,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $32,732,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $12,488,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $4,186,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $1,239,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $399,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $133,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $104,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $33,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $16,000,000.

     SEC. 4. DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Means-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For means-tested direct spending, the average rate of 
     growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 6.7 percent.
       (2) For means-tested direct spending, the estimate average 
     rate of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-
     year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 6.2 percent 
     under current law.
       (3) This concurrent resolution retains the social safety 
     net that has lifted millions of Americans out of poverty and 
     protects both the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program 
     and Medicaid from draconian spending cuts.
       (b) Nonmeans-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the average rate 
     of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 5.9 percent.
       (2) For nonmeans-test direct spending, the estimated 
     average rate of growth in the total level of outlays during 
     the 10-year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 5.3 
     percent under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for nonmeans-tested direct spending:
       (A) For Medicare, this budget rejects proposals to end the 
     Medicare guarantee and shift rising health care costs onto 
     seniors by replacing Medicare with vouchers or premium 
     support for the purchase of private insurance. Such proposals 
     will expose seniors and persons with disabilities on fixed 
     incomes to unacceptable financial risks, and they will weaken 
     the traditional Medicare program. Instead, this budget builds 
     on the success of the Affordable Care Act, which made 
     significant strides in health-care cost containment and put 
     into place a framework for continuous innovation. This budget 
     supports comprehensive reforms to give physicians and other 
     care providers incentives to provide high-quality, 
     coordinated, efficient care, in a manner consistent with the 
     goals of fiscal sustainability. It makes no changes that 
     reduce benefits available to seniors and individuals with 
     disabilities in Medicare.
       (B) Any savings derived from changes or reforms to Medicare 
     and Social Security should be used to extend the solvency of 
     these vital programs and not be used to offset the cost of 
     cutting taxes.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 122, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott) and a Member opposed each will control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  The underlying Republican budget dismantles the Medicare guarantee. 
It cuts Medicaid in the last year by 25 percent and includes 
unspecified cuts in a category called ``other mandatory spending.'' 
That category, of course, is Social Security and pensions for veterans 
and Federal employees. And then it cuts other essential Federal 
programs. It also repeals ObamaCare, but keeps in place the savings and 
tax increases that pay for it. The Republican budget also includes a 
$5.7 trillion tax cut that primarily benefits the wealthiest Americans 
and then somehow claims it will be revenue neutral by raising somebody 
else's taxes by $5.7 trillion, an average of about $2,000 for every 
man, woman, and child in America every year.
  Mr. Chairman, the Congressional Black Caucus budget on the other hand 
is based on reality and uses real numbers. Our budget makes tough 
choices, but not at the expense of the most vulnerable Americans. The 
CBC budget calls for revenue enhancements of $2.7 trillion over the 
next 10 years. The budget shows that this is a real and achievable goal 
by highlighting approximately $4.2 trillion in revenue options that the 
Congress could use to achieve the $2.7 trillion in new revenues, such 
as limiting the deductibility of corporate interest payments, limiting 
the special tax breaks and corporate loopholes that are baked into our 
Tax Code, treating capital gains and dividends like regular income. 
And, incidentally, Mr. Chairman, this amount is less than half of the 
$5.7 trillion in tax increases assumed in the Republican budget.

                              {time}  1310

  The revenue enhancements called for in our budget will be used to 
totally cancel the sequester, to pay for a $500 billion jobs bill that 
will put more than 5 million Americans back to work, and to provide for 
an additional $300 billion in long-term investments in our economy 
through education, job training, health care, science, and research.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds.
  Even with these additional investments, our budget is projected to 
put our Nation back on a sustainable path because the deficit reduction 
is more than the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction commission 10-year 
goal.
  Mr. Chairman, the CBC budget shows that we can create jobs, invest in 
education, transportation, and research, and avoid devastating health 
care cuts and achieve the 10-year Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction 
goal. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to support the Congressional 
Black Caucus budget.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 4037]]


  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 15 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend my friend, Mr. 
Scott, for bringing forward a budget on behalf of the Congressional 
Black Caucus. I think it's important that we have all sorts of options 
here on the floor to be able to discuss as they relate to a budget.
  I would note a couple of items that he conveniently left out. One is 
that the budget that the CBC brings to the floor--this will come as no 
surprise, Mr. Chairman--never gets to balance, which means it continues 
to spend more money than the government takes in, continues to spend 
more money than Washington takes in. The people of this great country 
understand that we can't continue going down this road over and over 
and over and over.
  A couple of points that Mr. Scott made regarding the Republican 
budget, which is the budget that is the base budget here that we're 
bringing to the floor that, in fact, does get to balance in a 
responsible way:
  It saves and strengthens and secures Medicare, as opposed to the 
misinformation that was provided by the other side;
  It makes certain that States have the kind of flexibility so that 
they're able to provide the highest quality of health care to their 
Medicaid population;
  It doesn't, as a matter of fact, address in a specific way the issue 
of Social Security because it provides for a reserve fund so that that 
is able to be addressed in a more specific way through the committee 
structure, which is also the important thing to recognize about the 
issue of taxes.
  Our friends on the other side are so specific about what they accuse 
us of regarding taxes, but, in fact, as you know, Mr. Chairman, it's 
the Ways and Means Committee that will ultimately define that.
  A couple of items that he conveniently left out on the budget that he 
is proposing is that they do raise taxes. In fact, they raise taxes by 
$2.8 trillion--$2.8 trillion over the next 10 years--and much of that 
increase in taxes is in the area of those who create jobs. We all know 
that if you tax something, you get less of it. So by taxing job 
creators, we'll get fewer jobs, and, Mr. Chairman, that's the last 
place we need to be heading right now. They spend $5.7 trillion more 
than the Republican budget that's being proposed, and they add another 
$2.9 trillion to the debt relative to the base budget that we're 
working on today.
  I also want to address the issue of business taxes. They talk about 
removing the incentives that move jobs overseas. Well, Mr. Chairman, 
the biggest incentive to moving jobs overseas is that the United States 
now has the highest business tax rate in the industrialized world. If 
you're a business and you're planning on either expanding your business 
or you're thinking about starting a business here in the United States 
and you go to the line that says taxes, the other side of that says, 
no, go somewhere else, get out of here, because taxes are lower 
elsewhere, which means that jobs are being created elsewhere. We're 
driving jobs overseas by virtue of our current tax structure, and our 
friends on the other side of the aisle, especially with the CBC budget, 
actually increase that as opposed to decrease that.
  I do, however, want to commend them, once again, for bringing a 
budget forward because, as you've heard earlier today and in the 
conversations around the budget, the President has not. We did find it. 
I found the President's budget. Here it is. Not a doggone thing on this 
poster, Mr. Chairman, because the President hasn't brought anything to 
us.
  Now, that might be amusing to some, but the fact of the matter is 
that the law states that the President of the United States is required 
to present a budget to Congress by the first Monday in February. That 
was February 4 this year. We're a little over 6 weeks beyond that. The 
President has flagrantly--flagrantly--ignored his statutory 
responsibility to bring to the United States Congress a budget.
  Now, some folks on the other side say, Oh, it happens all the time. 
Don't worry about that. It happens all the time. Well, as a matter of 
fact, Mr. Chairman, in just one term, President Obama has missed the 
budget deadline more than any other President. He's now missed it four 
out of five times.
  In the 90 years between 1923 and 2013, President Obama is the only 
President to miss the deadline 2 years in a row. He's the only 
President who's missed the deadline 3 out of 4 years in his first term, 
and he holds the record for the longest delay--98 days. Maybe that's 
the record he's trying to beat, Mr. Chairman.
  So I want to commend, again, my colleagues in the Congressional Black 
Caucus for bringing forward a budget. As I say, I think it's extremely 
important that we have all sorts of different ideas out here on the 
floor to be able to debate and have people take a perspective on and 
have the opportunity to vote ``yea'' or ``nay'' on. I would 
respectfully suggest, however, that their budget moves this country in 
the wrong direction, not the right direction, and we'll urge opposition 
to their budget proposal.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), a member of the Budget 
Committee.
  Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much, gentleman from Virginia, for yielding 
me the time.
  It's really my privilege to discuss the jobs program that is at the 
heart of the Congressional Black Caucus budget. The Congressional Black 
Caucus does acknowledge that, while me must address our debt and 
deficits, in the short run, an austerity budget, as the Republicans 
have proposed, hurts our economy rather than helps.
  We have proposed a comprehensive jobs plan, paid for proudly with the 
largesse and the revenue that the rich have received and tax reform 
measures that will propel our economic recovery for everyone, not just 
the haves, improve our economic competitiveness, and provide 
opportunities for those communities that still have not reaped the 
benefit of recent economic resurgence.
  The CBC budget includes a $100 billion investment in a national 
direct job creation program estimated to create 2 million jobs 
directly, as well as another 800,000 jobs indirectly in the private 
sector; $50 billion for school modernization; $50 billion for 
preserving teacher, law enforcement, and first responder jobs, good 
public service jobs that we all need; $230 billion for investing in our 
Nation's crumbling infrastructure; $50 billion in rebuilding America's 
neighborhoods; $13 billion in job training programs; and another $7 
billion in summer jobs programs.
  Our significant investment in jobs is the core reason why I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Congressional Black Caucus budget.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, what's the time remaining on each 
side?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia has 9\3/4\ minutes remaining, 
and the gentleman from Virginia has 10\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita), a member of the Budget 
Committee.
  Mr. ROKITA. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding the time.
  I agree with the gentleman from Georgia. It's good to have debate. 
It's good to have choices. It's good to have options, but that doesn't 
mean every option is equally good. And we're faced with that situation 
right here, right now, and that's why I rise in opposition to the CBC 
substitute budget.
  There are different ways to balance a budget. Many, most Americans, 
many of us here, think that taking 20 percent of the value of a 
country's GDP, like this Federal Government does and spends it, is more 
than enough to run it and most anything else.
  But to be fair, there are other ways to balance, and one of those 
ways is to raise revenue. And I want to examine just a few of the ways 
that this substitute budget proposes to run the Federal Government by 
raising revenue.

[[Page 4038]]



                              {time}  1320

  I see from all the different ideas here that their intention was to 
take from whom they believe are the richest Americans, the wealthiest 
Americans, those who haven't paid their fair share, the 1 percent, 
however you want to phrase it, but let's look at it more closely.
  One, taxing capital gains and dividends as ordinary income at a top 
rate of 39.6 percent, I think this budget forgets how many middle class 
Americans have 401(k)s, how many of us across the Nation invest in the 
stock market, how many union members still on the old pension plans, 
those dinosaur plans, still rely on the stock market for their 
retirement. What are these capital gains and dividends going to do to 
them? They're not the richest, for sure.
  Taxing financial transactions at 0.25 percent of the asset's value, 
the same thing, Mr. Chairman. What about all the middle class 
individuals, so many Americans in this country that rely for their 
retirement not just on Social Security but on 401(k)s, union members 
who rely on pensions? And what's it going to be like for them when 
we're taking simply more from them from their retirement?
  And then perhaps the most insidious, returning estate tax levels to 
2009, not only are we taxing twice, but we are making it a bad thing, 
apparently, to pass on our hard-earned wealth to our children, our next 
generation. It's no way to run a country. It's immoral, in fact.
  But let's assume all these tax increases. The fact of the matter is 
this budget still never balances, never comes into balance. And I was 
struck this morning, Mr. Chairman, by Mr. Mulvaney from South Carolina, 
during his 1-minute speech, when he said, when you contract with 
somebody to borrow money, that's what debt is. You intend to pay it 
back. When you contract with somebody and have no intention of paying 
that debt back, that's thievery.
  That's exactly what we're doing, Mr. Chairman, to the children of 
tomorrow, to the people that do not yet exist, that do not have a vote 
in this matter. That's why I rise in support, and I urge all my 
colleagues to defeat this substitute budget.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, the Republican budget claims to be in balance, but it's 
only in balance if you assume they can raise $5.7 trillion in new taxes 
and they cut $2.5 trillion in health care and a trillion dollars more 
in a category that includes Social Security and pensions.
  I'd also note that a great deal has been made about the capital gains 
and dividend benefits in 401(k)s. I would point out to the gentleman 
that in a 401(k) the people do not get the benefit of that deduction. 
They don't pay any tax at all as it grows. When they draw it out, they 
draw it out as ordinary income.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California 
(Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE of California. Let me first thank Congressman Bobby Scott for 
your tremendous leadership in putting together the Congressional Black 
Caucus's alternative budget; also, our chair, Congresswoman Marcia 
Fudge, for her very bold vision in helping to move this forward.
  As a member of the Budget Committee, as I said yesterday, I've had a 
chance to get into the weeds of the Republican budget. And I can say 
with certainty that I strongly support the Congressional Black Caucus 
budget because it is pro-growth, pro-people, and pro-American.
  I just want to follow up on the gentlewoman from Wisconsin's 
comments, Congresswoman Moore, who so eloquently stated the jobs 
provisions of this budget.
  Let me show you the chart with regard to the 5 million jobs that this 
budget creates. When you look at the fact that without the 
Congressional Black Caucus's budget it will take us until April 2015 to 
create enough jobs to take us back to prerecession employment, that is 
not acceptable with so many people in our country who are unemployed.
  This budget enhances Medicare and Medicaid.
  It cancels the devastating sequester and it reins in bloated Pentagon 
spending.
  We actually end the Overseas Contingency Fund when the President's 
goal is accomplished in 2014 of bringing our young men and women home 
from Afghanistan. This is really a slush fund. It's not even funded 
through the Pentagon. It's a slush fund through somewhere over at the 
State Department.
  This budget provides $230 billion to revitalize our Nation's 
infrastructure and creates a $500 million jobs program to accelerate 
the Nation's economic recovery.
  To help families stay secure in their homes until the economy fully 
recovers, our budget also funds a restoration of critical unemployment 
benefits to the full 99 weeks.
  Also, we support a real effort to eradicate poverty in America with 
the 10-20-30 formula, which targets resources to communities that need 
assistance.
  And we call for a national strategy to eradicate poverty by cutting 
it in half in 10 years.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlelady an 
additional 30 seconds.
  Ms. LEE of California. Let me just also conclude by saying our budget 
protects the safety net and protects those initiatives which create 
pathways out of poverty, such as the earned income tax credit, the 
child tax credit, the SNAP program, food and nutrition assistance, and 
the program that assists women with nutrition assistance when they're 
pregnant. All of these efforts are protected in the Congressional Black 
Caucus budget; whereas, the Ryan budget would cut these programs. These 
are needed desperately as we move to a pathway to prosperity.
  Our budget is pro-American, pro-growth, and pro-people.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I would just point out to the gentlelady that, 
in fact, multiple economists have looked at the budget that Republicans 
have brought forward, and a couple from Stanford had an editorial, I 
believe, in The Wall Street Journal this week and noted that their 
review, their study, their evaluation of the Republican budget actually 
demonstrates that 500,000 jobs would be produced in the first year in 
the Republican budget and 1.7 million jobs in the 10th year.
  So if you want jobs, there's a way to get jobs created in this 
country, and it is to reward those individuals who are creating jobs. 
That's what the Republican budget does.
  I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to another new member of the Budget 
Committee and a member of the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Nunnelee).
  Mr. NUNNELEE. Our friends on the other side have called for what they 
label a balanced approach, but let's look at the record.
  Is their quench for new taxes insatiable? At the start of this year, 
they got $600 billion in new taxes due to the fiscal cliff bill that 
passed. In addition, they added another $1 trillion of new taxes, 
starting this year, for ObamaCare. A total of $1.6 trillion in new 
taxes have been added since New Year's. But before the ink was even 
dry, they began to call for even more tax increases. In fact, the 
budget that we're discussing here calls for an additional $2.8 trillion 
of taxes that will be paid for by hardworking men and women around 
America. Taxes like, if you sell your house, you'll have to pay an 
excessive tax on the gain from the sale of your house when you're in 
retirement.
  What do they do with their new taxes? Do they take it and pay down 
the debt? No. Instead, they take these additional taxes and use it to 
spend more.
  This budget is not content with ObamaCare that passed a few years 
ago, no. It expands that. I do commend our friends on the other side 
for at least showing your intentions that you're not going to be happy 
until every American is on socialized medicine. And this expands 
ObamaCare.
  It also expands food stamps. At a time when projections are showing

[[Page 4039]]

that our economy may improve, certainly we should see individuals 
moving away from food stamps and on to a job supporting themselves, but 
that's not what we're seeing. A measure of success of a society should 
not be how many people can we put on public assistance. The measure of 
success of a society should be how many men and women can we allow to 
help themselves.
  But this budget does cut spending in one area. It cuts into our 
national defense, even more so than the President's budget that he 
submitted last year. So while we're increasing spending on things that 
would drain our economy and deprive our children of obtaining jobs, 
we're compromising the very defense of our Nation. And when does it 
balance? Never.
  Mr. Chairman, I reject this budget and urge you to vote ``no.''

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds just 
before I yield to the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands.
  First of all, the gentleman just complained about the ObamaCare 
taxes. What he didn't say is that the Republican budget keeps all the 
taxes; they just repeal the benefits.
  The Republican budget also does not cancel the sequester. The 
sequester is estimated to cost 700,000 to 2 million jobs. They do not 
cancel the sequester. In fact, they have additional cuts that will even 
add to those job losses.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from the Virgin 
Islands (Mrs. Christensen).
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I thank you for yielding, and for the excellent job 
that you and your team did on the budget.
  The CBC budget is proudly a statement of CBC, but also of American, 
values. As a physician, I'm particularly proud of its investment in 
health. It protects and strengthens Social Security, Medicare, 
Medicaid, and children's health insurance; fully funds the Affordable 
Care Act, adds a public health option, and includes provisions that 
will reduce health disparities.
  It fully funds the AIDS Drug Assistance Program, mental health and 
substance abuse, maternal and child health, community health centers, 
the Offices of Minority Health, and the National Institute for Minority 
and Health Disparity Research at NIH.
  It preserves Healthy Start, funds programs to increase the number and 
diversity of the health workforce, and gives communities the tools to 
improve health and well-being through restoring programs like REACH, 
dental health projects, the National Minority AIDS Education and 
Training Center, and other related programs. And it ensures that 
minority physicians and those practicing in poor neighborhoods and 
their patients will have the benefit of health information technology.
  The CBC budget in its entirety addresses the socioeconomic 
determinants of health, beginning with the 10/20/30 program to reduce 
poverty. All of these provisions will reduce health care spending in 
the medium and long term. It is a masterpiece of a budget, and I urge 
everyone to vote for it. And yes, we will not be happy until every 
American has access to quality health care.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time 
remains on each side, please?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia has 3 minutes remaining, and 
the gentleman from Virginia has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. May I inquire of my friend how many more 
speakers he has?
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I think we have two more speakers, including 
myself.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlelady from California (Ms. Waters).
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Congressional Black 
Caucus, I am so very, very proud to be here in support of the 
Congressional Black Caucus budget. This is a budget with a centerpiece: 
Job creation. This is a budget that is balanced. This is a budget that 
is in opposition to the Ryan budget that would slash and burn and cut 
and deny our senior citizens, deny our children, do away with Head 
Start and many programs that the American people deserve to have.
  I am a member of the Financial Services Committee, now serving as a 
ranking member. I created the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. The 
Neighborhood Stabilization Program is a program that goes into 
communities that have been devastated by foreclosures based on the 
subprime meltdown that we had in this country, where so many people 
were tricked into signing onto loans and mortgages they could not 
afford. Thus, they went into foreclosure. These communities have been 
devastated with boarded-up homes, with stray animals on the property, 
with police and fire having to spend more money in these cities to try 
and upkeep them. The Ryan budget would do away with the Neighborhood 
Stabilization Program.
  The home values must be maintained in these communities. Some people 
are trying to keep up their homes, but with these boarded-up 
properties, the value of the homes go down. The Neighborhood 
Stabilization Program is a project that would revitalize the properties 
and put them back on the market as affordable homes. Instead of doing 
away with this program that helps to keep the value of our American 
citizens' homes, we protect it. The Ryan budget would do away with it.
  Thank the CBC for understanding how to protect our neighborhoods, how 
to protect our consumers and our citizens, and how to make our 
neighborhoods safe, despite the fact that we almost went into a 
depression based on the financial services meltdown.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Is the gentleman ready to close?
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I have one more speaker outside of myself, and 
then I will be pleased to close.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. We are prepared to close. I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ 
minutes to a senior member of the Budget Committee, the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
  Mr. GARRETT. I thank the CBC for actually coming to the floor with a 
budget, something that the President of the United States has not been 
able to do four out of five times, even though it is the law of the 
land that he is required to do so. So I commend them for doing so.
  We should look to see what is it that we agree with in this and what 
do we disagree with. We do agree on several points, such as that we 
want to have a just and fair Tax Code. We do agree, as we have in our 
budget, to make sure that we address the most vulnerable, those people 
who are out of work, the poor in the country, those who are trying hard 
to make ends meet, to try to end poverty as well, to try to make sure 
that there is health care in this country. But where we differ from the 
CBC is the impact that their budget would have on each and every one of 
these.
  Their budget would have a devastating impact on those who are out of 
work, those who are trying to not just get a handout, but get a hand 
up; those who are looking for health care and not being able to afford 
it; those who are looking for health care from the Federal Government 
and realizing that within a short period of time, over the next decade, 
we will see, actually, the money in the Federal Government for the 
health care that they're receiving right now basically run out.
  So that is why I applaud their attempt to come to the floor with a 
budget. But I ask them to take a look at what the impact of their 
budget will do as opposed to what the Republican budget will do. We 
will actually be able to create jobs in this country. We did so before 
in something called the JOBS Act, which we passed in a bipartisan 
manner.
  We are going to take the next step to make sure that there is a level 
playing field in this country versus other countries, to bring back 
those jobs that have been lost to other foreign nations and bring them 
back into this country as well. We will be able to reform the system 
with regard to the poor. We will

[[Page 4040]]

be able to provide for a system that provides for the American family 
in a fair and just Tax Code.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I yield myself the balance of the time.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the Congressional Black Caucus 
budget reacts to this chart which shows the recovery over past 
recessions.
  This recession has been deeper and longer than any others. We still 
haven't gotten the jobs back. At the rate we're going, we're not going 
to get the jobs we lost in the 2008 recession for another 2 years. 
That's why it's important that the Congressional Black Caucus has a 
budget that has $500 billion in jobs. That will create about 5 million 
jobs as soon as we can get the money out the door, 5 million jobs, 
which will significantly reduce the impact of that recession. That's in 
stark contrast to the Republican budget, which maintains the sequester. 
The suggestion there is that 700,000 to 2 million jobs would be lost.
  So we have a choice: 5 million jobs or lose jobs. We have a choice in 
terms of investments in education, transportation, scientific research, 
investments in our future, or cuts in those investments.
  We have a credible path to achieve the Simpson-Bowles 10-year goal 
rather than a budget that depends on $5.7 trillion in unspecified tax 
increases to offset their $5.7 trillion tax cut that they say is 
revenue neutral. Also, it is a budget that requires massive cuts in 
Medicare, Medicaid, and other health care programs, pensions, and 
everything else that will adversely affect those most in need.
  The one-third cut, 25 to 30 percent cut in Medicaid, we have to 
remember that two-thirds of the Medicaid expense goes to the elderly 
and disabled. What is their plans for them if you're cutting Medicaid 
by 25 to 30 percent?
  We can do better. We can have a progressive, pro-people, pro-growth, 
pro-jobs agenda; or we can have the devastating cuts in the Republican 
budget, which has $5.7 trillion unspecified tax cuts in it if you 
believe they will come up with that kind of money.

                              {time}  1340

  I think we should make the right choice. That right choice is the 
Congressional Black Caucus budget.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I would, once again, remind my 
friends on the other side of the aisle and those listening that the 
Republican budget creates 500,000 jobs by the end of the first year, 
and it will result in over 1 million jobs in the 10th year. It's 
important to appreciate that. And I agree with my friend on the chart 
that he has about the jobs decreasing, the deepest and longest period 
of poor job growth in any recession. He's absolutely right. He's 
correct on that.
  But what this budget does that he proposes is doubles down on 
policies that don't work. Spending money that we don't have is not a 
prescription for more job creation. A little honesty, Mr. Chairman, on 
this: only in Washington, as the American people know, is spending at a 
lower rate a cut. More spending at a lower rate in this town is a 
reduction, is a cut accused by the other side.
  The fact of the matter is that the Republican budget increases 
spending on average 3.4 percent each year over the next 10 years. It's 
a responsible budget. It's a budget that actually gets to balance, 
which means that we don't spend money at the end of this budget that 
Washington doesn't have, and gets us on a path to paying off the debt.
  It's that way that we realize that we can create jobs for the 
American people, we can ensure that young people in this country will 
be able to get out of college and be able to find a job in their sphere 
of education, and we can make certain that seniors have the kind of 
services that they need, the kind of things that have been destroyed by 
the current administration and by the budget being proposed on the 
other side. The Republican budget is a responsible budget.
  I urge that Members of our party vote down the budget.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. FUDGE. Mr. Chair, every year since 1981, the Congressional Black 
Caucus has offered a fair and balanced alternative budget.
  The CBC Alternative Budget for fiscal year 2014 is a ``Pro-Growth, 
Pro-People, Pro-America'' budget. It acknowledges that only by 
investing in people can you build a bridge to a better America.
  America doesn't need an austerity budget. Americans need and deserve 
more.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the CBC ``Pro-Growth, Pro-
People, Pro-America'' Budget Alternative.
  Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Chair, I rise today to ask my colleagues to reject 
the budget put forth by Chairman Ryan and the Republican led Congress 
and support the FY 2014 Congressional Black Caucus Alternative Budget, 
the Congressional Progressive Caucus Alternative Budget, and Democratic 
Substitute Budget. These budgets will protect our families, put 
Americans back to work, restore fairness to our tax code, and make 
critical investments in education, transportation, innovation, 
research, and job creation.
  The proposals submitted by the Republicans would undermine vital 
programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP. The Ryan budget cuts 
programs that assist low-income families, communities of color, young 
children, students, older people, individuals with disabilities, the 
unemployed, and the uninsured.
  Specifically, the CBC Alternative Budget proposes a balanced plan 
that focuses on economic growth, invests in communities, and creates 
economic opportunity for all.
  The CBC budget:
  Cancels the sequester; creates a $500 billion jobs program to 
accelerate the Nation's economic recovery; provides $230 billion in 
investments for America's crumbling infrastructure; reduces the deficit 
by $2.8 trillion over the next 10 years; addresses the Medicare Doc 
Fix;. protects and enhances Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, 
and TANF; proposes the 10-20-30 plan which targets resources to the 
communities that need assistance the most; addresses health disparities 
through full funding for the Affordable Care Act and strong support for 
the National Institutes of Health.
  Again, I ask my colleagues to vote against the Ryan Budget that does 
not balance the budget, and will harm our children, seniors, and the 
middle class, and to vote for resolutions that strike a sensible 
balance between revenue increases and spending cuts.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the CBC 
Budget Substitute to H. Con. Res. 25 because it provides for serious 
deficit reduction, job creation, and promotes pragmatic economic 
growth. In a word: this budget puts America back in the black.
  I wish to thank Chairwoman Fudge of the CBC and Congressman Scott of 
Virginia, a Member of the CBC who helps to drive our budget, and 
Congresswoman Gwen Moore who sits on the Budget Committee; Members who 
have taken the lead in steering our job-creating, morally righteous, 
and deficit-reducing budget to the House Floor.
  The Members of this body have some very serious ideological 
differences that have manifested themselves in the respective budgets 
that the American people will hear over the course of the next few 
days. But at the end of the day we have to produce for the American 
people--and budget means that we must do just that--and do so by 
addressing both sides of the ledger.
  That means tough, bedrock decisions about spending but also about 
revenue. My colleagues in the CBC have taken on this task in earnest 
and I believe produced a serious, pragmatic Fiscal Year 2014 budget 
alternative.
  The FY 2014 CBC Budget entitled, ``Pro-Growth, Pro-People, Pro-
America,'' contains $2.8 trillion in deficit reduction relative to 
current law, which would put debt on a downward path after the 
expiration of short-term stimulus spending. Debt is projected to fall 
from 78.8 percent of GDP in 2014 to 66.2 percent of GDP in 2023.
  We include a lowering of the threshold for the tax cuts extended in 
the American Taxpayer Relief Act from $450K to $250K, a concept which I 
strongly supported in 2010, 2011, and 2012; taxing capital gains and 
dividends as ordinary income, and enacting a financial transactions 
tax.
  The CBC Substitute also cancels the harmful sequestration, enacts a 
permanent ``doc fix'', and includes $862 billion in jobs measures and 
long-term investments. Revenue would rise to 20.5 percent of GDP by 
2023 in the CBC's budget, compared to 19.1 percent under current 
policy. Spending would fall to 22.3 percent of GDP by 2023 under 
current policy, and would fall to the same level under the CBC's budget 
though with a great deal of short-term stimulus measures.

[[Page 4041]]

  The CBC Budget protects and enhances Social Security, Medicare, 
Medicaid, SNAP, TANF and other vital safety net programs that save 
millions of families from poverty.
  The CBC Budget creates jobs and opportunity via new infrastructure 
investments, outlined below:
  Maintenance and repair for public transit, highways, airports, ports, 
railroads, bridges and other infrastructure investments. ($230 
billion);
  Workforce development programs such as the Workforce Investment Act 
Adult Program, the Dislocated Workers Program, Job Corps and other 
employment and training services. ($13 billion);
  Providing relief to states to preserve teacher, law enforcement and 
first responder jobs. ($50 billion);
  Neighborhood stabilization programs that provide affordable housing 
development, infrastructure improvements and other community 
development needs. ($50 billion);
  Veterans programs that honor our commitment to help our nation's 
soldiers after they come back from serving our country. (Increased by 
$50 billion).
  The CBC Budget also calls for significant tax reform measures that 
would enhance revenues over the next decade by $2.7 trillion. Economic 
history has demonstrated that you cannot starve the government of 
revenues. To achieve our revenue goals, the CBC Budget outlines 
approximately $4.2 trillion in revenue enhancements that Congress could 
use to achieve this goal, including:
  Ending special tax breaks and closing tax loopholes. ($1 trillion 
over 10 years);
  Limiting tax preferences for Corporate Debt. ($1.151 trillion over 10 
years);
  Enacting the ``Buffet Rule'' and a surcharge for millionaires. ($460 
billion over 10 years);
  Reduce the ``tax gap'' through better tax enforcement. ($107 billion 
over 10-years);
  Ending the mortgage deduction for vacation homes and yachts. ($10 
billion over 10 years);
  The CBC Budget addresses health disparities by fully funding the 
Affordable Care Act and providing strong support of the National 
Institute of Health. In contrast, the Republican Budget attempts to 
repeal the Affordable Care Act, while using the revenues to help 
achieve balance.
  The elephant in the room is entitlement policy. Unlike discretionary 
spending, mandatory spending grew rapidly from 5 percent of GDP in 1962 
to a range of 9 percent to 10.5 percent of GDP from 1975 to 2007, 
peaking in recession years because of automatic stabilizers. The 
American people spoke last year and their collective voice clearly said 
no to haphazard, immoral, and arbitrary cuts to their hard-earned 
benefits; and the Supreme Court raised its voice when it upheld the 
constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. It is the law of the 
land.
  I am here to say that any type of entitlement reform will not be done 
on the backs of Seniors in the 18th District of Texas--and I am 
prepared to ``stand in the gap'' to protect their benefits.
  And speaking of Texas, two years ago, my hometown of Houston, Texas 
was forced to lay off nearly one thousand municipal employees. When 
these employees are put on the unemployment line, libraries close, 
schools cut back on essential after-school programs, community centers 
lose personnel, police hours are trimmed, and the truly destitute 
become an afterthought.
  Those tough budget decisions had a human cost and I hear from my 
constituents every day about them, and frankly, I don't want tax cuts 
for the wealthy at the expense of jobs for people in Texas.
  Nonetheless, I stand here today and declare that the federal budget 
is a moral document, with meaning, fiber, and a unique texture; and the 
budget we craft, and what we do here today in the hallowed halls of 
Congress is really about the American people and the impact that our 
budget and fiscal policy decisions will have on them.
  The Democratic Budget Alternatives stands in clear contrast to the 
budget that our Republican colleagues have put forward. This budget 
will reduce the deficit in a balanced and credible way, making 
difficult choices while providing investments that help create jobs now 
and build an even stronger economy for the future. But unlike the 
Republican budget--which ends the Medicare guarantee while providing 
tax breaks to millionaires--we ask the very wealthy and special 
interests to share responsibility for reducing the deficit. It is a 
shared American sacrifice.
  This budget demonstrates that we can put our fiscal house in order 
without blindly slashing investments and breaking our promises to 
seniors, low-income kids, and individuals with disabilities. We will 
preserve the Medicare guarantee and work to strengthen it, along with 
Medicaid, and not ending it. We will provide tax relief for working 
families, not a tax windfall to millionaires and corporations that is 
financed by middle-income Americans. And we will protect the promise 
and opportunity of the American Dream for all, instead of leaving 
future generations behind.
  Mr. Chair, let's roll-up our sleeves and get to work on a pro-growth, 
pro-people, and pro-American budget.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia will be postponed.


 Amendment No. 3 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in 
House Report 113-21.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL 
                   YEAR 2014.

       (a) Declaration.--Congress declares that this resolution is 
     the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2014 
     and that this resolution sets forth the appropriate budgetary 
     levels for fiscal year 2013 and for fiscal years 2015 through 
     2023.
       (b) Table of Contents.--

Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2014.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Major functional categories.

                 TITLE II--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

Sec. 201. Direct spending.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

     SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

       The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023:
       (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution:
       (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
     follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $2,007,856,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,539,041,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,090,207,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,312,805,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,467,609,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,594,533,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,731,069,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,890,672,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,090,360,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,311,426,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,521,978,000,000.
       (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
     revenues should be changed are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: -$30,455,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $268,109,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $483,615,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $533,914,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $563,936,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $565,582,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $581,832,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $606,063,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $633,351,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $660,727,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $689,833,000,000.
       (2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new 
     budget authority are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $3,490,177,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $3,802,488,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,699,149,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,661,190,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,745,621,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,912,983,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $4,085,848,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $4,236,650,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,394,458,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,628,614,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,786,461,000,000.
       (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget 
     outlays are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $3,446,784,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $3,737,820,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,694,356,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,664,466,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,736,311,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,873,536,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $4,044,258,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $4,180,795,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,349,709,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,590,188,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,735,162,000,000.
       (4) Deficits (on-budget).--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the amounts of the deficits (on-budget) 
     are as follows:

[[Page 4042]]

       Fiscal year 2013: -$1,438,928,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: -$1,198,779,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: -$604,149,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: -$351,661,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: -$268,702,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: -$279,003,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: -$313,189,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: -$290,123,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: -$259,349,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: -$278,762,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: -$213,184,000,000.
       (5) Debt subject to limit.--Pursuant to section 301(a)(5) 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the appropriate 
     levels of the public debt are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $17,613,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $19,003,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $19,765,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $20,279,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $20,770,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $21,296,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $21,853,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $22,392,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $22,904,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $23,427,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $23,907,000,000,000.
       (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of 
     debt held by the public are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $12,796,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $14,077,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $14,748,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $15,161,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $15,497,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $15,842,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $16,234,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $16,620,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $16,995,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $17,418,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $17,799,000,000,000.

     SEC. 102. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

       The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate 
     levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years 
     2013 through 2023 for each major functional category are:
       (1) National Defense (050):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $653,623,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $660,662,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $627,358,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $635,421,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $533,377,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $577,345,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $532,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $551,052,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $530,339,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $532,738,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $541,142,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $529,878,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $552,461,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $543,703,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $564,996,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $554,057,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $578,612,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $566,536,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $590,437,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $583,997,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $602,317,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $590,707,000,000.
       (2) International Affairs (150):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $65,925,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,487,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $74,304,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $60,306,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $66,367,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,181,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $65,021,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,237,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $63,666,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $63,868,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $64,831,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $62,854,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $66,004,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $62,921,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $67,194,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $63,610,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $68,583,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $64,824,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $70,803,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $66,778,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $72,773,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $68,420,000,000.
       (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,904,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,835,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,175,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,248,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,301,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,585,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,769,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $38,760,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,249,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,035,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,008,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,531,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,764,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,150,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $41,530,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,803,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,637,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,584,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,783,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $42,636,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,950,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,747,000,000.
       (4) Energy (270):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,743,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $12,893,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,469,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $15,073,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,218,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,359,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,844,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,112,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,471,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,555,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,655,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,379,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,791,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,469,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,976,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,497,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,737,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,895,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,566,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,611,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,365,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $21,305,000,000.
       (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,900,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,568,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,432,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,904,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,006,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,853,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,956,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,745,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,167,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $53,651,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,935,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $54,770,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $55,747,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $55,818,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $57,329,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $57,063,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,266,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $57,835,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $59,785,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $58,908,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $61,590,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $60,084,000,000.
       (6) Agriculture (350):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,672,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,076,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,506,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $15,152,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,610,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $17,325,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,582,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $19,155,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,020,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $18,532,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,645,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $17,107,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,474,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $15,848,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,614,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $16,098,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,120,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $16,629,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,591,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $17,099,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $18,007,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $17,531,000,000.
       (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):

[[Page 4043]]

       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, -$26,748,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$22,618,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,768,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,315,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,033,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,477,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,287,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,522,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $19,877,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,732,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,274,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,181,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,935,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,562,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,034,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,707,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,491,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $7,080,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,769,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $10,131,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,238,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,422,000,000.
       (8) Transportation (400):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,501,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $16,489,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $263,861,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $269,513,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $264,939,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $271,121,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $266,139,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $272,133,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $242,306,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $248,082,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $218,555,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $223,221,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $194,747,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $199,735,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $145,973,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $151,221,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $126,846,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $133,046,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $128,717,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $135,286,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $130,141,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $137,190,000,000.
       (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $55,661,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,295,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,292,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,610,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,262,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $38,511,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,558,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,313,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,860,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,971,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,942,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $35,217,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,110,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,320,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,712,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,267,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,670,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,664,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,654,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $35,272,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,652,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,057,000,000.
       (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
     (500):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $395,738,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $394,888,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $432,087,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $432,679,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $254,470,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $254,901,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $144,145,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $139,641,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $136,437,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $132,344,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $142,254,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $140,104,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $137,829,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $136,450,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $139,151,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $138,048,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $142,068,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $140,195,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $145,371,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $142,949,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $148,853,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $146,217,000,000.
       (11) Health (550):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $372,555,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $365,580,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $433,346,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $423,649,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $517,470,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $505,831,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $569,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $573,943,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $623,582,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $626,442,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $659,937,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $660,166,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $696,323,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $695,376,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $743,148,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $731,584,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $776,728,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $774,597,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $820,495,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $817,824,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $870,473,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $867,771,000,000.
       (12) Medicare (570):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $507,202,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $506,750,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $525,793,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $525,264,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $547,282,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $546,984,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $593,440,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $593,229,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $608,752,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $608,342,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $631,481,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $631,181,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $691,031,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $690,811,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $738,756,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $738,339,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $787,726,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $787,660,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $862,162,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $861,813,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $893,584,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $893,155,000,000.
       (13) Income Security (600):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $633,048,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $624,494,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $703,311,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $690,186,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $730,956,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $717,121,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $642,485,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $639,242,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $606,151,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $602,323,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $609,461,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $600,361,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $615,507,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $610,889,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $630,836,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $626,001,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $648,963,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $643,247,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $672,335,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $671,127,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $685,213,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $678,911,000,000.
       (14) Social Security (650):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,803,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,883,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,504,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,614,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,231,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,306,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,367,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,405,000,000.

[[Page 4044]]

       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $36,689,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $36,689,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,003,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,003,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,319,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,319,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,751,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,751,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,271,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,271,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,932,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $53,932,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,038,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $58,038,000,000.
       (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $148,146,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $142,631,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $159,837,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $154,597,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $169,547,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $164,297,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $179,300,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $177,681,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $175,689,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $175,506,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $174,161,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $173,463,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $185,764,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $184,884,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $190,399,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $189,322,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $194,989,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $193,415,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $207,392,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $205,643,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $204,760,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $202,814,000,000.
       (16) Administration of Justice (750):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $56,844,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $59,006,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $73,936,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $60,265,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $66,476,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,460,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $68,687,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $70,852,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $67,440,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $72,880,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $69,251,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $70,961,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $71,208,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $71,454,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $73,172,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $72,548,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $75,682,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $74,757,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $82,067,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $81,030,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $85,149,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $84,045,000,000.
       (17) General Government (800):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,263,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,631,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $25,542,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,293,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $25,575,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,055,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $25,676,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $26,728,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,335,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,614,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,156,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $28,524,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,871,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,388,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,698,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,298,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,646,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,238,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,595,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,175,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,579,000,000.
       (18) Net Interest (900):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $332,829,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $332,829,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $350,457,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $350,457,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $379,747,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $379,747,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $433,511,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $433,511,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $526,898,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $526,898,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $629,965,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $629,965,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $701,785,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $701,785,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $763,921,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $763,921,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $810,359,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $810,359,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $852,930,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $852,930,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $890,245,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $890,245,000,000.
       (19) Allowances (920):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,320,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,262,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,367,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,971,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,428,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,241,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,287,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,648,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,437,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $3,525,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,372,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,541,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $7,099,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,467,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,686,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,176,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,589,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,646,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,704,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,744,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,823,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,809,000,000.
       (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, -$76,489,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$76,489,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$75,946,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$75,946,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$80,864,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$80,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$86,391,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$86,391,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,137,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,137,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,503,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,503,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$97,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$97,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$98,916,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$98,916,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$103,177,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$103,177,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$105,117,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$105,117,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$108,885,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$108,885,000,000.

                 TITLE II--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

     SEC. 201. DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Means-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For means-tested direct spending, the average rate of 
     growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 6.7 percent.
       (2) For means-tested direct spending, the estimated average 
     rate of growth in the total level of outlays during the 11-
     year period beginning with fiscal year 2013 is 6.3 percent 
     under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for means-tested direct spending:
       (A) State budgets have suffered significantly during the 
     economic downturn. According to the National Governor's 
     Association, half of all states are projecting lower total 
     revenues in 2013 than they saw in 2008. To assist struggling 
     states, the Back to Work Budget temporarily increases funding 
     for Medicaid - the single largest portion of

[[Page 4045]]

     total state spending - through the Federal Medical Assistance 
     Percentages program. This will help stabilize Medicaid, which 
     is a vital program for low-income and middle-class families, 
     providing health and long-term care services to those 
     stricken with catastrophic illness, injury, or disability, or 
     facing prolonged infirmity.
       (B) The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act expanded a 
     number of tax credits targeted at working families to boost 
     relief during hard economic times. The Back to Work Budget 
     retains the improvements made to the Earned Income Tax Credit 
     (qualifying children and phase-out range), Child and 
     Dependent Care Credit, and the American Opportunity Tax 
     Credit. These credits fuel demand for American businesses by 
     putting money in the hands of families that truly need it.
       (b) Nonmeans-Tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the average rate 
     of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 5.9 percent.
       (2) For non means-tested direct spending, the estimated 
     average rate of growth in the total level of outlays during 
     the 11-year period beginning with fiscal year 2013 is 5.1 
     percent under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for nonmeans-tested direct spending:
       (A) Medicare is a cornerstone of the American health care 
     system for more than 45 million America seniors. It is an 
     exemplary program that provides the most efficient care to a 
     segment of the population that costs more to treat. The Back 
     to Work Budget protects beneficiaries and makes the system 
     even more efficient. It amends Part D of Medicare to allow 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate 
     prescription drug prices with pharmaceutical manufacturers, 
     as the Department of Veterans Affairs currently does, which 
     will save Medicare $157 billion over 10 years and will reduce 
     costs for seniors. The budget adopts policies to prohibit 
     ``pay for delay'' agreements that reduce competition and 
     modifies periods of exclusivity to increase availability of 
     needed therapies. The budget also accelerates the use of 
     bundling payments as an alternative to fee-for-service 
     payments. It builds on Affordable Care Act efficiencies in 
     administration of information and payments. Using 
     standardized electronic systems for administration 
     information such as claims, billing, payments and eligibility 
     creates a more efficient and less fragmented health care 
     system.
       (B) The bulk of agriculture commodity subsidies go to large 
     corporate farms that grow commodity crops such as corn, 
     wheat, cotton, rice, and soybeans. These crops are often 
     grown using unsustainable methods that require high levels of 
     fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, leading to polluted 
     waterways and degraded soil. The Back to Work Budget 
     eliminates certain commodity subsidies, which will save 
     billions, while reducing environmental impacts.
         Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
     setting forth the congressional budget for the United States 
     Government for fiscal year 2014 and including the appropriate 
     budgetary levels for fiscal year 2013 and fiscal years 2015 
     through 2023.''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 122, the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) and a Member opposed each will control 15 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, in presenting our Back to Work budget, a 
budget of the Progressive Caucus of this House, we are first pleased to 
announce that in less than 48 hours, 105,000 citizen cosponsors have 
joined with us in presenting this budget. They are pleased to affirm, 
and the point of this is House Budget Committee chairman, 
Representative Paul Ryan, has released a budget proposal that is the 
most reckless austerity plan he's ever proposed. Instead, we get a 
budget that will slow the economy and kill jobs.
  We urge you to vote for the Progressive Caucus' Back to Work budget 
which will grow the economy, create 7 million jobs, and ask the wealthy 
and multinationals to pay their fair share so we can make investments 
in our people and our future--105,000 citizen cosponsors in less than 
48 hours.
  With that, I yield 2 minutes to the cochair of the Progressive 
Caucus, my friend, the gentleman from Minnesota, Keith Ellison.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to just congratulate 
everybody with the Progressive Caucus and thank all of the staff that 
did such a good job preparing this excellent budget which gives us an 
amazing choice as Americans to confront this jobs crisis. I'm so proud 
that our Speaker has told the world--Speaker Boehner--that the debt 
crisis is not immediate. He's right, it's not. But let me tell you what 
is immediate: the jobs crisis.
  That's why the Back to Work budget brings down unemployment to 5.3 
within 3 years by investing in people--our construction workers, our 
teachers, and our police officers. We're also fiscally responsible, 
reducing the deficit over the long run by $4.4 trillion.
  The Republican budget makes the wrong choices for our country. I 
respect the fact that they have honestly projected a vision, but it's 
an austere vision for the American people. It's no surprise that this 
message lost the election that we just had. It was put in front of the 
people. They said we will have none of it, but the American people do 
want what's in the Back to Work budget.
  Gallup released a poll that confirms what you and I already know, and 
that is that the American people want jobs, not austerity; 72 percent, 
Mr. Chairman, of Americans said that they support putting people back 
to work repairing our Nation's infrastructure, including a majority of 
Republicans.
  Now, the fact is that the Back to Work budget is about putting people 
back to work. As the Speaker and I agree, it's not the moment where we 
need to clamp down on debt. It's the moment we need to put Americans 
back to work. So which budget meets the test? The Progressive Caucus 
budget invests at the level the American Society of Civil Engineers 
says is needed to close our infrastructure gap. The Republican budget 
cuts transportation by 20 percent.
  Mr. Chairman, it's time to get back to work, and let's pass the Back 
to Work budget.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 15 
minutes.
  Mr. GARRETT. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today, as they say, in opposition to the 
Progressive Caucus substitute. While my friends across the aisle are 
motivated by good intentions, I believe that their substitute is, 
frankly, a blueprint for fiscal disaster. Instead of restoring the 
certainty to the economy by promoting fairness and providing American 
families the opportunity for more prosperity, this budget is simply a 
black hole for American families.
  I can at least give credit to both the Progressive Caucus and the 
Democrat Caucus for offering a budget because the President of the 
United States has failed to do so. As you are aware, on February 4, the 
President, as required by law, is to give us a budget. It's March 20 
now; and the American people, well, we're still waiting. That is the 
fourth time in 5 years that President Obama has failed to submit a 
budget on time and failed to abide by the law.
  The Senate Democrats, well, they're not much better. It has taken 
them almost 4 years to produce a budget that basically now increases 
government spending by $265 billion, taxes up by almost $1 trillion, 
and cuts health care providers by almost $300 billion. Over the period 
covered by the budget, deficits under the Senate plan are nearly $4 
trillion larger than those under the House plan.
  So, today, we have a Progressive substitute on the floor. This budget 
will do what? It will raise taxes by almost $6 trillion over the next 
10 years, including a new tax on carbon. $5.7 trillion in new taxes 
necessarily means greater tax burdens on who? The American family. 
These tax cuts put job creators in the penalty box again, and that 
means more Americans will be where? Without jobs.
  These tax policies are deceptively sold under, really, a warped 
notion of what ``fairness'' is. The reality is this ``fairness'' of 
theirs is merely a heavy-handed government taking from one pocket and 
putting in another pocket.
  This budget's tax policy is based on the equality of outcome rather 
than equality of opportunity. When he's talking about equality, Milton 
Friedman once pointed out that a society that puts equality before 
freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality, 
however, will get a high degree of both.
  So true fairness is the freedom to manage and direct one's own life 
and

[[Page 4046]]

one's own future. Those who take risks giving their all in the pursuit 
of the American Dream deserve to keep what they've earned. Those who 
work hard day in and day out, they deserve to keep what they've earned.
  But the Progressive budget is nothing but regressive. There's nothing 
fair about this budget, especially to the risk-taker or to the 
hardworking American family. Their budget would spend nearly $9 
trillion more than the Republican budget. Note, now, when I say those 
numbers--where does that money come from--that means from our children 
and our grandchildren. They ultimately will be the ones who will have 
to bear this burden.
  This budget would also establish a government-run health insurance 
option under ObamaCare and let the government basically set price 
controls on drugs. What does that mean? That means for those who were 
around back in 1970s, I think that's most of us, price controls on 
gasoline. How did that work out for us? Not too long. Waiting lines for 
gas is one thing. Waiting lines, however, for lifesaving medicine is a 
whole other story.
  This budget would also expand the current, broken, and failed Federal 
job-training program without any reform whatsoever. This budget calls 
for even more money for the bureaucrats in Washington with regard to 
education, and this budget calls for even more money into the broken-
down highway transit system that we have in this country.

                              {time}  1350

  And this budget even fails in the government's first responsibility--
providing for the common defense. This budget further goes and guts the 
Defense Department by calling for almost $700 billion in cuts to the 
Pentagon compared to our budget.
  This Progressive substitute then would put this country basically on 
the wrong path. For that reason, I urge a ``no'' vote on this budget.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, there is some adage about if you do the 
same thing over and over again without changing it, that that is a mark 
of insanity. That adage applies to the Ryan budget 2, the same as Ryan 
budget 1, and to 10 years of failed fiscal policy that our budget, by 
putting people to work, attempts to get us out of that fiscal black 
hole.
  With that, let me yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California, 
Congresswoman Lee.
  Ms. LEE of California. Let me thank Congressmen Grijalva and Ellison 
for their bold and visionary leadership of the Progressive Caucus.
  As a member of the Budget Committee opposed to the job-killing 
``Pathway to Poverty'' Ryan budget, I stand in strong support of the 
Progressive Caucus Back to Work budget. The number one priority of the 
Progressive Caucus budget is fixing the job crisis. That is exactly 
what we want to do in our Back to Work budget. That is what it does.
  Most economists argue that job creation equals deficit reduction. The 
CPC budget asks the wealthiest 1 percent, Big Oil, and huge 
corporations to pay just a little more so we can invest in the American 
people and create 7 million American jobs.
  Our budget saves over $1.8 trillion in bloated Pentagon spending by 
eliminating the Overseas Contingency Operations account, which really 
is a slush fund that has funded two wars off budget. We refocus our 
resources into a modern military able to face 21st century threats.
  We also require the Pentagon, the single largest Federal agency, with 
the highest waste, fraud, and abuse, to pass an audit test and pass it 
now. It is the only Federal agency not subject to an audit.
  Our budget replaces the disastrous sequester by supporting critical 
spending in education, infrastructure, and we reject benefit cuts to 
Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, at this point, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Oklahoma, a member of the Budget Committee, Mr. 
Lankford.
  Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. Chairman, I rise to give support to what is 
happening for the Path to Prosperity. It is a responsible budget.
  And I also rise to encourage my colleagues. It is a good thing for us 
to come down and get a chance to talk about budgets and where we are 
headed. It is a good thing to propose multiple options to be able to 
have this kind of dialogue about where we are headed as a Nation. This 
is what is happening in the Senate this week as well. For the first 
time in 4 years, the Senate has an ongoing dialogue about budgets and 
about the future.
  While almost $6 trillion of debt has been added to our children, we 
have not done a budget between the House and the Senate in almost 4 
years now. It is time to be able to do that. I encourage my Senate 
colleagues as well, and congratulate them for also taking this up.
  I do look forward to one day seeing the President's budget. I did see 
today in the news that the President has released his final four 
bracket for the NCAA men's basketball bracket, but we have yet to 
actually see his budget. At some point, we hope to be able to see our 
national priority be on budgets, not on NCAA brackets, in the days 
ahead.
  The budget that we are proposing focuses on families that need 
certainty. The way that you budget and you plan for the future and the 
way to set aside finances for the future is some kind of certainty in 
what is happening. We don't have that right now as a Nation.
  For most families that actually live month to month, they don't have 
a large amount of resources to set aside for future investment. If a 
ticking debt bomb is coming for them, they expect the people in 
Washington to actually pay attention to that so that the little bit of 
money they can set aside for retirement doesn't blow up in some giant 
debt crisis in the days ahead.
  This is a moment to deal with our debt. The budget that we are 
proposing is a responsible budget that takes 10 years to slowly start 
to bring us back into balance. Only in Washington is a drastic 
draconian cut actually reducing the increase.
  What the Ryan budget does, what we are proposing, is a 1.6 percent 
decrease on the increase. Right now, the Federal budget is scheduled to 
increase by 5 percent over the next 10 years. We will actually just 
increase the budget 3.4 percent. I would say that is fairly modest. 
That is a way to be able to deal with what is happening in the Nation, 
and it is also a way to deal with what is happening to come in the days 
ahead.
  We are not promoting additional stimulus spending as the budget that 
is being proposed now is. A giant proposal for additional spending did 
not help us several years ago. What was promised right now is that we 
would be at 5\1/2\ percent unemployment rather than still hovering near 
8 percent unemployment, as we have for so long now.
  Jobs do not come from additional Federal spending long term. If you 
want real jobs, it has to be in the private sector. That is the only 
thing that can be sustained; otherwise, you are dependent year after 
year after year with additional taxes and additional spending. We need 
to have the private sector be engaged in this. The way to do that is to 
encourage the private sector with some level of stability.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, let me yield 1 minute to the gentlelady 
from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to ask my colleagues to 
support the Back to Work budget. The Back to Work budget puts jobs 
first, which is actually the best way to reduce our deficit. Jobs equal 
deficit reduction.
  Our budget will create nearly 7 million jobs and bring unemployment 
down to 5 percent in 3 years. It protects Social Security and 
strengthens the critical benefits of Medicare and Medicaid. Our budget 
responds to what the American people say they want: job creation, more 
revenues from those who can afford to pay, and smart spending cuts that 
target waste, not opportunity.
  A new Gallup poll released today found that more than three-quarters 
of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, support Federal 
Government efforts that focus on creating jobs.

[[Page 4047]]

Americans don't want austerity or tax cuts, more tax cuts for the rich. 
They want jobs, good jobs.
  So you can vote for good jobs by voting for the Back to Work budget.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman who 
played a critical role in fashioning the budget that is before us, the 
Republican budget, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita).
  Mr. ROKITA. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. Chairman, like speakers before me, I am thankful and appreciative 
that others are proposing substitute budgets. It is good to have 
options, Mr. Chair. It is good to have a debate. But not all options 
are equally good, so I rise against the substitute budget that is now 
before us.
  Admittedly, there are a couple of different ways and a combination 
thereof that you can balance a budget: spending cuts--and, by the way, 
when a Federal Government already takes, on average, 20 percent of the 
value of all the goods and services that a country produces, a lot of 
us think that is more than enough to run the government and that 
spending reductions are actually the solution.
  Revenue increases might also get you to balance. That is certainly 
what this Progressive substitute tries to do. Nearly $6 trillion in tax 
increases over the next 10 years. And, by the way, Mr. Chairman, they 
don't get to balance. It doesn't happen. $6 trillion more of the 
people's property this budget confiscates, and they still can't balance 
the budget.
  Why is balancing the budget so darn important? Well, a couple 
different reasons. You cannot start paying off the debt until you get 
to a balanced budget so that you have a surplus to start paying that 
debt down.
  So their intention, Mr. Chair, is not to pay down the debt. That is 
what they are stating in this budget, and, frankly, that's immoral.
  If you intend to pay a debt back in any contractual situation, or 
even in this country's budget situation, it is called a debt. When you 
take money from future generations, when you take money from people 
that don't yet exist with no intention to pay it back, as this budget 
does, have no intention to pay it back, it is called thievery, and 
that's wrong. That is why this budget needs to fail.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, when, in the course of the last decade-
plus, multinational corporations, billionaires in this country have 
been curried favor with tax breaks, loopholes that have allowed them to 
pay less than the average American, that has hurt the economy. And I 
would suggest that, aside from thievery, that is gaming the system and 
not sharing in the full responsibility we all have as Americans to take 
care of this country.
  I would now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin, 
Congressman Pocan.

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. POCAN. The number one issue before our country is not the 
deficit; it's getting the economy going and creating jobs. We have 12 
million people who are still unemployed and millions more who are 
underemployed in this country. That's why the best budget we could put 
forward is one that creates jobs, not one that costs us 2 million jobs 
as is estimated by the austerity policies of the Republican Party. It's 
not just the Congressional Progressive Caucus that says this. Our 
Congressional Budget Office says that three-quarters of the deficit 
we're going to see in 2014 is caused by underemployment and 
unemployment.
  The real enemy to deficit reduction is not a new made-up spending 
crisis; it's the need for jobs.
  The Back to Work budget makes a real commitment to job creation, 
creating 7 million jobs and reducing unemployment to 5 percent within 3 
years. It invests in education, in police, firefighters, teachers, 
infrastructure; and it ends the job-killing cuts of the sequester. 
Instead of balancing the budget on the backs of the middle class and 
the neediest, the Back to Work budget has the back of America's middle 
class, and it does it while responsibly reducing the deficit by $4.4 
trillion.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for the Back to Work budget.
  Mr. GARRETT. In recognizing that we can create the jobs and the 
prosperity by not raising taxes at the same time, I yield now 3 minutes 
to the gentlelady from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler).
  Mrs. HARTZLER. It's time for our Nation to get our priorities right; 
and according to the Constitution, there are only a few things that we 
should be doing here in Congress. One of them is to provide for the 
common defense; but, sadly, this substitute bill guts our national 
defense and leaves us very vulnerable as a Nation. Let's review where 
we've been.
  A couple of years ago, Defense made some efficiencies under Secretary 
Gates and cut $78 billion. Then with the Budget Control Act, 
immediately, $487 billion more was cut from the national defense. Then 
sequestration has kicked in, which is another $500 billion from 
national defense, and this proposed budget here goes even beyond that.
  Our Republican budget replaces cuts from the sequester back into the 
national defense and keeps it a priority. It makes sure our men and 
women in uniform have what they need, but this budget cuts an 
additional $658 billion from the Pentagon. Even Secretary of Defense 
Leon Panetta earlier said that, with sequestration, it would hollow out 
our forces. So, certainly, this would do even more.
  With sequestration, if we don't replace it, which this budget does 
not, we're going to see 100,000 fewer soldiers and marines; the Navy 
will likely have to mothball 60 ships, including two carrier battle 
groups while a quarter of our bombers would be jeopardized; we would 
also see the elimination of 250 fighter aircraft and higher fees for 
military health care. Now, that's not providing for the common defense. 
In addition, if sequestration is not overturned, for which our budget 
allows, then we could see up to 2.1 million jobs cut.
  They're calling this budget a Back to Work budget, but when our men 
and women in uniform come back from Afghanistan, instead of being met 
with ticker tape parades, they're going to be met with pink slips. It's 
wrong, and we can do better.
  There are serious ramifications. Our budget replaces those cuts, and 
it's needed. There are threats in the world, and this is no time for us 
to be cutting our defense. We have Iran threatening not only our 
neighbors, but us; and it is getting closer to having a nuclear 
capability. We have even this week North Korea shooting off a missile 
and putting out YouTube videos of that missile coming here and hitting 
not only cities of the United States, but even the U.S. Capitol. In 
addition to that, there are radical Islamists around the world who 
still want to harm us.
  Now is not the time to cut our national defense. We need to keep our 
priorities right. We need to provide for the common defense. We need to 
pass the Republican House budget and reject this substitute that will 
hollow out our forces and endanger our families.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. The Back to Work budget sets a level of 2006 for 
defense. Pentagon spending has doubled over the last decade; 2006 was 
the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on 
terrorism. We just celebrated the 10th anniversary of Iraq. There has 
been $2.2 trillion spent on that war--a war, I might say, that was not 
paid for at all. This does not cripple defense; this merely brings it 
to a realistic level so as to share in the reconstruction of this 
economy of ours.
  With that, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California (Ms. 
Waters).
  Ms. WATERS. I want to thank Mr. Ellison and Mr. Grijalva for their 
leadership with the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
  I rise in support of the Back to Work budget. Let me just say it 
again--back to work. This is what this budget is all about, ladies and 
gentlemen--investment in our infrastructure. We have bridges that are 
falling apart, streets that need repair, water systems that need 
upgrading. We can create jobs.

[[Page 4048]]

The Republicans and the Ryan budget talk about jobs. They talk the 
talk, but they don't walk the walk.
  I tried to get an amendment on the TIGER program, which would 
increase the funding for jobs in transportation that we need so badly. 
They rejected that. They rejected that because they're focused on 
making sure that they give tax cuts to the richest people in this 
country, making sure that they keep those tax loopholes for the 
privileged--not investing in America's future and in America's growth.
  The people are expecting us to make them their priority, to make sure 
that we are investing in opportunities for them, their families, their 
children, and their neighborhoods. No, the Ryan budget pays no 
attention to any of that. These privileged people on the other side of 
the aisle, who don't have to worry about jobs and who don't have to 
worry about any of that, deny the people the right to just participate.
  Mr. GARRETT. I would ask the Chair how much time remains on both 
sides.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 3 minutes remaining. The 
gentleman from Arizona has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. GARRETT. That being the case, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield 1 minute to my good friend, the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. McDermott).
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Chairman, the Back to Work budget is the first 
budget that recognizes the truth about our so-called ``deficit 
crisis'': we don't have one. Speaker Boehner and Chairman Ryan went on 
television on Sunday and said that there is no immediate crisis, that 
it is the unemployment numbers we should be worried about.
  Now is not the time for austerity. It is the time for the government 
to invest where the private sector won't. They're sitting on their 
money, waiting. This is the time to bolster our new and growing 
industries, like biomedical research and technology. Now is the time to 
rebuild our infrastructure. Creating jobs, as this budget does, is the 
only way we will become self-sustaining. With lower unemployment, fewer 
people need public assistance, and more people pay taxes. That's how 
you shrink the deficit. That's fiscal responsibility.
  My Republican colleagues love to talk about balancing household 
budgets. Well, I don't know any American family that would use its 
children's lunch money to pay down its credit cards, and that's what 
they're proposing in the Ryan budget. Most families choose to invest in 
college educations, health care and retirements, trading current debt 
for future returns.
  It's time to choose what kind of country we're going to live in. Do 
we grow with education, investments and a strong social safety net; or 
do we cut our way to higher unemployment, instability, and class 
divide?
  Mr. GARRETT. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Nadler).
  Mr. NADLER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to oppose the radical Republican budget, 
which will increase unemployment and savage Medicare and Medicaid and 
other programs that families depend on, mostly to finance tax cuts for 
the rich and partly to fix the deficit crisis that we have already 
tamed. In 2009, the deficit was 10.1 percent of GDP. Next year, it will 
be down to 5.3 percent. This is the largest and fastest reduction in 
deficits since the demobilization after World War II.
  To add insult to injury, the Republican budget would make sweeping, 
regressive changes to the Tax Code, which would raise taxes on middle 
class families by up to $3,000. Millionaires, however, would actually 
see a tax cut averaging $245,000 a year. This is just wrong. Working 
families should never have to pay more just so the rich can pay less.
  We no longer, if we ever did, have a deficit crisis. With 12 million 
people searching for employment and with almost 5 million Americans 
without jobs for more than 6 months, we do have a jobs crisis. 
According to the Economic Policy Institute, the net effect of the 
Republican budget would be to decrease the gross domestic product by 
1.7 percent, resulting in 2 million additional jobs lost in 2014 alone.
  If budgets are truly a reflection of our values, then what does it 
say about the priorities of House Republicans when their budget 
increases health care costs for seniors, cuts 2 million jobs, and hits 
middle class families with a tax increase in order to subsidize another 
tax cut for the rich?

                              {time}  1410

  In contrast, the Back to Work budget addresses the jobs crisis head 
on by creating nearly 7 million jobs in the first year, by making stark 
investments in our infrastructure, schools, and transits. It protects 
Medicare, Medicaid, education, and family support systems.
  Conservative governments in Europe have instituted the same austerity 
policies offered by the Republican budget. The result has been a 
double-dip recession and 12 percent unemployment. We should learn from 
their stupidity.
  I rise today to oppose the radical Republican budget, which is merely 
a repackaging of the same extreme agenda that the American people 
rejected last fall.
  Simply put, this bill is a disaster.
  The House Republicans' budget would again try to end Medicare as we 
know it by replacing the guarantee of health coverage with a private 
voucher program that would reduce benefits. This throws seniors back 
onto the mercy of the private insurance market, while every year giving 
them less and less of the health benefits they have earned through a 
lifetime of hard work.
  The Republican budget would not only make permanent the arbitrary, 
across-the-board budget cuts known as `sequestration,' it would go 
further--making even more savage cuts to domestic programs. Critical 
social services like food stamps, college assistance for low-income 
families, Section 8 housing, home heating assistance, and Medicaid--all 
would face drastic cuts. Under the Republican proposal, our 
transportation investments would be cut by 20% over the next 10 years, 
exacerbating the challenges posed by our outdated roads, bridges, and 
airports. The bill also completely eliminates support for PBS, NPR, 
AmeriCorps, and the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities.
  The Republican budget makes all of these cuts while refusing to cut a 
dime of military spending. What's worse, the Republican plan actually 
reverses planned reductions to military spending by increasing cuts to 
vital social programs--a callously unfair proposal that will have 
terrible consequences for millions of American families.
  To add insult to injury, the bill before us today would make 
sweeping, regressive changes to the tax code which would raise taxes on 
middle class families by up to $3,000. Millionaires, however, would 
actually see a tax cut that averages $245,000 a year. This is just 
wrong. Working families should never have to pay more just so the rich 
can pay less, which is just one more reason why we must defeat this 
bill.
  We no longer, if we ever did, have a deficit crisis. What we have is 
a jobs crisis, with 12 million people searching for employment, and 
almost 5 million Americans without a job for more than 6 months.
  In contrast with the Republican spending plan, the Back to Work 
Budget addresses the jobs crisis head-on by creating nearly 7 million 
jobs in the first year by making historic investments in our 
infrastructure, schools, and transit. It would enable States and local 
governments to hire laid-off teachers, cops, and firefighters, putting 
them back to work in strengthening our communities.
  The Back to Work Budget would preserve our commitment to seniors by 
making no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, while 
reducing health care costs by negotiating drug prices, increasing 
competition in the health care marketplace, and reducing fraud.
  Our budget would also adopt a common-sense tax system that asks the 
wealthiest to pay their fair share while lowering the tax burden on 
middle class families. We would also extend the Making Work Pay tax 
credit to help low-wage workers get back to work and providing for 
their families.
  According to the Economic Policy Institute, the net effect of all of 
these policies would decrease GDP by 1.7%, resulting in 2 million jobs 
lost in 2014 alone. If budgets are truly a reflection of our values, 
then what does it say about the priorities of House Republicans when 
their budget increases health care costs for seniors, cuts 2 million 
jobs, and hits middle class families with a tax increase in order to 
subsidize another tax cut for the rich?

[[Page 4049]]

  The American people rejected this extremist ideology last fall, and I 
hope that my colleagues follow their lead and reject this bill today.
  But the larger problem with the Republican budget is that it will 
increase unemployment and savage Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs 
that families depend upon, in order to fix a deficit ``crisis'' which 
we have already tamed. In 2009 the deficit was 10.1% of GDP. By next 
year, it will be down to 5.3%. This is the largest and fastest 
reduction in deficits since the demobilization after World War II.
  Basic economics tells us that government should pay off debt during 
good times while protecting jobs and middle class security during bad 
times. By balancing revenues with investments and creating millions of 
new jobs, the Back to Work Budget would produce significant economic 
growth while reducing the deficit by $4.4 trillion over 10 years.
  But callous, unbalanced cuts to domestic programs, particularly of 
the magnitude that House Republicans are proposing, would spell 
disaster for our economic recovery.
  While GOP leaders claim to be making tough choices when it comes to 
our spending priorities, again and again they seem to only be making 
the wrong choices. They choose tax breaks for millionaires and the 
largest corporations over tax fairness for the middle class. They 
choose to reduce access to health care by voucherizing Medicare instead 
of protecting the benefits that seniors have earned through a lifetime 
of hard work. They choose to avoid required reductions in military 
spending by instead cutting programs that feed hungry children, heat 
family homes, and make college affordable.
  Conservative governments in Europe have instituted the same austerity 
policies offered by the Republican budget. The result is a double-dip 
recession and 12% unemployment. We should learn from their stupidity.
  Mr. GARRETT. And just to take a word from the gentlelady from 
California, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Williams), who has actually walked the walk and created jobs to create 
more American prosperity.
  Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, we owe it to the American people to 
produce a smart, responsible budget; a budget that balances, that 
encourages job growth, and supports job creators; a budget that 
simplifies our overly complicated Tax Code and lowers tax rates for 
corporations and the middle class.
  This budget just doesn't add up. In fact, it further complicates the 
Tax Code and will greatly hamper job creation. It would create five new 
tax brackets for upper-income individuals and small businesses, and 
would raise taxes on hardworking middle class Americans. It's not good 
policy to raise taxes ever, and especially not in a struggling economy.
  I know what it takes to run a successful business. I have owned and 
operated my small business for 41 years, and it was said I walked the 
walk, I talked the talk.
  This budget won't work in the real world, and it won't work in any 
world. This budget contains trillions in new taxes, trillions in new 
spending, and adds trillions more to the deficit. Pretty soon this 
budget would need its own bailout.
  The American people deserve better. They beg for the Ryan budget. I 
urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this substitute.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the time remaining?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Arizona has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining. 
The gentleman from New Jersey has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota 
(Mr. Ellison), the cochair of the Progressive Caucus.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate my Republican 
friends on convincing some Americans that the only thing they should be 
thinking about is debt and deficit. While it is important, we 
acknowledge that, even Speaker Boehner last weekend said that it was 
not an immediate crisis. But the immediate crisis is the jobs crisis, 
so we should be comparing these budgets based on who creates more jobs.
  Now, the Progressive Caucus Back to Work budget creates 7 million 
jobs in its first year with a jobs package that repairs 35,000 public 
schools, rehires 300,000 laid-off teachers, and boosts consumer demand 
with a tax credit for working families. I believe my friend who just 
spoke said that we raise taxes on middle class families. Not true. We 
actually cut taxes on middle class families.
  The Republican budget would kill 2 million jobs in its first year by 
slashing investment in research, education, and public safety.
  Now by a job-to-job comparison, not just a debt-to-debt, deficit-to-
deficit comparison--again, an important thing, but not the most 
important thing--on the jobs measure, the Back to Work budget is 
superior in every way to the Republican budget. It puts people back to 
work doing jobs that need doing.
  The American Society of Civil Engineers, experts who are completely 
nonpartisan, have said we have $3.3 trillion in unmet maintenance 
needs. We make a downpayment on that infrastructure gap, and we put 
Americans back to work with the Back to Work budget.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has the right to close.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The Back to Work budget is a budget that is common sense, and it 
reflects the values of the American people. It is a budget that deals 
with the realities of our economic times and our social times in this 
country.
  This budget is about investment. It's about saying that the greatest 
resource we have in this country is the American people. We need to put 
them to work. We need to educate them for the future, and we need to 
provide them with some economic security for the middle class, working 
people, so they, too, can enjoy the economic benefits of this great 
Nation of ours.
  We also do not step on those who are the most vulnerable. We provide 
them with the security, with Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid, 
so that they, too, can continue to utilize the full benefits of those 
earned benefits that they have.
  This fiscal debate today with the Ryan budget, too, and the other 
good budgets that have been proposed today is really an argument and a 
debate about the values and the future of this Nation. The Back to Work 
budget accepts the reality that we're in. It does not try to repeat a 
failed policy of the past, and takes us in a direction that in 10 
years--and in 10 years, this country will be more solvent, more secure, 
and unemployment will be down and the investment in this time will pay 
off tremendous dividends for the future. Our budget is about the 
future. It is not about being mired in the past, as the Ryan budget is.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, so here we are at the end of the debate, 
and where are we?
  The Progressive substitute, what would it do? It would raise taxes on 
the American family. It would increase spending throughout the country. 
It would put programs such as Medicare, to allow them to go bankrupt, 
if you will, within the decade, in 2023. It would do all this and put 
the burden on our children and never, ever balance.
  In contrast, before us is the House Republican's Path to Prosperity. 
What does it do? It takes the first step. It takes the very first step 
toward reversing this trend, this path to debt and decline that the 
President and his fellow Democrats on that side of the aisle, and the 
Senate Democrats as well, have laid out for the American people. See, 
the Republican budget stops spending money that we do not have. The 
Republican budget simply does the right things in this area.
  The Republican budget fixes our broken Tax Code. It does away with 
all of those unfair corporate deductions and the like that we've talked 
about. There is some commonality there. So it fixes our broken Tax 
Code, and it does so in a way at the end of the day creates jobs, 
increases wages, and helps the American family. The Republican budget 
will protect and strengthen important priorities like Medicare and 
national security, not allowed by the other side of the aisle. The 
Republican budget will also reform our welfare programs, such as 
Medicaid, so they can actually deliver on their promise and not go 
bankrupt.

[[Page 4050]]

  Every American family, every family in this country understands the 
necessity of having a balanced budget. The President and the Democrats 
could surely learn by talking to them across the country. Budgets are 
more than numbers. Budgets basically come here to Congress and set 
priorities, if you will; and beyond that, they have real impact on 
human beings.
  Unlike the Progressive substitute that's before us right now, the 
Path to Prosperity will provide real economic security for workers, for 
parents. It will ensure security retirement for the elderly and our 
seniors. It will expand opportunity for the young. For that reason, I 
urge this Chamber to vote on the side of freedom and opportunity and 
reject the Progressive Caucus budget substitute.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROSS. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to the Grijalva 
substitute amendment.
   The amendment before us right now does nothing to get our nation 
back on a sustainable spending path. Instead, it proposes devastating 
cuts to the Department of Defense that would threaten our national 
security. It does nothing to protect the solvency of the Medicare trust 
fund. And this budget further complicates the tax code by creating five 
additional income tax brackets.
   Americans are in this economic crisis together. We must work 
together to overcome these challenges that are having devastating 
effects on our economy, the jobs market, and could seriously hinder the 
standard of living for the younger generations.
   The House budget, the Republican Path to Prosperity, builds upon the 
bipartisan Fiscal Commission which my bill, the `Bowles-Simpson Plan of 
Lowering America's Debt Act,' also does. To be effective, Congress must 
eliminate waste and restore fiscal discipline to the government. The 
Simpson-Bowles Commission has given us a framework to implement 
targeted cuts so we don't have to subject the American people to 
arbitrary across-the-board-cuts again. The budget before us today is 
the way to go.
   At a time when our country is more than $16 trillion in debt--all of 
which is saddled on our children and grandchildren--Congress must act 
to end the years upon years of rampant, runaway federal spending that 
has occurred under both political parties.
   It's Congress' job to pass a budget that is balanced and carefully 
spends Americans' hard-earned tax dollars. I urge my colleagues to 
reject the Grijalva amendment and instead implement the House 
Republican budget, the responsible, balanced budget which builds on the 
Simpson-Bowles Commission's suggestions, and will foster a healthier 
economy and help create jobs across America.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, as a proud member of the Congressional 
Progressive Caucus, CPC, I rise in strong support of the CPC's 
alternative to H. Con. Res. 25. This alternative budget, more 
appropriately known as the ``Budget for All'' Substitute invests in 
America, reforms corporate and individual taxes in a balanced manner, 
and adopts sensible, modern defense spending. Simply put: the CPC is an 
egalitarian and effective budget for all of America.
  The CPC's ``Budget for All'' wisely invests the hard earned peace 
dividend resulting from the successful end to the war in Iraq and the 
winding down of the war in Afghanistan to promote economic growth and a 
healthier and cleaner environment.
  In addition, this budget puts Americans back to work, charts a path 
to responsible deficit reduction, enhances our economic 
competitiveness, rebuilds the middle class and invests in our future. 
The CPC budget makes no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security 
benefits, and asks those who have benefited most from our economy to 
pay a sensible share. It is only fair.
  The CPC budget addresses America's persistently high unemployment 
levels with more than $2.9 trillion in additional job-creating 
investments, which frankly will help depressed economies in inner-city 
communities across America, including those in my hometown of Houston, 
Texas. This plan utilizes every tool at the government's disposal to 
get our economy moving again, including:
  Direct hire programs that create a School Improvement Corps, a Park 
Improvement Corps, and a Student Jobs Corps, among others.
  Targeted tax incentives that spur clean energy, manufacturing, and 
cutting-edge technological investments in the private sector.
  Widespread domestic investments including an infrastructure bank, a 
$556 billion surface transportation bill, and approximately $2.1 
trillion in widespread domestic investment.
  The Budget for All achieves $6.8 trillion in deficit reduction, hits 
the same debt to GDP ratio as the Republican budget with lower deficits 
in the last five years; and does so in a responsible way that does not 
eviscerate vital services Americans want preserved.
  These benchmarks are achieved by focusing on the true drivers of our 
deficit: unsustainable tax policies, the wars overseas, and policies 
that helped cause the recent recession--rather than irresponsibly 
putting the middle class's social safety net on the chopping block.
  The budget also taxes fairly, because it:
  Ends tax cuts for the top 2% of Americans on schedule at year's end.
  Extends tax relief for middle class households and the vast majority 
of Americans.
  Creates new tax brackets for millionaires and billionaires.
  Eliminates the tax code's preferential treatment of capital gains and 
dividends.
  Abolishes corporate welfare for oil, gas, and coal companies.
  Eliminates loopholes that allow businesses to dodge their true tax 
liability.
  Calls for the adoption of the ``Buffett Rule''.
  Creates a publicly funded federal election system that gets corporate 
money out of politics for good.
  The CPC budget demonstrates that we have been listening to the 
American people because we responsibly and sensibly end our military 
presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving America more secure at home 
and abroad; and modernizes our military to address 21st century threats 
and stop contributing to our deficit problems. This is the peace 
dividend. With this dividend, the CPC budget:
  Provides a Making Work Pay tax credit for families struggling with 
high gas and food cost's 2013-2015.
  Extends Earned Income Tax Credit, and the Child and Dependent Care 
Credit.
  Invests in programs to stave off further foreclosures to keep 
families in their homes.
  Invests in our children's education by increasing Education, 
Training, and Social Services.
  Mr. Chair, the federal budget is a moral document, with meaning, 
fiber, and a unique texture. Sometimes we lose sight of this fact given 
the preoccupation by many with, I could wax on and on today on the 
Floor about the ``baselines,'' ``benchmarks,'' and ``extrapolations and 
projections of future budget conditions,'' based on the assumptions 
that may or may not turn out to be accurate.
  But real people living, struggling with real problems in the real 
world are not interested in such esoteric discussion. They want us to 
focus on their lives and their problems. They want to know that we 
understand the necessity of making taxes fairer, simpler, and 
economically reasonable.
  Most economists agree, Mr. Chair, that entitlement policy must be 
evaluated and progressively modified to achieve sustainability. Unlike 
discretionary spending, mandatory spending grew rapidly from 5% of GDP 
in 1962 to a range of 9% to 10.5% of GDP from 1975 to 2007, peaking in 
recession years because of automatic stabilizers.
  Let me be clear: I am unalterably opposed to any entitlement reform 
that deprives seniors, like the ones that reside in the 18th 
Congressional District of Texas, of benefits they have labored long and 
hard to earn. To do otherwise would break a promise to prior 
generations who faithfully paid into the current system. These are not 
entitlements; they are earned benefits. And they must not be taken 
away.
  And speaking of Texas; recently my hometown of Houston was forced to 
lay off nearly one thousand municipal employees. When these employees 
are put on the unemployment line, libraries close, schools cut back on 
essential after-school programs, community centers lose personnel, 
police hours are trimmed, and the truly destitute become an 
afterthought.
  Those tough budget decisions had a human cost and I hear from my 
constituents every day about them. Frankly, I do not want tax cuts for 
the wealthy at the expense of jobs for working and middle class 
families in Texas.
  The CPC fiscal year 2014 budget alternative stands in clear contrast 
to the budget that our Republican colleagues have put forward. This 
budget will reduce the deficit in a balanced and credible way, making 
difficult choices while providing investments that help create jobs now 
and build an even stronger economy for the future.
  But unlike the Republican budget--which ends the Medicare guarantee 
while providing enormous tax breaks to millionaires--we ask the very 
wealthy and special interests to share responsibility for reducing the 
deficit. We must embark on a truly shared sacrifice.
  I ask my colleagues to support the CPC Budget for All Substitute.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

[[Page 4051]]

  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.


                       Announcement by the Chair

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now 
resume on those amendments printed in House Report 113-21 on which 
further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Mulvaney of South Carolina.
  Amendment No. 2 by Mr. Scott of Virginia.
  Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Grijalva of Arizona.
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


 Amendment No. 1 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Mulvaney

  The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. 
Mulvaney) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 154, 
noes 261, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 83]

                               AYES--154

     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Garamendi
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (MI)
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--261

     Alexander
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Delaney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Doggett
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallego
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Aderholt
     Amodei
     DeLauro
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Fortenberry
     Grimm
     Hinojosa
     Langevin
     Lipinski
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Smith (NJ)
     Thompson (CA)
     Wasserman Schultz

                              {time}  1446

  Messrs. WEBER of Texas, SCHWEIKERT, BARBER, DUNCAN of South Carolina, 
GOSAR, ROONEY and BARTON, and Mrs. KIRKPATRICK changed their vote from 
``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. CARSON of Indiana, DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois, NEAL and 
TONKO, and Mrs. McCARTHY of New York changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


 Amendment No. 2 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Scott of 
                                Virginia

  The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIR. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 105, 
noes 305, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 20, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 84]

                               AYES--105

     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     Deutch
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fudge
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis
     Lowenthal
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Meeks

[[Page 4052]]


     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Takano
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watt
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--305

     Alexander
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Rodney
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Latta
     Levin
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Vela
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Negrete McLeod
       

                             NOT VOTING--20

     Aderholt
     Amodei
     DeLauro
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Fortenberry
     Grimm
     Hinojosa
     Hurt
     Langevin
     Lipinski
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Pelosi
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sewell (AL)
     Smith (NJ)
     Thompson (CA)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waxman

                              {time}  1456

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chair, I was detained and missed this vote 
for the Record. I support this amendment and would have voted for it. 
Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 84, the Scott of VA Substitute 
amendment to H. Con. Res. 25, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``aye.''
  Stated against:
  Mr. HURT. Mr. Chair, I was not present for rollcall vote No. 84. Had 
I been present, I would have voted ``no.''


 Amendment No. 3 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Grijalva

  The CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) 
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIR. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 84, 
noes 327, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 19, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 85]

                                AYES--84

     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Blumenauer
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cummings
     Davis, Danny
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fudge
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Holt
     Honda
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis
     Lowenthal
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Nolan
     Pallone
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Serrano
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Takano
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Waters
     Watt
     Welch
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--327

     Alexander
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonamici
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cicilline
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Holding
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     Latta
     Levin
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan

[[Page 4053]]


     Meeks
     Messer
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Speier
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vela
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Negrete McLeod
       

                             NOT VOTING--19

     Aderholt
     Amodei
     DeLauro
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Fortenberry
     Grimm
     Hinojosa
     Langevin
     Lipinski
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Scott, Austin
     Smith (NJ)
     Thompson (CA)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waxman
     Wilson (FL)

                              {time}  1503

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


  Amendment No. 4 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Woodall

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in 
House Report 113-21.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL 
                   YEAR 2014.

       (a) Declaration.--The Congress determines and declares that 
     this concurrent resolution establishes the budget for fiscal 
     year 2014 and sets forth appropriate budgetary levels for 
     fiscal years 2015 through 2023.
       (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 2014.

                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.

                     TITLE III--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 301. Limitation on advance appropriations.
Sec. 302. Concepts and definitions.
Sec. 303. Adjustments of aggregates, allocations, and appropriate 
              budgetary levels.
Sec. 304. Limitation on long-term spending.
Sec. 305. Budgetary treatment of certain transactions.
Sec. 306. Application and effect of changes in allocations and 
              aggregates.
Sec. 307. Congressional Budget Office estimates.
Sec. 308. Transfers from the general fund of the treasury to the 
              highway trust fund that increase public indebtedness.
Sec. 309. Separate allocation for overseas contingency operations/
              global war on terrorism.
Sec. 310. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

                            TITLE IV--POLICY

Sec. 401. Policy statement on Health Care Law repeal.
Sec. 402. Policy statement on means-tested welfare programs.
Sec. 403. Policy statement on reforming Federal regulation.
Sec. 404. Policy statement on medicare.
Sec. 405. Policy statement on deficit reduction through the 
              cancellation of unobligated balances.
Sec. 406. Policy statement on block granting Medicaid.
Sec. 407. Policy statement on a carbon tax.
Sec. 408. Policy statement on the use of official time by Federal 
              employees for union activities.
Sec. 409. Policy statement on creation of a Committee to Eliminate 
              Duplication and Waste.
Sec. 410. Policy statement on Federal funding of abortion.
Sec. 411. Policy statement on readable legislation.
Sec. 412. Policy statement on work requirements.
Sec. 413. Policy statement on energy production.
Sec. 414. Policy statement on regulation of greenhouse gases by the 
              Environmental Protection Agency.
Sec. 415. Policy statement on creating a Commission to Eliminate Waste 
              and Duplication.
Sec. 416. Policy statement on reforming the Federal budget process.

                         TITLE V--RESERVE FUNDS

Sec. 501. Reserve fund for the repeal of the 2010 health care laws.
Sec. 502. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for the reform of the 2010 
              health care laws.
Sec. 503. Deficit-neutral reserve fund related to the Medicare 
              provisions of the 2010 health care laws.
Sec. 504. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for the sustainable growth rate 
              of the Medicare program.
Sec. 505. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for reforming the tax code.
Sec. 506. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for trade agreements.
Sec. 507. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for revenue measures.
Sec. 508. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for rural counties and schools.
Sec. 509. Implementation of a deficit and long-term debt reduction 
              agreement.

                      TITLE VI--EARMARK MORATORIUM

Sec. 601. Earmark moratorium.
Sec. 602. Limitation of authority of the House Committee on Rules.

                TITLE VII--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

Sec. 701. Direct spending.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

     SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

       The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of 
     fiscal years 2014 through 2023:
       (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this concurrent resolution:
       (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
     follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,238,676,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2.569,511,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,736,260,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,855,685,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $2,977,343,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,094,769,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,226,689,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,394,021,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,583,392,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,758,528,000,000.
       (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
     revenues should be changed are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: -$42,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: -$48,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: -$55,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: -$62,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: -$66,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: -$71,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: -$76,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: -$82,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: -$88,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: -$95,000,000,000.
       (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 2014: $2,731,789,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,637,514,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,784,886,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,879,849,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $2,949,017,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,107,529,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,214,726,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,321,892,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,444,036,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,514,166,000,000.
       (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this concurrent resolution, the appropriate levels of total 
     budget outlays are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,776,790,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,691,748,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,778,027,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $2,851,148,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $2,924,400,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,060,129,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,175,963,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,279,221,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,430,176,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,470,191,000,000.
       (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 2014: -$538,114,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: -$122,237,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: -$41,767,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $4,537,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $52,943,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $34,640,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $50,726,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $114,800,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $153,216,000,000.

[[Page 4054]]

       Fiscal year 2023: $288,337,000,000.
       (5) Debt subject to limit.--The appropriate levels of the 
     public debt are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $17,770,245,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $18,078,431,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $18,314,047,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $18,575,645,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $18,835,381,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $19,150,167,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $19,468,280,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $19,747,439,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $19,992,706,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $20,141,240,000,000.
       (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of 
     debt held by the public are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2014: $12,843,588,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $13,061,768,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $13,195,792,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $13,302,662,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $13,381,815,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $13,531,424,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $13,696,092,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021; $13,839,370,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $13,984,314,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $14,032,720,000,000.

     SEC. 102. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

       The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate 
     levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years 
     2014 through 2023 for each major functional category are:
       (1) National Defense (050):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,225,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $579,234,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $574,359,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $563,976,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $585,556,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $570,288,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $598,822,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $575,457,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $612,125,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $582,678,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $625,445,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $600,508,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $639,780,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $614,250,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $654,096,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $628,265,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $671,181,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $649,221,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $688,640,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $660,461,000,000.
       (2) International Affairs (150):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (4) Energy (270):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.

[[Page 4055]]

       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (6) Agriculture (350):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (8) Transportation (400):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
     (500):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.

[[Page 4056]]

       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (11) Health (550):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (12) Medicare (570):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (13) Income Security (600):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (14) Social Security (650):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.

[[Page 4057]]

       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (16) Administration of Justice (750):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (17) General Government (800):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (18) Net Interest (900):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $352,461,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $352,461,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $369,105,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $369,105,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $406,832,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $406,832,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $472,136,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $472,136,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $540,485,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $540,485,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $590,567,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $590,567,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $632,916,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $632,916,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $657,623,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $657,623,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $678,208,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $678,208,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $688,759,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $688,759,000,000.
       (19) Allowances (920):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,819,103,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,845,094,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,694,050,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,758,667,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,792,498,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,800,908,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,808,890,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,803,554,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,796,408,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,801,238,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,891,517,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,869,054,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $1,942,030,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,928,797,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,010,172,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,993,333,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,094,647,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,102,747,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $2,136,766,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $2,120,971,000,000.
       (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       (21) Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on 
     Terrorism (970):
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2016:

[[Page 4058]]

       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, an amount to be derived from 
     function 920.
       (B) Outlays, an amount to be derived from function 920.

                        TITLE II--RECONCILIATION

     SEC. 201. RECONCILIATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

       (a) Submissions of Spending Reduction.--The House 
     committees named in subsection (b) shall submit, not later 
     than May 31, 2013, recommendations to the Committee on the 
     Budget of the House of Representatives. After receiving those 
     recommendations, such committee shall report to the House a 
     reconciliation bill carrying out all such recommendations 
     without substantive revision.
       (b) Instructions.--
       (1) Committee on agriculture.--The Committee on Agriculture 
     shall submit changes in laws within its jurisdiction 
     sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 
     for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (2) Committee on education and the workforce.--The 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce shall submit changes 
     in laws within its jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the 
     deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal 
     years 2013 through 2023.
       (3) Committee on energy and commerce.--The Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (4) Committee on financial services.--The Committee on 
     Financial Services shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (5) Committee on the judiciary.--The Committee on the 
     Judiciary shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (6) Committee on natural resources.--The Committee on 
     Natural Resources shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (7) Committee on oversight and government reform.--The 
     Committee on Oversight and Government Reform shall submit 
     changes in laws within its jurisdiction sufficient to reduce 
     the deficit by at least $1,000,000,000 for the period of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023.
       (8) Committee on ways and means.--(A) The Committee on Ways 
     and Means shall submit changes in laws within its 
     jurisdiction sufficient to reduce the deficit by at least 
     $1,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2013 through 
     2023.
       (B) The Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives shall report a reconciliation bill not later 
     than September 15, 2013, that consists of changes in laws 
     within its jurisdiction sufficient to reduce revenues by not 
     more than $42,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2014 and by not 
     more than $685,000,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 
     2014 through 2023.

                     TITLE III--BUDGET ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 301. LIMITATION ON ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) The Veterans Health Care Budget and Reform Transparency 
     Act of 2009 provides advance appropriations for the following 
     veteran medical care accounts: Medical Services, Medical 
     Support and Compliance, and Medical Facilities.
       (2) The President has yet to submit a budget request as 
     required under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States 
     Code, including the request for the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, for fiscal year 2014, hence the request for veteran 
     medical care advance appropriations for fiscal year 2015 is 
     unavailable as of the writing of this concurrent resolution.
       (3) This concurrent resolution reflects the most up-to-date 
     estimate on veterans' health care needs included in the 
     President's fiscal year 2013 request for fiscal year 2015.
       (b) In General.--In the House, except as provided for in 
     subsection (c), any bill or joint resolution, or amendment 
     thereto or conference report thereon, making a general 
     appropriation or continuing appropriation may not provide for 
     advance appropriations.
       (c) Exceptions.--An advance appropriation may be provided 
     for programs, projects, activities, or accounts referred to 
     in subsection (d)(1) or identified in the report to accompany 
     this concurrent resolution or the joint explanatory statement 
     of managers to accompany this concurrent resolution under the 
     heading ``Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations''.
       (d) Limitations.--For fiscal year 2015, the aggregate level 
     of advance appropriations shall not exceed--
       (1) $55,483,000,000 for the following programs in the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs--
       (A) Medical Services;
       (B) Medical Support and Compliance; and
       (C) Medical Facilities accounts of the Veterans Health 
     Administration; and
       (2) $28,852,000,000 in new budget authority for all 
     programs identified pursuant to subsection (c).
       (e) Definition.--In this section, the term ``advance 
     appropriation'' means any new discretionary budget authority 
     provided in a bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, making general appropriations 
     or any new discretionary budget authority provided in a bill 
     or joint resolution making continuing appropriations for 
     fiscal year 2015.

     SEC. 302. CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS.

       Upon the enactment of any bill or joint resolution 
     providing for a change in budgetary concepts or definitions, 
     the chair of the Committee on the Budget may adjust any 
     allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this 
     concurrent resolution accordingly.

     SEC. 303. ADJUSTMENTS OF AGGREGATES, ALLOCATIONS, AND 
                   APPROPRIATE BUDGETARY LEVELS.

       (a) Adjustments of Discretionary and Direct Spending 
     Levels.--If a committee (other than the Committee on 
     Appropriations) reports a bill or joint resolution, or 
     amendment thereto or conference report thereon, providing for 
     a decrease in direct spending (budget authority and outlays 
     flowing therefrom) for any fiscal year and also provides for 
     an authorization of appropriations for the same purpose, upon 
     the enactment of such measure, the chair of the Committee on 
     the Budget may decrease the allocation to such committee and 
     increase the allocation of discretionary spending (budget 
     authority and outlays flowing therefrom) to the Committee on 
     Appropriations for fiscal year 2014 by an amount equal to the 
     new budget authority (and outlays flowing therefrom) provided 
     for in a bill or joint resolution making appropriations for 
     the same purpose.
       (b) Adjustments to Implement Discretionary Spending Caps 
     and to Fund Veterans' Programs and Overseas Contingency 
     Operations/Global War on Terrorism.--
       (1) Findings.--(A) The President has not submitted a budget 
     for fiscal year 2014 as required pursuant to section 1105(a) 
     of title 31, United States Code, by the date set forth in 
     that section.
       (B) In missing the statutory date by which the budget must 
     be submitted, this will be the fourth time in five years the 
     President has not complied with that deadline.
       (C) This concurrent resolution reflects the levels of 
     funding for veterans' medical programs as set forth in the 
     President's fiscal year 2013 budget request.
       (2) President's budget submission.--In order to take into 
     account any new information included in the budget submission 
     by the President for fiscal year 2014, the chair of the 
     Committee on the Budget may adjust the allocations, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary levels for 
     veterans' programs, Overseas Contingency Operations/Global 
     War on Terrorism, or the 302(a) allocation to the Committee 
     on Appropriations set forth in the report of this concurrent 
     resolution to conform with section 251(c) of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (as adjusted 
     by section 251A of such Act).
       (3) Revised congressional budget office baseline.--The 
     chair of the Committee on the Budget may adjust the 
     allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate budgetary 
     levels to reflect changes resulting from technical and 
     economic assumptions in the most recent baseline published by 
     the Congressional Budget Office.
       (c) Determinations.--For the purpose of enforcing this 
     concurrent resolution on the budget in the House, the 
     allocations and aggregate levels of new budget authority, 
     outlays, direct spending, new entitlement authority, 
     revenues, deficits, and surpluses for fiscal year 2014 and 
     the period of fiscal years 2014 through fiscal year 2023 
     shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the 
     chair of the Committee on the Budget and such chair may 
     adjust such applicable levels of this concurrent resolution.

[[Page 4059]]



     SEC. 304. LIMITATION ON LONG-TERM SPENDING.

       (a) In General.--In the House, it shall not be in order to 
     consider a bill or joint resolution reported by a committee 
     (other than the Committee on Appropriations), or an amendment 
     thereto or a conference report thereon, if the provisions of 
     such measure have the net effect of increasing direct 
     spending in excess of $5,000,000,000 for any period described 
     in subsection (b).
       (b) Time Periods.--The applicable periods for purposes of 
     this section are any of the four consecutive ten fiscal-year 
     periods beginning with fiscal year 2024.

     SEC. 305. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 302(a)(1) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, section 13301 of the Budget 
     Enforcement Act of 1990, and section 4001 of the Omnibus 
     Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, the report accompanying 
     this concurrent resolution on the budget or the joint 
     explanatory statement accompanying the conference report on 
     any concurrent resolution on the budget shall include in its 
     allocation under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974 to the Committee on Appropriations amounts for 
     the discretionary administrative expenses of the Social 
     Security Administration and the United States Postal Service.
       (b) Special Rule.--For purposes of applying sections 302(f) 
     and 311 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, estimates of 
     the level of total new budget authority and total outlays 
     provided by a measure shall include any off-budget 
     discretionary amounts.
       (c) Adjustments.--The chair of the Committee on the Budget 
     may adjust the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels for legislation reported by the Committee on Oversight 
     and Government Reform that reforms the Federal retirement 
     system, if such adjustments do not cause a net increase in 
     the deficit for fiscal year 2014 and the period of fiscal 
     years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 306. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS 
                   AND AGGREGATES.

       (a) Application.--Any adjustments of the allocations, 
     aggregates, and other appropriate 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 and aggregates resulting from these adjustments 
     shall be considered for the purposes of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 as allocations and aggregates included in 
     this concurrent resolution.
       (c) Budget Compliance.--(1) 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 appropriate levels of this concurrent 
     resolution shall not be subject to the points of order set 
     forth in clause 10 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives or section 604.
       (2) Section 314(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
     shall not apply in the House of Representatives to any bill, 
     joint resolution, or amendment that provides new budget 
     authority for a fiscal year or to any conference report on 
     any such bill or resolution, if--
       (A) the enactment of that bill or resolution;
       (B) the adoption and enactment of that amendment; or
       (C) the enactment of that bill or resolution in the form 
     recommended in that conference report;
     would not cause the appropriate allocation of new budget 
     authority made pursuant to section 302(a) of such Act for 
     that fiscal year to be exceeded or the sum of the limits on 
     the security and non-security category in section 251A of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act as reduced 
     pursuant to such section.

     SEC. 307. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATES.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) Costs of Federal housing loans and loan guarantees are 
     treated unequally in the budget. The Congressional Budget 
     Office uses fair-value accounting to measure the costs of 
     Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but determines the cost of other 
     Federal housing programs on the basis of the Federal Credit 
     Reform Act of 1990 (``FCRA'').
       (2) The fair-value accounting method uses discount rates 
     which incorporate the risk inherent to the type of liability 
     being estimated in addition to Treasury discount rates of the 
     proper maturity length. In contrast, cash-basis accounting 
     solely uses the discount rates of the Treasury, failing to 
     incorporate risks such as prepayment and default risk.
       (3) The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the $635 
     billion of loans and loan guarantees issued in 2013 alone 
     would generate budgetary savings of $45 billion over their 
     lifetime using FCRA accounting. However, these same loans and 
     loan guarantees would have a lifetime cost of $11 billion 
     under fair-value methodology.
       (4) The majority of loans and guarantees issued in 2013 
     would show deficit reduction of $9.1 billion under FCRA 
     methodology, but would increase the deficit by $4.7 billion 
     using fair-value accounting.
       (b) Fair Value Estimates.--Upon the request of the chair or 
     ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, any estimate 
     prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
     for a measure under the terms of title V of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974, ``credit reform'', as a supplement to 
     such estimate shall, to the extent practicable, also provide 
     an estimate of the current actual or estimated market values 
     representing the ``fair value'' of assets and liabilities 
     affected by such measure.
       (c) Fair Value Estimates for Housing Programs.--Whenever 
     the Director of the Congressional Budget Office prepares an 
     estimate pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974 of the costs which would be incurred in carrying 
     out any bill or joint resolution and if the Director 
     determines that such bill or joint resolution has a cost 
     related to a housing or residential mortgage program under 
     the FCRA, then the Director shall also provide an estimate of 
     the current actual or estimated market values representing 
     the ``fair value'' of assets and liabilities affected by the 
     provisions of such bill or joint resolution that result in 
     such cost.
       (d) Enforcement.--If the Director of the Congressional 
     Budget Office provides an estimate pursuant to subsection (b) 
     or (c), the chair of the Committee on the Budget may use such 
     estimate to determine compliance with the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 and other budgetary enforcement controls.

     SEC. 308. TRANSFERS FROM THE GENERAL FUND OF THE TREASURY TO 
                   THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND THAT INCREASE PUBLIC 
                   INDEBTEDNESS.

       For purposes of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, or 
     the rules or orders of the House of Representatives, a bill 
     or joint resolution, or an amendment thereto or conference 
     report thereon, that transfers funds from the general fund of 
     the Treasury to the Highway Trust Fund shall be counted as 
     new budget authority and outlays equal to the amount of the 
     transfer in the fiscal year the transfer occurs.

     SEC. 309. SEPARATE ALLOCATION FOR OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY 
                   OPERATIONS/GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM.

       (a) Allocation.--In the House, there shall be a separate 
     allocation to the Committee on Appropriations for overseas 
     contingency operations/global war on terrorism. For purposes 
     of enforcing such separate allocation under section 302(f) of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the ``first fiscal 
     year'' and the ``total of fiscal years'' shall be deemed to 
     refer to fiscal year 2014. Such separate allocation shall be 
     the exclusive allocation for overseas contingency operations/
     global war on terrorism under section 302(a) of such Act. 
     Section 302(c) of such Act shall not apply to such separate 
     allocation. The Committee on Appropriations may provide 
     suballocations of such separate allocation under section 
     302(b) of such Act. Spending that counts toward the 
     allocation established by this section shall be designated 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Balanced Budget 
     and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
       (b) Adjustment.--In the House, for purposes of subsection 
     (a) for fiscal year 2014, no adjustment shall be made under 
     section 314(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 if any 
     adjustment would be made under section 251(b)(2)(A)(ii) of 
     the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 
     1985.

     SEC. 310. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       The House adopts the provisions of this title--
       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
     Representatives and as such they shall be considered as part 
     of the rules of the House of Representatives, and these rules 
     shall supersede other rules only to the extent that they are 
     inconsistent with other such rules; and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     the House of Representatives to change those rules at any 
     time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as in the 
     case of any other rule of the House of Representatives.

                            TITLE IV--POLICY

     SEC. 401. POLICY STATEMENT ON HEALTH CARE LAW REPEAL.

       It is the policy of this resolution that the Patient 
     Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148), and 
     the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 
     (Public Law 111-152) should be repealed.

     SEC. 402. POLICY STATEMENT ON MEANS-TESTED WELFARE PROGRAMS.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that:
       (1) In 1996, President Bill Clinton and congressional 
     Republicans enacted reforms that have moved families off of 
     Federal programs and enabled them to provide for themselves.
       (2) According to the most recent projections, over the next 
     10 years we will spend approximately $10 trillion on means-
     tested welfare programs.
       (3) Today, there are approximately 70 Federal programs that 
     provide benefits specifically to poor and low-income 
     Americans.

[[Page 4060]]

       (4) Taxpayers deserve clear and transparent information on 
     how well these programs are working, and how much the Federal 
     Government is spending on means-tested welfare.
       (b) Policy on Means-Tested Welfare Programs.--It is the 
     policy of this resolution that the President's budget should 
     disclose, in a clear and transparent manner, the aggregate 
     amount of Federal welfare expenditures, as well as an 
     estimate of State and local spending for this purpose, over 
     the next ten years.

     SEC. 403. POLICY STATEMENT ON REFORMING FEDERAL REGULATION.

       It is the policy of this resolution that the cost of 
     regulations on job creators should be reduced by enacting 
     title II of the Jobs Through Growth Act (H.R. 3400), as 
     introduced on November 10, 2011. Further, it is the policy of 
     this resolution that H.R. 309, the Regulatory Sunset and 
     Review Act of 2013 as introduced on January 18, 2013, should 
     also be enacted.

     SEC. 404. POLICY STATEMENT ON MEDICARE.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) More than 51 million Americans depend on Medicare for 
     their health security.
       (2) The Medicare Trustees Report has repeatedly recommended 
     that Medicare's long-term financial challenges be addressed 
     soon. Each year without reform, the financial condition of 
     Medicare becomes more precarious and the threat to those in 
     and near retirement becomes more pronounced. According to the 
     Congressional Budget Office--
       (A) the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will be exhausted in 
     2023 and unable to pay scheduled benefits; and
       (B) Medicare spending is growing faster than the economy 
     and Medicare outlays are currently rising at a rate of 6.4 
     percent per year on average over the next ten years, and 
     under the Congressional Budget Office's alternative fiscal 
     scenario, direct spending on Medicare is projected to reach 
     6.4 percent of GDP by 2035 and 13 percent of GDP by 2085.
       (3) Failing to address this problem will leave millions of 
     American seniors without adequate health security and younger 
     generations burdened with enormous debt to pay for spending 
     levels that cannot be sustained.
       (b) Policy on Medicare Reform.--It is the policy of this 
     resolution--
       (1) to protect those in and near retirement from any 
     disruptions to their Medicare benefits and offer future 
     beneficiaries the same health care options available to 
     Members of Congress; and
       (2) that H.R. 309, the Regulatory Sunset and Review Act of 
     2013 as introduced on January 18, 2013, should be enacted
       (c) Assumptions.--This resolution assumes reform of the 
     Medicare program such that:
       (1) Current Medicare benefits are preserved for those in 
     and near retirement, without changes.
       (2) For future generations, when they reach eligibility, 
     Medicare is reformed to provide a premium support payment and 
     a selection of guaranteed health coverage options from which 
     recipients can choose a plan that best suits their needs, 
     including an option to remain in the traditional Medicare 
     fee-for-service program.
       (3) Medicare will provide additional assistance for lower-
     income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks.
       (4) Medicare spending is put on a sustainable path and the 
     Medicare program becomes solvent over the long term.

     SEC. 405. POLICY STATEMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION THROUGH THE 
                   CANCELLATION OF UNOBLIGATED BALANCES.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) According to the Office of Management and Budget, 
     Federal agencies will hold $698 billion in unobligated 
     balances at the close of fiscal year 2013.
       (2) These funds represent direct and discretionary spending 
     made available by Congress that remain available for 
     expenditure beyond the fiscal year for which they are 
     provided.
       (3) In some cases, agencies are granted funding and it 
     remains available for obligation indefinitely.
       (4) The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 
     1974 requires the Office of Management and Budget to make 
     funds available to agencies for obligation and prohibits the 
     Administration from withholding or cancelling unobligated 
     funds unless approved by an act of Congress.
       (5) Greater congressional oversight is required to review 
     and identify potential savings from unneeded balances of 
     funds.
       (b) Policy on Deficit Reduction Through the Cancellation of 
     Unobligated Balances.--Congressional committees shall through 
     their oversight activities identify and achieve savings 
     through the cancellation or rescission of unobligated 
     balances that neither abrogate contractual obligations of the 
     Federal Government nor reduce or disrupt Federal commitments 
     under programs such as Social Security, veterans' affairs, 
     national security, and Treasury authority to finance the 
     national debt.
       (c) Deficit Reduction.--Congress, with the assistance of 
     the Government Accountability Office, the Inspectors General, 
     and other appropriate agencies should make it a high priority 
     to review unobligated balances and identify savings for 
     deficit reduction.

     SEC. 406. POLICY STATEMENT ON BLOCK GRANTING MEDICAID.

       It is the policy of this resolution that Medicaid and the 
     Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) should be block 
     granted to the States in a manner prescribed by the State 
     Health Flexibility Act of 2013 (H.R. 567, 113th Congress).

     SEC. 407. POLICY STATEMENT ON A CARBON TAX.

       It is the policy of this budget that a carbon tax would be 
     detrimental to American families and businesses, and is not 
     in the best interest of the United States.

     SEC. 408. POLICY STATEMENT ON THE USE OF OFFICIAL TIME BY 
                   FEDERAL EMPLOYEES FOR UNION ACTIVITIES.

       It is the policy of this budget that, as called for in the 
     Federal Employee Accountability Act of 2013, Federal 
     employees shall not use official time to conduct union 
     activities.

     SEC. 409. POLICY STATEMENT ON CREATION OF A COMMITTEE TO 
                   ELIMINATE DUPLICATION AND WASTE.

       It is the policy of this budget that a new committee, 
     styled after the post-World War II ``Byrd Committee'' shall 
     be created to act on GAO's annual waste and duplication 
     reports as well as Oversight and Government Reform Inspector 
     General reports.

     SEC. 410. POLICY STATEMENT ON FEDERAL FUNDING OF ABORTION.

       It is the policy of this budget that no taxpayer dollars 
     shall go to any entity that provides abortion services.

     SEC. 411. POLICY STATEMENT ON READABLE LEGISLATION.

       It is the policy of this budget that bills should be made 
     more readable and for Members of Congress and more accessible 
     to the public as called for in the Readable Legislation Act 
     of 2013.

     SEC. 412. POLICY STATEMENT ON WORK REQUIREMENTS.

       It is the policy of this budget that the work requirements 
     in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant 
     program should be preserved as called for in H.R. 890, 113th 
     Congress.

     SEC. 413. POLICY STATEMENT ON ENERGY PRODUCTION.

       It is the policy of this resolution that the Arctic 
     National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and currently unavailable 
     areas of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) should be open for 
     energy exploration and production. To ensure States' rights, 
     states are given the option to withdrawal from leasing within 
     certain areas of the OCS. Specifically, a State, through 
     enactment of a State statute, may withdrawal from leasing 
     from all or part of any area within 75 miles of that State's 
     coast.

     SEC. 414. POLICY STATEMENT ON REGULATION OF GREENHOUSE GASES 
                   BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.

       The Environmental Protection Agency is prohibited from 
     promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action 
     relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a 
     greenhouse gas to address climate change.

     SEC. 415. POLICY STATEMENT ON CREATING A COMMISSION TO 
                   ELIMINATE WASTE AND DUPLICATION.

       It is the policy of this budget that a new commission 
     styled after the ``Byrd Committee'' shall be established as 
     called for in H. Res. 119., as introduced on March 14, 2013.

     SEC. 416. POLICY STATEMENT ON REFORMING THE FEDERAL BUDGET 
                   PROCESS.

       It is the policy of this resolution that the Federal budget 
     process should be reformed so that it is easier to reduce 
     Federal spending than it is to increase it by enacting 
     reforms included in the Spending, Deficit, and Debt Control 
     Act of 2009 (H.R. 3964, 111th Congress).

                         TITLE V--RESERVE FUNDS

     SEC. 501. RESERVE FUND FOR THE REPEAL OF THE 2010 HEALTH CARE 
                   LAWS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that only consists of a full 
     repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the 
     health care-related provisions of the Health Care and 
     Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

     SEC. 502. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR THE REFORM OF THE 
                   2010 HEALTH CARE LAWS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that reforms or replaces the 
     Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or the Health Care 
     and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, if such measure 
     would not increase the deficit for the period of fiscal years 
     2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 503. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND RELATED TO THE 
                   MEDICARE PROVISIONS OF THE 2010 HEALTH CARE 
                   LAWS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations,

[[Page 4061]]

     aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this concurrent 
     resolution for the budgetary effects of any bill or joint 
     resolution, or amendment thereto or conference report 
     thereon, that repeals all or part of the decreases in 
     Medicare spending included in the Patient Protection and 
     Affordable Care Act or the Health Care and Education 
     Reconciliation Act of 2010, if such measure would not 
     increase the deficit for the period of fiscal years 2014 
     through 2023.

     SEC. 504. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR THE SUSTAINABLE 
                   GROWTH RATE OF THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that includes provisions 
     amending or superseding the system for updating payments 
     under section 1848 of the Social Security Act, if such 
     measure would not increase the deficit for the period of 
     fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 505. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR REFORMING THE TAX 
                   CODE.

       In the House, if the Committee on Ways and Means reports a 
     bill or joint resolution that reforms the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any such bill or joint resolution, or amendment 
     thereto or conference report thereon, if such measure would 
     not increase the deficit for the period of fiscal years 2014 
     through 2023.

     SEC. 506. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution reported by the 
     Committee on Ways and Means, or amendment thereto or 
     conference report thereon, that implements a trade agreement, 
     but only if such measure would not increase the deficit for 
     the period of fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 507. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR REVENUE MEASURES.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution reported by the 
     Committee on Ways and Means, or amendment thereto or 
     conference report thereon, that decreases revenue, but only 
     if such measure would not increase the deficit for the period 
     of fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

     SEC. 508. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR RURAL COUNTIES AND 
                   SCHOOLS.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels and limits in this resolution for the budgetary 
     effects of any bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto 
     or conference report thereon, that makes changes to or 
     provides for the reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
     393) by the amounts provided by that legislation for those 
     purposes, if such legislation requires sustained yield timber 
     harvests obviating the need for funding under P.L. 106-393 in 
     the future and would not increase the deficit or direct 
     spending for fiscal year 2014, the period of fiscal years 
     2014 through 2018, or the period of fiscal years 2014 through 
     2023.

     SEC. 509. IMPLEMENTATION OF A DEFICIT AND LONG-TERM DEBT 
                   REDUCTION AGREEMENT.

       In the House, the chair of the Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this concurrent resolution to accommodate the 
     enactment of a deficit and long-term debt reduction agreement 
     if it includes permanent spending reductions and reforms to 
     direct spending programs.

                      TITLE VI--EARMARK MORATORIUM

     SEC. 601. EARMARK MORATORIUM.

       (a) Point of Order.--It shall not be in order to consider--
       (1) a bill or joint resolution reported by any committee, 
     or any amendment thereto or conference report thereon, that 
     includes a congressional earmark, limited tax benefit, or 
     limited tariff benefit; or
       (2) a bill or joint resolution not reported by any 
     committee, or any amendment thereto or conference report 
     thereon, that includes a congressional earmark, limited tax 
     benefit, or limited tariff benefit.
       (b) Definitions.--For the purposes of this resolution, the 
     terms ``congressional earmark'', ``limited tax benefit'', and 
     ``limited tariff benefit'' have the meaning given those terms 
     in clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (c) Special Rule.--The point of order under subsection (a) 
     shall only apply to legislation providing or authorizing 
     discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other 
     spending authority, providing a Federal tax deduction, 
     credit, or exclusion, or modifying the Harmonized Tariff 
     Schedule in fiscal year 2012 or fiscal year 2013.
       (d) Inapplicability.--This resolution shall not apply to 
     any authorization of appropriations to a Federal entity if 
     such authorization is not specifically targeted to a State, 
     locality, or congressional district.

     SEC. 602. LIMITATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON 
                   RULES.

       The House Committee on Rules may not report a rule or order 
     that would waive the point of order set forth in the first 
     section of this resolution.

                TITLE VII--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

     SEC. 701. DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Means-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For means-tested direct spending, the average rate of 
     growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 6.7 percent.
       (2) For means-tested direct spending, the estimated average 
     rate of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-
     year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 6.2 percent 
     under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for means-tested direct spending:
       (A) In 1996, a Republican Congress and a Democratic 
     president reformed welfare by limiting the duration of 
     benefits, giving States more control over the program, and 
     helping recipients find work. In the five years following 
     passage, child-poverty rates fell, welfare caseloads fell, 
     and workers' wages increased. This budget applies the lessons 
     of welfare reform to both the Supplemental Nutrition 
     Assistance Program and Medicaid.
       (B) For Medicaid, this budget converts the Federal share of 
     Medicaid spending into a flexible State allotment tailored to 
     meet each State's needs, indexed for inflation and population 
     growth. Such a reform would end the misguided one-size-fits-
     all approach that has tied the hands of State governments. 
     Instead, each State would have the freedom and flexibility to 
     tailor a Medicaid program that fits the needs of its unique 
     population. Moreover, this budget repeals the Medicaid 
     expansions in the President's health care law, relieving 
     State governments of its crippling one-size-fits-all 
     enrollment mandates.
       (C) For the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, this 
     budget converts the program into a flexible State allotment 
     tailored to meet each State's needs, increases in the 
     Department of Agriculture Thrifty Food Plan index and 
     beneficiary growth. Such a reform would provide incentives 
     for States to ensure dollars will go towards those who need 
     them most. Additionally, it requires that more stringent work 
     requirements and time limits apply under the program.
       (b) Nonmeans-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the average rate 
     of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 5.9 percent.
       (2) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the estimated 
     average rate of growth in the total level of outlays during 
     the 10-year period beginning with fiscal year 2014 is 5.3 
     percent under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for nonmeans-tested direct spending:
       (A) For Medicare, this budget advances policies to put 
     seniors, not the Federal Government, in control of their 
     health care decisions. Those in or near retirement will see 
     no changes, while future retirees would be given a choice of 
     private plans competing alongside the traditional fee-for-
     service Medicare program. Medicare would provide a premium-
     support payment either to pay for or offset the premium of 
     the plan chosen by the senior, depending on the plan's cost. 
     The Medicare premium-support payment would be adjusted so 
     that the sick would receive higher payments if their 
     conditions worsened; lower-income seniors would receive 
     additional assistance to help cover out-of-pocket costs; and 
     wealthier seniors would assume responsibility for a greater 
     share of their premiums. Putting seniors in charge of how 
     their health care dollars are spent will force providers to 
     compete against each other on price and quality. This market 
     competition will act as a real check on widespread waste and 
     skyrocketing health care costs.
       (B) In keeping with a recommendation from the National 
     Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, this budget 
     calls for Federal employees--including Members of Congress 
     and congressional staff--to make greater contributions toward 
     their own retirement.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 122, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Woodall) and a Member opposed each will control 15 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I bring a budget today, a substitute, on behalf of the Republican 
Study Committee, a budget that balances the Federal budget in just 4 
years. It does that, Mr. Chairman, by setting priorities for this 
Nation, priorities that our constituents back home know need to be set.

[[Page 4062]]

  I want to begin, Mr. Chairman, by showing you the priorities as they 
relate to revenue and spending. Within 4 years, we bring revenue above 
the level of spending so that we can begin to repay our debt and 
eliminate our deficits for the first time since the Clinton 
administration, which will bring deficits and revenues in line, Mr. 
Chairman.
  What we do is we prioritize those programs that are important to so 
many Americans. As you see from this chart, Mr. Chairman, Social 
Security spending is up each and every year in our budget while 
extending the life of the Social Security trust fund; Medicare spending 
is up each and every year in our budget while extending the life of the 
Medicare trust fund.
  Mr. Chairman, if a budget is nothing else, it is a statement of our 
values and our priorities. And the Republican Study Committee's value 
and priority is to end the passing of responsibilities from this 
generation to the next, to be responsible for the bills that we create 
today and pay for those priorities today.
  In 4 short years, Mr. Chairman, we can be out of this conversation 
about debt and deficit and begin the conversation about freeing the 
next generation from the $16.7 trillion that you and I and previous 
Congresses have racked up on their behalf.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 15 minutes.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, we had a discussion yesterday and today 
about different approaches to the budget, and we've had a discussion 
about the Budget Committee budget, the Ryan budget, that was on the 
floor and will be voted on later.
  That budget, of course, is an uncompromising budget. If you look at 
this budget, it's even worse. And on top of that, this budget has even 
more gimmicks than the earlier budget that we talked about.

                              {time}  1510

  So what are those gimmicks? Well, first of all, this budget says it 
comes into balance in 4 years. Look, if you want a race to a fake 
balance, obviously you should vote for this one over the Republican 
caucus budget. But the reality is, it gets to that balance by keeping 
the savings from ObamaCare, which our Republican colleagues say they 
want to eliminate, that they want to repeal.
  You don't have to take my word for it. The Heritage Foundation did a 
quick action alert on this budget. Here is what they say: ``Another 
failing of this RSC budget is that, like the committee budget''--in 
other words like the principal Republican budget--``it keeps revenues 
near the levels reached with ObamaCare tax hikes even though it repeals 
the health care bill's spending provisions.''
  So let's just be really clear what that means for the American 
people. They are repealing the spending provisions. That means they are 
getting rid of all the benefits in the Affordable Care Act, including 
the provision to make sure that your child can stay on your insurance 
policy until they are age 26 so a family is not bankrupted by an 
accident or some disease that their child gets. It means the provisions 
that make sure people can't get denied coverage because of preexisting 
conditions, that is gone. So they get rid of all that, but they keep 
the ObamaCare taxes. That is what the Heritage Foundation says.
  Guess what? They also keep the savings from the Affordable Care Act 
in the Medicare area that we achieve by ending the overpayments to some 
of the insurance companies and other changes in the incentive 
structure. We did it without hitting beneficiaries. They have railed 
against that in the past, but it is right here in their budget.
  And here is the catch: they say their budget gets a surplus in just 4 
years. Well, the surplus is $22 billion, they claim. But here is how 
much of it comes from the Affordable Care Act, from ObamaCare. They 
have got a little under $100 billion in revenue that year coming in, 
and then they have got Medicare savings. So not close to balance in 4 
years without those provisions, which, as the Heritage Foundation 
points out, are in there.
  And do you know what? Even at the 10-year window, even at the end of 
the 10-year window, they claim to have a $246 billion surplus, and yet 
they wouldn't get there without the savings from the Affordable Care 
Act, from ObamaCare.
  That's a hoax. To come to the floor and say you will have a balanced 
budget in 4 years or 10 years, but guess what, you are going to repeal 
ObamaCare, your budget doesn't work when you do that. That just doesn't 
add up.
  Now, they have another big sort of gimmick in this one that is not in 
the other Republican budget that has to do with taxes. So the problem 
with the main Republican budget is that it will provide tax breaks to 
very wealthy people and help finance those tax breaks by bringing down 
those rates by raising the tax burden on middle-income people.
  As we discussed earlier, we actually put that question to the test in 
the Budget Committee. We offered an amendment that says: Well, when you 
do tax reform, don't make it a Trojan horse for raising middle class 
taxes to finance tax breaks for the wealthy. Protect the American 
middle class from tax increases. A simple amendment. Every Republican 
on the committee voted ``no.'' So that is their problem with the main 
Republican budget.
  This one has another problem. It creates two tax systems and says: 
Taxpayer, you get to choose. And then it assumes that they are going to 
choose the one that is worst for them. Because if they choose the one 
that is better for the taxpayer, from the taxpayer's perspective they 
don't have enough revenue in their budget to come to balance.
  Now, look, the American people are smart. If you give them two 
choices, obviously people are going to add them up, and they are going 
to pick the tax return where they pay less. And if the American people 
are as smart as I think they are, they will blow another hole in this 
RSC budget.
  So I am not even beginning to talk about the fact that they, once 
again, more than double the sequester cuts to places like NIH and 
places where we do scientific research, that they slash our investment 
in infrastructure. They do all that. They do even more of that than the 
other Republican budget, but it has the same fundamental gimmick with 
respect to ObamaCare. And then on top of that, it has this other tax 
gimmick in it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, while I regret the Rules Committee didn't 
give us more time to correct that misinformation, they did give us 
wonderful speakers. I would like to yield 4 minutes now to a former 
chairman of the Republican Study Committee, a former chairman of the 
Republican Conference, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and thank him for 
his leadership on this critical issue.
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard from so many of our colleagues that 
budgets are about priorities, and I believe this to be true. So what 
does it say about Democrats' priorities when the President is almost 2 
months late in submitting his budget, and Senate Democrats have taken 
over 4 years to even bother to write a budget?
  I suppose it says, Mr. Chairman, that budgets have a way of getting 
in the way of Democrats as they wish to tax us more, as they wish to 
borrow more money from China, money our kids have to pay back, and 
budgets get in the way of Democrats wanting to spend more of our money 
on a Washington insider economy that doesn't work for the rest of us.
  We know that ObamaCare just raised $1 trillion of taxes, much of it 
falling on working families. The so-called ``fiscal cliff'' raised 
taxes almost another $700 billion, much of it falling on small business 
owners who can no longer

[[Page 4063]]

offer raises, promotions, or even hire new workers. And now all these 
Democrat budgets are looking for an additional trillion dollars of tax 
increase on top of that. That comes out to about $9,000 for every 
working household in America.
  Mr. Chairman, that is not fair, that is not helpful to this 
struggling economy. No nation in the history of the world has ever 
taxed its way into prosperity. America will not be the first.
  Mr. Chairman, no nation has ever spent its way into prosperity; yet 
the Democrat budgets continue a spending spree that is driving us 
towards national bankruptcy. A day of reckoning is coming. You cannot 
have Federal programs going at 2 percent, 4 percent, 6 percent, 8 
percent when the new reality under this President is 1\1/2\ to 2 
percent economic growth, and the family budget, which ultimately pays 
for the Federal budget, is stagnant.
  The families that I represent in the Fifth Congressional District of 
Texas have several concerns. They want to feel more secure in their 
jobs. They want to quit seeing their paychecks shrink in the face of 
higher prices. They want a healthier economy where their success is 
dependent upon how well they work, not on who they know in Washington. 
In other words, they don't want a Washington insider economy where they 
can only succeed if Democrats choose to invest in them.
  Mr. Chairman, not every American belongs to a government employee 
labor union that supported the President in the last election. Not 
every American has a failing bankrupt solar energy company. So for the 
rest of them, these hardworking Americans, they want an opportunity, 
and they want a Main Street economy that, if they work hard and they 
play by the rules, every American can succeed.
  And, finally, the people I represent believe it is just immoral, 
immoral to saddle our children with this trillion dollars of debt. That 
is why I am proud to support both the Republican Study Committee budget 
and the House Republican budget. They will help bring us a vibrant, 
competitive economy through pro-growth tax reform, a whole new Tax Code 
which is fairer, flatter, simpler, and more competitive, a budget that 
is guaranteed to grow jobs and paychecks. And contrary to the Democrat 
budget, no tax increases on anybody.

                              {time}  1520

  We quit spending money we don't have, and I know my Democratic 
colleague is very sensitive about the balance issue because they have a 
budget which never balances. The American people demand one; the 
Republican Study Committee and the House Republican budget deliver it. 
For a fairer economy, for a balanced budget, for a greater future for 
our children, we need to support these Republican budgets.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, our budget focuses first and foremost 
on jobs and getting the economy growing. It does balance in the same 
time that the Republican budget last year balanced. And unlike the 
Republican budget, the main one, we do not give tax breaks to the folks 
at the very top financed by increasing taxes on middle class taxpayers.
  I now yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California 
(Mr. Cardenas), a great new member of the Budget Committee.
  Mr. CARDENAS. Mr. Chairman, my friends across the aisle constantly 
say we should act like families and small businesses who balance their 
budgets. So let's look at families and businesses in this country.
  The fact is that most American families don't have a balanced budget. 
When you graduate college, you get a mortgage or you go into debt, 
either way. Many families are suffering through unemployment or 
underemployment or even foreclosure. When you lose your job or your 
house, you don't just pack it in and say, Well, I don't have a job 
anymore, so no more food for me. No, you get your suit cleaned, get out 
there and interview. You get your resume professionally printed. You 
invest in training courses to make yourself more marketable. You spend 
money to make money.
  It's the same thing for businesses. Small businesses are not 
profitable right away. Businesses take time to pay off a lot of start-
up costs like equipment, inventory, insurance, and training. Businesses 
have to invest to make business work. Sometimes your business goes into 
a slump. So you train your employees, you buy new inventory and invest 
in your company so it will grow. You don't just stop investing.
  Mr. Chairman, the logic that they use to create this fiction that 
responsible businesses and families are always in balance is simply not 
true. Just like folks who are out of work or need to clean their suit 
and improve their skills, we need to build infrastructure and train our 
workers. Just like businesses who need new inventory and new ways to 
sell, we need to find new technologies to build here at home and invest 
in the education of our future workforce.
  The very examples that they use of families and small businesses are 
simply examples that demand investment, not austerity. You dress for 
the job you want, not for the job you have. Let's pass a budget that 
invests in our country, in our future, starting today.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, at this time it's my great pleasure to 
yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the 
chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Georgia for 
yielding and for his leadership in bringing this budget to the floor. I 
rise in strong support of the RSC budget that we have here today, and I 
want to talk about a few of the great things that it does to get our 
economy moving again and get our country back on track.
  The first thing that it does, it balances in 4 years. That's right, 
we really do think it's an important priority of this country that we 
balance the Federal budget. I have a 6-year-old daughter and a 3-year-
old son, and I don't think that it's asking too much that we balance 
the Federal budget before they graduate from high school. And so we do 
that.
  What else do we do with this budget? We get our economy moving again 
through tax reform that's pro-growth oriented and actually lower 
overall rates and close loopholes so that we can create jobs and be 
competitive again and get the country moving on track again.
  Another thing we do, we save Medicare from bankruptcy. On the current 
path, according to President Obama's own Medicare actuaries, right now 
Medicare is scheduled to go bankrupt in 11 years. We don't think it's 
responsible to let that happen, so we actually put a plan in place to 
save Medicare from bankruptcy and ensure it for future generations.
  We also repeal the job-killing ObamaCare, and not just the policies 
behind it, but all the taxes, many of which fall on middle class 
families, by the way. And so that's going to help get our economy 
moving again.
  But let's contrast this vision, this document that's being criticized 
by my friends on the other side, with the President's budget. What's 
the President's budget? It doesn't exist. Today the President released 
his Final Four picks. He released his brackets. He's not a day late on 
that. Yet, under the law, the President is now 45 days late on 
releasing his budget. So what kind of set of priorities does that show, 
the fact that the President doesn't think that it's important enough to 
meet the legal deadline to file his own budget, he's 45 days late, and 
yet we know his Final Four picks?
  So we have a plan to get the economy moving again. We're laying this 
plan forward to get a balanced budget and to get our economy moving and 
start putting some pro-growth policies in place so we can create jobs 
in this country.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 1 minute to a distinguished 
new Member from Florida (Ms. Frankel).
  Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I want to explain my strong 
opposition to the Republican budget and strong support of the Democrat 
budget amendment because it offers a balanced approach that is fair to 
seniors, the middle class, and invests in the right priorities.

[[Page 4064]]

  I want to give an important example. My district is filled with 
people from all walks of life--teachers, entrepreneurs, and nurses--
who've worked hard and spent their lives earning the Medicare 
guarantee. They live with the comfort of knowing that if they get sick 
or injured, the health care they've earned will be there for them. I 
know this firsthand. My own mother beat cancer with the help of 
Medicare. Fortunately, I didn't have to make the choice that many 
Americans will face under the Republican budget: having to choose 
between helping a parent pay for a cancer treatment or saving for our 
own children's college tuition.
  The Democratic budget, on the other hand, secures Medicare by 
stopping overpayments to insurance companies and incentivizing 
efficiency in our health care delivery.
  Mr. Chairman, we were sent here to get things done, to solve problems 
and not to create new ones, and that's why I will proudly vote for the 
Democratic budget.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, at this time it is my pleasure to yield 1 
minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), one of the visionaries 
of the Republican Study Committee.
  Mr. BARTON. I thank the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of reasons that I rise in strong 
support of the Republican Study Committee budget. It repeals ObamaCare. 
It repeals the death tax. It repeals the alternative minimum tax. It 
authorizes the Keystone pipeline. It authorizes drilling in ANWR up in 
Alaska. But the real reason and the primary reason is that it balances, 
and it balances sooner rather than later.
  The first 4 years of the Obama Presidency, our deficits approached $7 
trillion. The President has yet to submit a budget that ever balances. 
None of the Democratic alternative budgets ever balance. The Republican 
Study Committee balances in 4 years. It reduces the deficit 
immediately, larger, and it balances.
  If I were to come before this body and ask for an amendment to be 
made in order to spend an additional trillion dollars a year to 
infinity, I don't think too many people would vote for that no matter 
what was in it. That's basically what you do if you vote to pass a 
budget that never balances.
  The Republican Study Committee balances sooner rather than later. It 
balances in 4 years.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Maryland for 
his leadership on these very difficult issues.
  Mr. Chairman, if you like sequestration that cuts $1.2 trillion in 
discretionary domestic spending, you're going to love the Republican 
budget which actually quintuples that. And then there's the RSC budget 
that goes even further. So while the Ryan budget cuts almost $6 
trillion over the next 10 years in investments, this budget, the RSC, 
cuts $7.7 trillion. Yes, it cuts funding, as the last speaker just 
said, but at what expense? At what cost? We are, with this budget and 
with the underlying Ryan budget, we are disinvesting in America. We are 
walking away from research and development investments. We're walking 
away from infrastructure investments.

                              {time}  1530

  We are walking away from STEM and education investments. Those are 
the three legs of a stool that makes a great country great.
  George Washington understood that and was a big champion of 
infrastructure investment and education.
  Abraham Lincoln understood that in the midst of the Civil War when he 
invested, and this Congress invested, in the Transcontinental Railroad, 
in the Land Grant Research College System, in the Homestead Act, yes, 
and even completing the dome of this building, because they understood 
it was important to invest in the future of this country.
  These two budgets walk away from that future. In fact, they almost 
guarantee a bleak future for America with respect to the competition. 
The Chinese aren't making these kinds of mistakes, we should not 
either.
  I urge defeat of both the RSC budget, Mr. Chairman, and the Ryan 
budget when it comes up.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, at this time it's my great pleasure to 
yield 1 minute to a colleague of mine from the great State of Georgia, 
Dr. Broun.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I'm amazed by the sheer ignorance 
of the economic disaster that our country is facing. Not only are our 
leaders ignoring this crisis, they're denying there is even a problem.
  This week we'll vote on six budget options, and five of them actually 
increase spending above today's level. Simply reducing the growth of 
spending will do nothing to address the economic emergency that we 
face. The idea that we're increasing spending, but not as much as the 
other guy, is severely misguided.
  We have to dig deeper and make real, targeted cuts, and there has to 
be a sense of urgency about it. Only the RSC budget actually cuts our 
baseline spending level and will lead to a balanced budget faster than 
the alternatives.
  We must live within our means.
  I thank my friend, Congressman Woodall, for recognizing that we need 
to cut the outrageous spending and offering this budget today.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time remains on each 
side?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland has 3\3/4\ minutes remaining, 
and the gentleman from Georgia has 5 minutes remaining. The gentleman 
from Maryland has the right to close.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I now yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Israel).
  Mr. ISRAEL. I thank my very good friend from Maryland, the ranking 
member of our Budget Committee. I thank him for his leadership, and for 
his common sense, and for advancing approaches that make the right 
investments in the right priorities in this country, investments that 
expand the middle class, investments that provide for a balanced 
approach and reduce our debt.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the RSC budget. As House Democrats, we 
believe that we need solutions-based budgets, not ideology-based 
budgets. We need solutions-based budgets that rest on three pillars:
  Number 1, they take a balanced approach and reduce debt, because we 
need to reduce debt, but do it in a balanced way.
  Number 2, they protect the middle class, because the middle class is 
still struggling. Make sure the middle class is protected.
  And Number 3, they make the right and smart investments in the right 
and smart priorities, that don't ask us to forsake research and cures 
and treatments for disease, that don't allow China to move ahead of us 
in research and development, engineering, science and technology, that 
keep us competitive in the world.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman another minute.
  Mr. ISRAEL. So we want these solutions-based budgets that achieve 
these three critical priorities, and the way we get to those three 
critical priorities is through one thing, and that is compromise. It is 
the ability of both sides of the aisle to pursue these three priorities 
in a balanced way.
  The budget before us right now is not about compromise, it is about 
ideology. It is not about common sense and solutions, it is about 
extremism.
  The American people have sent us here to get things done, to find 
solutions to move them forward.
  Let's not go backwards, Mr. Chairman. Let's not continue gridlock, 
Mr. Chairman. Let's find a balanced approach that rests on compromise 
and supports the middle class. And that is why I rise today in 
opposition to the budget before us.
  I thank my distinguished friend from Maryland.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, at this time it's my pleasure to yield 1

[[Page 4065]]

minute to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp), a gentleman who 
came into the House with me in 2010.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to visit 
with you today. And it's very interesting as we sit here and discuss 
the balanced approach.
  How do you have a balanced approach, Mr. Chairman, if you can't have 
a balanced budget?
  There are two different visions here. You either trust the people in 
Washington who have given us $16.7 trillion of debt, or you trust the 
American people.
  What the RSC budget does is trust the American people with their 
money by taking back the big tax increase that was given to us in 
January, by taking away the big ObamaCare controls that were given to 
us in 2010, and actually returns that power to the States and to the 
people, and actually balances the budget in 4 years.
  This is real progress. This is a returning to what the American 
people demand. And what we need to create growth and prosperity in 
America is to pass these types of budgets.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I'd inquire of my friend if he has any 
remaining speakers.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. No, we do not.
  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, you and all Members can find every word of this budget 
on the Internet at rsc.scalise.house.gov. This isn't just about trying 
to go through the math. This is about laying out priorities. That's 
what every budget is.
  This budget provides flexibility to States to care for our poor and 
our underserved in our health care communities. This budget provides 
the flexibility to seniors to find doctors, doctors that are no longer 
taking Medicare today and are threatening the health care quality that 
folks like my mom and dad are having to contend with.
  This is a budget that makes tough decisions. You're not going to find 
a family in this country, Mr. Chairman, that hasn't had to make tough 
decisions during tough economic times. And the question is, why won't 
the U.S. House of Representatives, why won't the U.S. Senate, why won't 
the United States President do exactly the same thing?
  We're trying to fulfill that request of the American people today, 
Mr. Chairman, in this budget. Every word laid out right here talking 
about, Mr. Chairman, responsible budgeting, prioritizing, as we did, 
our seniors who are counting on Social Security, our seniors who are 
counting on Medicare, our seniors who are counting on the solvency of 
both of those programs.
  We ensure that that does not continue, Mr. Chairman, because solvency 
is not guaranteed. In fact, it's guaranteed not to be there under 
current funding systems. We change those systems to ensure that it will 
be a sustainable path, Mr. Chairman, a path where revenues and spending 
align, radical idea for this Chamber. And you'll hear it described in 
radical terms by my friends, where spending and revenues align. We 
commit ourselves to that, and we achieve it.
  They say that talk is cheap, Mr. Chairman. That's why we back up this 
budget with real ideas, real proposals, real solutions. But when they 
say talk is cheap, and as my colleague from Maryland begins to close, I 
want to observe that talk, in this case, is not cheap at all.
  The words that you'll hear from the gentleman from Maryland, in 
opposition to our proposal, in support of his proposal, are the 
difference between the $33 billion surplus that our budget generates 
and the $5.11 trillion deficit that the gentleman's proposal creates.
  These are not questions of math, Mr. Chairman. These are questions of 
what kind of future do we want to leave to our children and our 
grandchildren. I feel the burden of responsibility for the $16.7 
trillion this Nation has already put on its credit card. We take 
difficult steps in this budget to begin to reverse that for the first 
time.
  In the absence of this budget, Mr. Chairman, in the absence of 
powerful ideas, like what you see in the House Budget Committee budget, 
we relegate our children to a second-class future, a future in which 
they owe $5.1 trillion more than the already immoral debt load that 
they face today.

                              {time}  1540

  There is a better way, Mr. Chairman. There are alternatives in this 
town. We are presenting one right here. It's called the Back to Basics 
budget, Mr. Chairman. It's a product of the Republican Study Committee.
  To close, Mr. Chairman, these things don't happen by themselves. 
While the President has been unable to produce a budget, we've produced 
five in this house. It's because of the work of folks like Nick Myers 
on my staff. It's because of the work of folks like Will Dunham on the 
RSC staff. I know the gentleman from Maryland has the same kind of 
hardworking team working with him. These things don't happen in a 
vacuum. They happen because folks put in hour after hour after hour. 
I'm grateful to them. I hope America will support the product of their 
minds.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I think the American people know full well that the 
best way to attack the deficit right now is to help put more Americans 
back to work. That's the sense in this country and that's what all the 
numbers show from the Congressional Budget Office.
  If you take the austerity approach recommended in either this budget 
or the main Republican budget, we know from the referees, the 
nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, that we'll see 750,000 fewer 
jobs just by the end of this calendar year. We also know you'll see 2 
million fewer jobs next year, which is why we say let's focus on the 
jobs deficit and address the budget deficit in a sustained way where we 
bring it down in a balanced way, where we ask for shared responsibility 
and not another round of tax breaks for the folks at the very top.
  And yes, we achieve balance in the same year the Republican budget 
last year achieved balance, but our priority is getting the country 
fully back to work.
  We also believe that when we put together these budgets, we shouldn't 
pretend that you can have it all ways. And as I have said repeatedly, 
the Republican budget, including this RSC budget, is based, on the one 
hand, on the claim that it gets to balance in 4 years--one, in 10 
years--but at the same time that they're repealing ObamaCare, and that 
just is not the case. It doesn't add up.
  So if you're in a race to fake balance, then you should vote for this 
one because it gets to fake balance in 4 years instead of 10 years. But 
if you're in a race to put America back to work, you should vote for 
the Democratic plan.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the 
substitute amendment offered by my colleague from Georgia, Mr. Woodall. 
I commend him on authoring this substitute amendment on behalf of the 
Republican Study Committee.
  At a time when we have over $16.5 trillion in debt, this budget 
reduces spending by $6.5 trillion over ten years and reduces deficits 
by $5.9 trillion. Furthermore, the Woodall amendment completely repeals 
ObamaCare, and it rolls back the tax increases associated with the 
fiscal cliff. In doing so, this budget decreases taxes by $685 billion 
over the budget window.
  Mr. Chair, unlike any other of the substitutes offered today, the RSC 
budget will achieve balance by 2017 without holding funding for our 
servicemen and women hostage. This budget also significantly reforms 
our entitlement programs so we can ensure their long term solvency for 
future generations.
  Mr. Chair, I believe that this is a sensible budget that puts the 
proper priorities in line. I ask all of my colleagues to support it.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Woodall).
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 104, 
noes 132,

[[Page 4066]]

answered ``present'' 171, not voting 24, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 86]

                               AYES--104

     Amash
     Barton
     Bentivolio
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Broun (GA)
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Camp
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Conaway
     Cotton
     Culberson
     DeSantis
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Farenthold
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Franks (AZ)
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Hall
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lankford
     Long
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Mulvaney
     Neugebauer
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pearce
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ross
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (TX)
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Weber (TX)
     Wenstrup
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho

                               NOES--132

     Alexander
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Benishek
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Calvert
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Collins (NY)
     Cook
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Delaney
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Ellmers
     Esty
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Forbes
     Frelinghuysen
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Granger
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Herrera Beutler
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Jones
     Joyce
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Lance
     Latham
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Petri
     Pitts
     Posey
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (NE)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Webster (FL)
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                       ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--171

     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Enyart
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--24

     Aderholt
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Clarke
     DeLauro
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Grimm
     Hinojosa
     Langevin
     Lipinski
     Matheson
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Perry
     Peterson
     Rangel
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Schock
     Smith (NJ)
     Thompson (CA)
     Wasserman Schultz

                              {time}  1606

  Messrs. SALMON, MARCHANT and ROE of Tennessee changed their vote from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Ms. SINEMA, Messrs. BARROW of 
Georgia and SCHRADER changed their vote from ``present'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. RYAN of Ohio and COOPER changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``present.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 86, had I been present, I would 
have voted ``aye.''
  Mr. MULLIN. Mr. Chair, my vote on rollcall 86 did not reflect the way 
I intended to vote. I wished to vote ``aye.''


                          personal explanation

  Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chair, I was not present during the rollcall votes 
Nos. 76-86, on March 18-20, 2013. I would like the record to reflect 
how I would have voted: On rollcall vote No. 76 I would have voted 
``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 77 I would have voted ``yes.'' On 
rollcall vote No. 78 I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 
79 I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 80 I would have 
voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 81 I would have voted ``yes.'' On 
rollcall vote No. 82 I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 
83 I would have voted ``yes.'' On rollcall vote No. 84 I would have 
voted ``no.'' On rollcall vote No. 85 I would have voted ``no.'' On 
rollcall vote No. 86 I would have voted ``no.''


Amendment No. 5 in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Van Hollen

  The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in 
House Report 113-21.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer a substitute amendment.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL 
                   YEAR 2014.

       (a) Declaration.--Congress declares that this resolution is 
     the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2014 
     and that this resolution sets forth the appropriate budgetary 
     levels for fiscal year 2013 and for fiscal years 2015 through 
     2023.
       (b) Table of Contents.--

Sec. 1. Concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2014.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Major functional categories.

                        TITLE II--RESERVE FUNDS

Sec. 201. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for job creation through 
              investments and incentives.
Sec. 202. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for trade adjustment assistance.
Sec. 203. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for increasing energy 
              independence and security.
Sec. 204. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for America's veterans and 
              servicemembers.
Sec. 205. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for Medicare improvement.
Sec. 206. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for extension of expiring health 
              care provisions.
Sec. 207. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for initiatives that benefit 
              children.
Sec. 208. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for early childhood education.
Sec. 209. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for college affordability and 
              completion.
Sec. 210. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for rural counties and schools.
Sec. 211. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for the Affordable Housing Trust 
              Fund.
Sec. 212. Deficit-neutral reserve fund for additional tax relief for 
              individuals and families.

                TITLE III--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

Sec. 301. Direct spending.

                    TITLE IV--ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS

Sec. 401. Point of order against advance appropriations.

[[Page 4067]]

Sec. 402. Adjustments to discretionary spending limits.
Sec. 403. Costs of emergency needs, Overseas Contingency Operations and 
              disaster relief.
Sec. 404. Budgetary treatment of certain discretionary administrative 
              expenses.
Sec. 405. Application and effect of changes in allocations and 
              aggregates.
Sec. 406. Reinstatement of pay-as-you-go.
Sec. 407. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

                            TITLE V--POLICY

Sec. 501. Policy of the House on jobs: Make it in America.
Sec. 502. Policy of the House on taking a balanced approach to deficit 
              reduction.
Sec. 503. Policy of the House on Social Security reform that protects 
              workers and retirees.
Sec. 504. Policy of the House on protecting the Medicare guarantee for 
              seniors.
Sec. 505. Policy of the House on affordable health care coverage for 
              working families.
Sec. 506. Policy of the House on Medicaid.
Sec. 507. Policy of the House on overseas contingency operations.
Sec. 508. Policy of the House on national security.
Sec. 509. Policy of the house on tax reform to replace the sequester 
              and reduce the deficit.
Sec. 510. Policy of the House on agriculture spending.
Sec. 511. Policy of the House on the use of taxpayer funds.
Sec. 512. Policy of the House on a national strategy to eradicate 
              poverty and increase opportunity.
Sec. 513. Policy statement on deficit reduction through the reduction 
              of unnecessary and wasteful spending.

                TITLE I--RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

     SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

       The following budgetary levels are appropriate for each of 
     fiscal years 2013 through 2023:
       (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution:
       (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
     follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $1,982,995,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,242,550,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $2,693,807,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $2,903,464,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,032,279,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,162,983,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,287,557,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,428,663,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $3,606,902,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $3,807,739,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $3,996,779,000,000.
       (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
     revenues should be changed are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: -$55,316,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: -$28,382,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $87,215,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $124,573,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $128,606,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $134,032,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $138,320,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $144,054,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $149,893,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $157,040,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $164,634,000,000.
       (2) New budget authority.--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the appropriate levels of total new 
     budget authority are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $3,117,551,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $2,982,872,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,020,965,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,230,136,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,416,527,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,611,034,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,772,378,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,975,108,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,149,602,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,383,593,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,540,638,000,000.
       (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
     this resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget 
     outlays are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $2,966,674,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $3,038,888,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $3,088,716,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $3,255,308,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $3,396,419,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $3,563,317,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $3,754,491,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $3,935,563,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $4,120,918,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $4,359,688,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $4,500,492,000,000.
       (4) Deficits (on-budget).--For purposes of the enforcement 
     of this resolution, the amounts of the deficits (on-budget) 
     are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: -$983,679,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: -$796,338,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: -$394,909,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: -$351,844,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: -$364,140,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: -$400,334,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: -$466,934,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: -$506,900,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: -$514,016,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: -$551,949,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: -$503,713,000,000.
       (5) Debt subject to limit.--Pursuant to section 301(a)(5) 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the appropriate 
     levels of the public debt are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $17,158,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $18,142,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $18,719,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $19,259,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $19,862,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $20,519,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $21,234,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $21,996,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $22,766,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $23,567,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $24,340,000,000,000.
       (6) Debt held by the public.--The appropriate levels of 
     debt held by the public are as follows:
       Fiscal year 2013: $12,340,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014: $13,215,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015: $13,702,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016: $14,141,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017: $14,589,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018: $15,065,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019: $15,616,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020: $16,224,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021: $16,858,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022: $17,558,000,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023: $18,232,000,000,000.

     SEC. 102. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

       The Congress determines and declares that the appropriate 
     levels of new budget authority and outlays for fiscal years 
     2013 through 2023 for each major functional category are:
       (1) National Defense (050):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $559,477,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $610,390,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,243,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $572,903,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $560,377,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $561,758,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $567,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $567,443,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $577,839,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $569,830,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $588,142,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $573,817,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $598,961,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $588,374,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $612,296,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $600,383,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $626,112,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $613,414,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $639,937,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $632,154,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $654,717,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $641,132,000,000.
       (2) International Affairs (150):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,222,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $45,650,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,883,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,375,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $46,374,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,641,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,403,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $45,089,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $48,444,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,103,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $49,468,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $46,678,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,544,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,255,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $51,639,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $48,207,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,267,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $49,218,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $53,656,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,519,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,791,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $51,430,000,000.
       (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,154,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,949,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,675,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,413,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,290,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,006,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,918,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,498,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,559,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,104,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,213,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $31,748,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,881,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,354,000,000.

[[Page 4068]]

       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,563,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,021,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,259,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,610,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $34,970,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,308,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,695,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $35,021,000,000.
       (4) Energy (270):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $6,243,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $9,122,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $11,469,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,803,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,213,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,259,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,318,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $6,132,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,421,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $5,190,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,585,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,699,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,415,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,868,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,617,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $4,926,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,763,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,029,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,912,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $5,092,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,950,000,000.
       (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,150,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,682,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,471,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,329,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,201,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,384,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $39,920,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,917,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,909,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $41,687,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,140,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $42,420,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,429,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,041,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,533,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,899,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,626,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,069,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $44,314,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,388,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $45,604,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $44,935,000,000.
       (6) Agriculture (350):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,373,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,777,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,731,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $20,377,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $21,859,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $21,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,516,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,089,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,250,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $21,762,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,392,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $21,854,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $22,826,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,200,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,156,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $22,640,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,531,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,040,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $23,819,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,327,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,197,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $23,721,000,000.
       (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, -$30,498,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$24,504,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,268,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $4,688,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $10,945,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$2,010,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $11,392,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$3,610,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $12,175,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$5,038,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,403,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$3,511,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,919,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$6,261,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $16,983,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$6,124,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $17,021,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$954,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,850,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $1,721,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $20,854,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $586,000,000.
       (8) Transportation (400):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $150,501,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $93,939,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $87,855,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $113,927,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $109,088,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $119,295,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $116,345,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $114,816,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $123,092,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $116,046,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $129,915,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $119,810,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $95,056,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $118,314,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $96,846,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $111,741,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $98,694,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $109,803,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $100,578,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $108,964,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $102,632,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $107,921,000,000.
       (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $77,911,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $38,409,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $12,804,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,649,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,030,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $29,592,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,249,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,082,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,477,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $21,790,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,216,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $17,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,043,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $15,035,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,313,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,552,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,590,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,499,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $13,874,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,746,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $14,161,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $14,870,000,000.
       (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
     (500):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $160,098,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $94,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $83,518,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $123,278,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $92,710,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $118,416,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $102,742,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $109,605,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $115,130,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $113,160,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $120,834,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $119,133,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $116,335,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $115,035,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $117,630,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $116,861,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $119,538,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $118,644,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $121,752,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $120,554,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $124,159,000,000.

[[Page 4069]]

       (B) Outlays, $122,856,000,000.
       (11) Health (550):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $365,206,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $361,960,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $420,426,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $415,580,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $501,066,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $494,101,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $555,478,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $560,950,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $612,806,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $615,141,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $649,517,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $649,782,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $686,508,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $685,746,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $733,129,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $721,860,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $765,634,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $764,199,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $808,826,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $806,984,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $857,954,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $856,154,000,000.
       (12) Medicare (570):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $511,692,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $511,240,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $524,360,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $523,798,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $527,337,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $527,018,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $581,809,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $581,593,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $599,824,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $599,410,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $624,856,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $624,553,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $686,015,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $685,792,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $735,523,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $735,103,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $786,822,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $786,753,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $863,459,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $863,107,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $895,197,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $894,764,000,000.
       (13) Income Security (600):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $544,108,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $543,012,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $530,633,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $527,635,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $528,452,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $524,007,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $538,972,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $537,680,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $538,442,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $533,191,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $541,387,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $532,055,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $545,610,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $541,222,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $557,934,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $553,806,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $571,912,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $567,782,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $590,615,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $591,286,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $598,144,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $593,842,000,000.
       (14) Social Security (650):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $52,803,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $52,883,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,834,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,887,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $30,729,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,756,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $33,876,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $33,903,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,305,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,293,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,579,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $40,577,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $43,949,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $43,955,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $47,434,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $47,441,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $50,904,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,911,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $54,653,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $54,657,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,846,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $58,848,000,000.
       (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $140,646,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $138,860,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $146,730,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $145,540,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $149,792,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $149,538,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $162,051,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $161,666,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $160,947,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $160,342,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $159,423,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $158,790,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $171,032,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $170,144,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $175,674,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $174,791,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $179,585,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $178,655,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $191,294,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $190,344,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $187,945,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $186,882,000,000.
       (16) Administration of Justice (750):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $57,094,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $57,620,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $66,480,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $56,974,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $55,925,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $59,131,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $58,611,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $62,330,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $57,778,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $63,554,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $59,428,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $61,445,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $61,337,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $61,795,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $63,242,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $62,863,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $65,350,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $64,861,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $71,323,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $70,797,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $73,982,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $73,433,000,000.
       (17) General Government (800):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $24,069,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,332,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $25,459,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $26,273,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $27,244,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $27,571,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $29,169,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $28,960,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $31,061,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $30,895,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $32,939,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $32,785,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $35,548,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $34,970,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $37,615,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $37,190,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $40,247,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $39,713,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $42,919,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $42,336,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $45,599,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $45,056,000,000.
       (18) Net Interest (900):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $331,467,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $331,467,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $343,889,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $343,889,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $371,611,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $371,611,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $419,889,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $419,889,000,000.

[[Page 4070]]

       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $506,071,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $506,071,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $607,385,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $607,385,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $681,354,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $681,354,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $748,802,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $748,802,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $803,446,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $803,446,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $856,402,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $856,402,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $904,907,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $904,907,000,000.
       (19) Allowances (920):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $383,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $585,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$8,910,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$2,871,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$18,414,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$16,800,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$19,705,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$17,821,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$26,866,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$25,161,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$31,285,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$29,178,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$35,094,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$33,074,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$39,156,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$37,307,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$44,685,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$42,435,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$49,560,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$46,734,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$54,953,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$51,947,000,000.
       (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, -$76,489,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$76,489,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, -$75,946,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$75,946,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, -$80,864,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$80,864,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, -$86,391,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$86,391,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,137,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,137,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, -$90,503,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$90,503,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, -$97,574,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$97,574,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, -$98,916,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$98,916,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, -$103,177,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$103,177,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, -$105,117,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$105,117,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, -$108,885,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, -$108,885,000,000.
       (21) Overseas Contingency Operations (970):
       Fiscal year 2013:
       (A) New budget authority, $99,941,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $50,926,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2014:
       (A) New budget authority, $70,000,000,000.
       (B) Outlays, $65,387,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2015:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $32,732,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2016:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $12,488,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2017:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $4,186,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2018:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $1,239,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2019:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $399,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2020:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $133,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2021:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $104,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2022:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $33,000,000.
       Fiscal year 2023:
       (A) New budget authority, $0.
       (B) Outlays, $16,000,000.

                        TITLE II--RESERVE FUNDS

     SEC. 201. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR JOB CREATION 
                   THROUGH INVESTMENTS AND INCENTIVES.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that provides for robust 
     Federal investments in America's infrastructure, incentives 
     for businesses, and support for communities or other measures 
     that create jobs for Americans and boost the economy. The 
     revisions may be made for measures that--
       (1) provide for additional investments in rail, aviation, 
     harbors (including harbor maintenance dredging), seaports, 
     inland waterway systems, public housing, broadband, energy, 
     water, and other infrastructure;
       (2) provide for additional investments in other areas that 
     would help businesses and other employers create new jobs; 
     and
       (3) provide additional incentives, including tax 
     incentives, to help small businesses, nonprofits, States, and 
     communities expand investment, train, hire, and retain 
     private-sector workers and public service employees;
      by the amounts provided in such measure if such measure does 
     not increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 202. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR TRADE ADJUSTMENT 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that protects workers and 
     supports jobs by reauthorizing Trade Adjustment Assistance by 
     the amounts provided in such measure if such measure would 
     not increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 203. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR INCREASING ENERGY 
                   INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that--
       (1) provides tax incentives for or otherwise encourages the 
     production of renewable energy or increased energy 
     efficiency;
       (2) encourages investment in emerging clean energy or 
     vehicle technologies or carbon capture and sequestration;
       (3) provides additional resources for oversight and 
     expanded enforcement activities to crack down on speculation 
     in and manipulation of oil and gas markets, including 
     derivatives markets;
       (4) limits and provides for reductions in greenhouse gas 
     emissions;
       (5) assists businesses, industries, States, communities, 
     the environment, workers, or households as the United States 
     moves toward reducing and offsetting the impacts of 
     greenhouse gas emissions; or
       (6) facilitates the training of workers for these 
     industries (``clean energy jobs'');
     by the amounts provided in such measure if such measure would 
     not increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 204. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR AMERICA'S VETERANS 
                   AND SERVICEMEMBERS.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that--
       (1) enhances the delivery of health care to the Nation's 
     veterans;
       (2) improves disability benefits or evaluations for wounded 
     or disabled military personnel or veterans, including 
     measures to expedite the claims process;
       (3) expands eligibility to permit additional disabled 
     military retirees to receive both disability compensation and 
     retired pay (concurrent receipt); or
       (4) eliminates the offset between Survivor Benefit Plan 
     annuities and veterans' dependency and indemnity 
     compensation;
     by the amounts provided in such measure if such measure would 
     not increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 205. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR MEDICARE 
                   IMPROVEMENT.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that makes improvements to 
     Medicare, including making reforms to the Medicare payment 
     system for physicians that build on delivery reforms 
     underway, such as advancement of new care models, and--
       (1) changes incentives to encourage efficiency and higher 
     quality care in a manner consistent with the goals of fiscal 
     sustainability;
       (2) improves payment accuracy to encourage efficient use of 
     resources and ensure that patient-centered primary care 
     receives appropriate compensation;
       (3) supports innovative programs to improve coordination of 
     care among all providers serving a patient in all appropriate 
     settings;

[[Page 4071]]

       (4) holds providers accountable for their utilization 
     patterns and quality of care; and
       (5) makes no changes that reduce benefits available to 
     seniors and individuals with disabilities in Medicare;
     by the amounts provided, together with any savings from 
     ending Overseas Contingency Operations, in such measure if 
     such measure would not increase the deficit for either of the 
     following time periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 
     or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 206. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR EXTENSION OF 
                   EXPIRING HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that extends expiring 
     Medicare, Medicaid, or other health provisions, by the 
     amounts provided in such measure if such measure would not 
     increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 207. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR INITIATIVES THAT 
                   BENEFIT CHILDREN.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that improves the lives of 
     children by the amounts provided in such measure if such 
     measure would not increase the deficit for either of the 
     following time periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 
     or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2023. Improvements may 
     include:
       (1) Extension and expansion of child care assistance.
       (2) Changes to foster care to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect and keep more children safely in their homes.
       (3) Changes to child support enforcement to encourage 
     increased parental support for children, particularly from 
     non-custodial parents, including legislation that results in 
     a greater share of collected child support reaching the child 
     or encourages States to provide access and visitation 
     services to improve fathers' relationships with their 
     children. Such changes could reflect efforts to ensure that 
     States have the necessary resources to collect all child 
     support that is owed to families and to allow them to pass 
     100 percent of support on to families without financial 
     penalty. When 100 percent of child support payments are 
     passed to the child, rather than to administrative expenses, 
     program integrity is improved and child support participation 
     increases.

     SEC. 208. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD 
                   EDUCATION.

       (a) Pre-kindergarten.--The chairman of the House Committee 
     on the Budget may revise the allocations, aggregates, and 
     other appropriate levels in this resolution for any bill, 
     joint resolution, amendment, or conference report related to 
     a pre-kindergarten program or programs to serve low-income 
     children, by the amounts provided in such measure if such 
     measure would not increase the deficit for either of the 
     following time periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 
     or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2023.
       (b) Child Care.--The chairman of the House Committee on the 
     Budget may revise the allocations, aggregates, and other 
     appropriate levels in this resolution for any bill, joint 
     resolution, amendment, or conference report related to child 
     care assistance for working families, by the amounts provided 
     in such measure if such measure would not increase the 
     deficit for either of the following time periods: fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 
     2023.
       (c) Home Visiting.--The chairman of the House Committee on 
     the Budget may revise the allocations, aggregates, and other 
     appropriate levels in this resolution for any bill, joint 
     resolution, amendment, or conference report related to a home 
     visiting program or programs serving low-income mothers-to-be 
     and low-income families, by the amounts provided in such 
     measure if such measure would not increase the deficit for 
     either of the following time periods: fiscal year 2013 to 
     fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2023

     SEC. 209. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR COLLEGE 
                   AFFORDABILITY AND COMPLETION.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that makes college more 
     affordable and increases college completion, including: 
     efforts to reform Federal student aid policies to ensure that 
     subsidized student loan interest rates do not double in July 
     2014 at the end of the one-year extension of the current 3.4 
     percent interest rate assumed in the resolution; or efforts 
     to ensure continued full funding for Pell grants, by the 
     amounts provided in such measure if such measure would not 
     increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 210. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR RURAL COUNTIES AND 
                   SCHOOLS.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that makes changes to or 
     provides for the reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools 
     and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
     393) by the amounts provided by that legislation for those 
     purposes, if such legislation requires sustained yield timber 
     harvests obviating the need for funding under Public Law 106-
     393 in the future and would not increase the deficit for 
     either of the following time periods: fiscal year 2013 to 
     fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 211. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR THE AFFORDABLE 
                   HOUSING TRUST FUND.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that capitalizes the existing 
     Affordable Housing Trust Fund by the amounts provided in such 
     measure if such measure would not increase the deficit for 
     either of the following time periods: fiscal year 2013 to 
     fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2023.

     SEC. 212. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND FOR ADDITIONAL TAX 
                   RELIEF FOR INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES.

       The chairman of the House Committee on the Budget may 
     revise the allocations, aggregates, and other appropriate 
     levels in this resolution for any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report that provides additional tax 
     relief to individuals and families, such as expanding tax 
     relief provided by the refundable child credit, by the 
     amounts provided in such measure if such measure would not 
     increase the deficit for either of the following time 
     periods: fiscal year 2013 to fiscal year 2018 or fiscal year 
     2013 to fiscal year 2023.

                TITLE III--ESTIMATES OF DIRECT SPENDING

     SEC. 301. DIRECT SPENDING.

       (a) Means-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For means-tested direct spending, the average rate of 
     growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 6.7 percent.
       (2) For means-tested direct spending, the estimated average 
     rate of growth in the total level of outlays during the 11-
     year period beginning with fiscal year 2013 is 6.3 percent 
     under current law.
       (3) The resolution retains the social safety net that lifts 
     millions of people out of poverty.
       (b) Nonmeans-tested Direct Spending.--
       (1) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the average rate 
     of growth in the total level of outlays during the 10-year 
     period preceding fiscal year 2014 is 5.9 percent.
       (2) For nonmeans-tested direct spending, the estimated 
     average rate of growth in the total level of outlays during 
     the 11-year period beginning with fiscal year 2013 is 5.1 
     percent under current law.
       (3) The following reforms are proposed in this concurrent 
     resolution for nonmeans-tested direct spending: For Medicare, 
     this budget rejects proposals to end the Medicare guarantee 
     and shift rising health care costs onto seniors by replacing 
     Medicare with vouchers or premium support for the purchase of 
     private insurance. Such proposals will expose seniors and 
     persons with disabilities on fixed incomes to unacceptable 
     financial risks, and they will weaken the traditional 
     Medicare program. Instead, this budget builds on the success 
     of the Affordable Care Act, which made significant strides in 
     health care cost containment and put into place a framework 
     for continuous innovation. This budget supports comprehensive 
     reforms to give physicians and other care providers 
     incentives to provide high-quality, coordinated, efficient 
     care, in a manner consistent with the goals of fiscal 
     sustainability. It makes no changes that reduce benefits 
     available to seniors and individuals with disabilities in 
     Medicare.

                    TITLE IV--ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS

     SEC. 401. POINT OF ORDER AGAINST ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--In the House, except as provided in 
     subsection (b), any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or 
     conference report making a general appropriation or 
     continuing appropriation may not provide for advance 
     appropriations.
       (b) Exceptions.--Advance appropriations may be provided--
       (1) for fiscal year 2015 for programs, projects, 
     activities, or accounts identified in the joint explanatory 
     statement of managers to accompany this resolution under the 
     heading ``Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations'' in 
     an aggregate amount not to exceed $28,852,000,000 in new 
     budget authority, and for 2016, accounts separately 
     identified under the same heading; and
       (2) for the Department of Veterans Affairs for the Medical 
     Services, Medical Support and Compliance, and Medical 
     Facilities accounts of the Veterans Health Administration.
       (c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``advance 
     appropriation'' means any new discretionary budget authority 
     provided in a

[[Page 4072]]

     bill or joint resolution making general appropriations or any 
     new discretionary budget authority provided in a bill or 
     joint resolution making continuing appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2014 that first becomes available for any fiscal year 
     after 2014.

     SEC. 402. ADJUSTMENTS TO DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.

       (a) Program Integrity Initiatives Under the Budget Control 
     Act.--
       (1) Social security administration program integrity 
     initiatives.--In the House, prior to consideration of any 
     bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report 
     making appropriations for fiscal year 2014 that appropriates 
     amounts as provided under section 251(b)(2)(B) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, 
     the allocation to the House Committee on Appropriations shall 
     be increased by the amount of additional budget authority and 
     outlays resulting from that budget authority for fiscal year 
     2014.
       (2) Health care fraud and abuse control program.--In the 
     House, prior to consideration of any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report making appropriations for 
     fiscal year 2014 that appropriates amounts as provided under 
     section 251(b)(2)(C) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985, the allocation to the House 
     Committee on Appropriations shall be increased by the amount 
     of additional budget authority and outlays resulting from 
     that budget authority for fiscal year 2014.
       (b) Additional Program Integrity Initiatives.--
       (1) Internal revenue service tax compliance.--In the House, 
     prior to consideration of any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report making appropriations for 
     fiscal year 2014 that appropriates $9,753,000,000 for the 
     Internal Revenue Service for enhanced enforcement to address 
     the Federal tax gap (taxes owed but not paid) and provides an 
     additional appropriation of up to $1,018,000,000, to the 
     Internal Revenue Service and the amount is designated for 
     enhanced tax enforcement to address the tax gap, the 
     allocation to the House Committee on Appropriations shall be 
     increased by the amount of additional budget authority and 
     outlays resulting from that budget authority for fiscal year 
     2014.
       (2) Unemployment insurance program integrity activities.--
     In the House, prior to consideration of any bill, joint 
     resolution, amendment, or conference report making 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2014 that appropriates 
     $60,000,000 for in-person reemployment and eligibility 
     assessments and unemployment insurance improper payment 
     reviews for the Department of Labor and provides an 
     additional appropriation of up to $20,000,000, and the amount 
     is designated for in-person reemployment and eligibility 
     assessments and unemployment insurance improper payment 
     reviews for the Department of Labor, the allocation to the 
     House Committee on Appropriations shall be increased by the 
     amount of additional budget authority and outlays resulting 
     from that budget authority for fiscal year 2014.
       (c) Procedure for Adjustments.--Prior to consideration of 
     any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report, 
     the chairman of the House Committee on the Budget shall make 
     the adjustments set forth in this subsection for the 
     incremental new budget authority in that measure and the 
     outlays resulting from that budget authority if that measure 
     meets the requirements set forth in this section.

     SEC. 403. COSTS OF EMERGENCY NEEDS, OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY 
                   OPERATIONS AND DISASTER RELIEF.

       (a) Emergency Needs.--If any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report makes appropriations for 
     discretionary amounts and such amounts are designated as 
     necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to this 
     subsection, then new budget authority and outlays resulting 
     from that budget authority shall not count for the purposes 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, or this resolution.
       (b) Overseas Contingency Operations.--In the House, if any 
     bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report makes 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2013 or fiscal year 2014 for 
     overseas contingency operations and such amounts are so 
     designated pursuant to this paragraph, then the allocation to 
     the House Committee on Appropriations may be adjusted by the 
     amounts provided in such legislation for that purpose up to 
     the amounts of budget authority specified in section 102(21) 
     for fiscal year 2013 or the 2014 level for Overseas 
     Contingency Operations in the President's 2014 budget and the 
     new outlays resulting from that budget authority.
       (c) Disaster Relief.--In the House, if any bill, joint 
     resolution, amendment, or conference report makes 
     appropriations for discretionary amounts and such amounts are 
     designated for disaster relief pursuant to this subsection, 
     then the allocation to the Committee on Appropriations, and 
     as necessary, the aggregates in this resolution, shall be 
     adjusted by the amount of new budget authority and outlays up 
     to the amounts provided under section 251(b)(2)(D) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
       (d) Procedure for Adjustments.--Prior to consideration of 
     any bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report, 
     the chairman of the House Committee on the Budget shall make 
     the adjustments set forth in subsections (b) and (c) for the 
     incremental new budget authority in that measure and the 
     outlays resulting from that budget authority if that measure 
     meets the requirements set forth in this section.

     SEC. 404. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF CERTAIN DISCRETIONARY 
                   ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

       (a) In General.--In the House, notwithstanding section 
     302(a)(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, section 
     13301 of the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, and section 4001 
     of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, the joint 
     explanatory statement accompanying the conference report on 
     any concurrent resolution on the budget shall include in its 
     allocation under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974 to the House Committee on Appropriations amounts 
     for the discretionary administrative expenses of the Social 
     Security Administration and of the Postal Service.
       (b) Special Rule.--For purposes of applying section 302(f) 
     of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, estimates of the 
     level of total new budget authority and total outlays 
     provided by a measure shall include any off-budget 
     discretionary amounts.

     SEC. 405. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS 
                   AND AGGREGATES.

       (a) Application.--In the House, any adjustments of 
     allocations and aggregates made pursuant to this 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 and aggregates resulting from these adjustments 
     shall be considered for the purposes of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974 as allocations and aggregates included in 
     this resolution.
       (c) Adjustments.--The chairman of the House Committee on 
     the Budget may adjust the aggregates, allocations, and other 
     levels in this resolution for legislation which has received 
     final congressional approval in the same form by the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, but has yet to be presented 
     to or signed by the President at the time of final 
     consideration of this resolution.

     SEC. 406. REINSTATEMENT OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO.

       In the House, and pursuant to section 301(b)(8) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, for the remainder of the 
     113th Congress, the following shall apply in lieu of 
     ``CUTGO'' rules and principles:
       (1) (A) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), it 
     shall not be in order to consider any bill, joint resolution, 
     amendment, or conference report if the provisions of such 
     measure affecting direct spending and revenues have the net 
     effect of increasing the on-budget deficit or reducing the 
     on-budget surplus for the period comprising either--
       (i) the current year, the budget year, and the four years 
     following that budget year; or
       (ii) the current year, the budget year, and the nine years 
     following that budget year.
       (B) The effect of such measure on the deficit or surplus 
     shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the 
     Committee on the Budget.
       (C) For the purpose of this section, the terms ``budget 
     year'', ``current year'', and ``direct spending'' have the 
     meanings specified in section 250 of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, except that the term 
     ``direct spending'' shall also include provisions in 
     appropriation Acts that make outyear modifications to 
     substantive law as described in section 3(4) (C) of the 
     Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
       (2) If a bill, joint resolution, or amendment is considered 
     pursuant to a special order of the House directing the Clerk 
     to add as a new matter at the end of such measure the 
     provisions of a separate measure as passed by the House, the 
     provisions of such separate measure as passed by the House 
     shall be included in the evaluation under paragraph (1) of 
     the bill, joint resolution, or amendment.
       (3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the 
     evaluation under paragraph (1) shall exclude a provision 
     expressly designated as an emergency for purposes of pay-as-
     you-go principles in the case of a point of order under this 
     clause against consideration of--
       (i) a bill or joint resolution;
       (ii) an amendment made in order as original text by a 
     special order of business;
       (iii) a conference report; or
       (iv) an amendment between the Houses.
       (B) In the case of an amendment (other than one specified 
     in subparagraph (A)) to a bill or joint resolution, the 
     evaluation under paragraph (1) shall give no cognizance to 
     any designation of emergency.
       (C) If a bill, a joint resolution, an amendment made in 
     order as original text by a special order of business, a 
     conference report, or an amendment between the Houses 
     includes a provision expressly designated as an emergency for 
     purposes of pay-as-you-go principles, the Chair shall put the 
     question of consideration with respect thereto.

     SEC. 407. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

       The House adopts the provisions of this title--

[[Page 4073]]

       (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
     Representatives and as such they shall be considered as part 
     of the rules of the House, and these rules shall supersede 
     other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent 
     with other such rules; and
       (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of 
     the House of Representatives to change those rules at any 
     time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as in the 
     case of any other rule of the House of Representatives.

                            TITLE V--POLICY

     SEC. 501. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON JOBS: MAKE IT IN AMERICA.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) the economy entered a deep recession in December 2007 
     that was worsened by a financial crisis in 2008 - by January 
     2009, the private sector was shedding 821,000 jobs per month;
       (2) actions by the President, Congress, and the Federal 
     Reserve helped stem the crisis, and job creation resumed in 
     2010, with the economy creating 6.4 million private jobs over 
     the past 36 consecutive months;
       (3) multi-year across-the-board spending cuts under 
     sequestration will cost Americans millions of jobs with up to 
     750,000 jobs lost this year alone, slow economic growth by up 
     to one third this year alone, and impair our global 
     competitive edge;
       (4) as part of a ``Make it in America'' agenda, U.S. 
     manufacturing has been leading the Nation's economic recovery 
     as domestic manufacturers regain their economic and 
     competitive edge and a wave of insourcing jobs from abroad 
     begins;
       (5) despite the job gains already made, job growth needs to 
     accelerate and continue for an extended period for the 
     economy to fully recover from the recession; and
       (6) job creation is vital to Nation-building at home and to 
     deficit reduction - CBO has noted that if the country were at 
     full employment, the deficit would be about half its current 
     size.
       (b) Policy.--
       (1) In general.--It is the policy of this resolution that 
     Congress should pursue a ``Make it in America'' agenda with a 
     priority to consider and enact legislation to help create 
     jobs, remove incentives to out-source jobs overseas and 
     instead support incentives that bring jobs back to the U.S., 
     and help middle class families by increasing the minimum 
     wage.
       (2) Jobs.--This resolution--
       (A) assumes enactment of legislation to replace 
     sequestration under the Budget Control Act of 2011 with at 
     least the same amount of deficit reduction from a balanced 
     approach that would increase revenues without increasing that 
     tax burden on middle-income Americans, and decrease long-term 
     spending while maintaining the Medicare guarantee, protecting 
     Social Security and a strong social safety net, and making 
     strategic investments in education, science, research, and 
     critical infrastructure necessary to compete in the global 
     economy.
       (B) assumes enactment of--
       (i) the President's $50 billion immediate transportation 
     jobs package;
       (ii) other measures proposed in the American Jobs Act and 
     reflected in the President's 2013 budget; and
       (iii) the President's proposed surface transportation 
     legislation;
       (C) assumes $1 billion for the President's proposal to 
     establish a Veterans Job Corps;
       (D) assumes $80 billion in education jobs funding for the 
     President's initiatives to promote jobs now while also 
     creating an infrastructure that will help students learn and 
     create a better future workforce, including $30 billion for 
     rebuilding at least 35,000 public schools, $25 billion to 
     prevent hundreds of thousands of educator layoffs, and $8 
     billion to help community colleges train 2 million workers in 
     high-growth industries with skills that will lead directly to 
     jobs; and
       (E) establishes a reserve fund that would allow for passage 
     of additional job creation measures, including further 
     infrastructure improvements and support for biomedical 
     research that both creates jobs and advances scientific 
     knowledge and health, or other spending or revenue proposals.

     SEC. 502. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON TAKING A BALANCED APPROACH 
                   TO DEFICIT REDUCTION.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) every bipartisan commission has recommended, and the 
     majority of Americans agree, that we should take a balanced, 
     bipartisan approach to reducing the deficit that addresses 
     both revenue and spending; and
       (2) sequestration is a meat-ax approach to deficit 
     reduction that imposes deep and mindless cuts, regardless of 
     their impact on vital services and investments.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the resolution that--
       (1) the Congress should vote on H.R. 699, which would 
     replace the sequester for calendar year 2013 with a balanced 
     mix of targeted and better timed spending reductions and 
     revenue increases to prevent the loss of jobs and the drag on 
     economic growth in the near term; and
       (2) the Congress should replace the entire 10-year 
     sequester established by the Budget Control Act of 2011 with 
     a balanced approach that would increase revenues without 
     increasing the tax burden on middle-income Americans, and 
     decrease long-term spending while maintaining the Medicare 
     guarantee, protecting Social Security and a strong social 
     safety net, and making strategic investments in education, 
     science, research, and critical infrastructure necessary to 
     compete in the global economy.

     SEC. 503. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM THAT 
                   PROTECTS WORKERS AND RETIREES.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) Social Security is America's most important retirement 
     resource, especially for seniors, because it provides an 
     income floor to keep them, their spouses and their survivors 
     out of poverty during retirement - benefits earned based on 
     their past payroll contributions;
       (2) in January 2011, 56.8 million people relied on Social 
     Security;
       (3) Social Security benefits are modest, with an average 
     annual benefit for retirees of about $15,000, which is the 
     majority of total retirement income for more than half of all 
     beneficiaries;
       (4) diverting workers' payroll contributions toward private 
     accounts undermines retirement security and the social safety 
     net by subjecting the workers' retirement decisions and 
     income to the whims of the stock market;
       (5) diverting trust fund payroll contributions toward 
     private accounts jeopardizes Social Security because the 
     program will not have the resources to pay full benefits to 
     current retirees; and
       (6) privatization increases Federal debt because the 
     Treasury will have to borrow additional funds from the public 
     to pay full benefits to current retirees.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the House that Social 
     Security should be strengthened for its own sake and not to 
     achieve deficit reduction. Because privatization proposals 
     are fiscally irresponsible and would put the retirement 
     security of seniors at risk, any Social Security reform 
     legislation shall reject partial or complete privatization of 
     the program.

     SEC. 504. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON PROTECTING THE MEDICARE 
                   GUARANTEE FOR SENIORS.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) senior citizens and persons with disabilities highly 
     value the Medicare program and rely on Medicare to guarantee 
     their health and financial security;
       (2) in 2012, 50 million people relied on Medicare for 
     coverage of hospital stays, physician visits, prescription 
     drugs, and other necessary medical goods and services;
       (3) the Medicare program has lower administrative and 
     program costs than private insurance for a given level of 
     benefits;
       (4) rising health care costs are not unique to Medicare or 
     other Federal health programs, they are endemic to the entire 
     health care system;
       (5) destroying the Medicare program and replacing it with a 
     voucher or premium support for the purchase of private 
     insurance that fails to keep pace with growth in health costs 
     will expose seniors and persons with disabilities on fixed 
     incomes to unacceptable financial risks;
       (6) shifting more health care costs onto Medicare 
     beneficiaries would not reduce overall health care costs, 
     instead it would mean beneficiaries would face higher 
     premiums, eroding coverage, or both; and
       (7) versions of voucher or premium-support policies that do 
     not immediately end the traditional Medicare program will 
     merely cause traditional Medicare to weaken and wither away.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the House that the 
     Medicare guarantee for seniors and persons with disabilities 
     should be preserved and strengthened, and that any 
     legislation to end the Medicare guarantee and shift rising 
     health care costs onto seniors by replacing Medicare with 
     vouchers or premium support for the purchase of private 
     insurance should be rejected.

     SEC. 505. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE 
                   COVERAGE FOR WORKING FAMILIES.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) making health care coverage affordable and accessible 
     for all American families will improve families' health and 
     economic security, which will make the economy stronger;
       (2) the Affordable Care Act signed into law in 2010 will 
     expand coverage to 27 million Americans and bring costs down 
     for families and small businesses;
       (3) consumers are already benefitting from the Affordable 
     Care Act's provisions to hold insurance companies accountable 
     for their actions and to end long-standing practices such as 
     denying coverage to children based on pre-existing 
     conditions, imposing lifetime limits on coverage that put 
     families at risk of bankruptcy in the event of serious 
     illness, and dropping an enrollee's coverage once the 
     enrollee becomes ill based on a simple mistake in the 
     enrollee's application;
       (4) the Affordable Care Act reforms Federal health 
     entitlements by using nearly every health cost-containment 
     provision experts recommend, including new incentives to 
     reward quality and coordination of care rather than simply 
     quantity of services provided, new tools to crack down on 
     fraud, and the elimination of excessive taxpayer subsidies to 
     private insurance plans, and as a result

[[Page 4074]]

     will slow the projected annual growth rate of national health 
     expenditures by 0.3 percentage points after 2016, the essence 
     of ``bending the cost curve''; and
       (5) the Affordable Care Act will reduce the Federal deficit 
     by more than $1,000,000,000,000 over the next 20 years.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the House that the law of 
     the land should support making affordable health care 
     coverage available to every American family, and therefore 
     the Affordable Care Act should not be repealed.

     SEC. 506. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON MEDICAID.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) Medicaid is a central component of the Nation's health 
     care safety net, providing health coverage to 28 million low-
     income children, 5 million senior citizens, 10 million people 
     with disabilities, and 14 million other low-income people who 
     would otherwise be unable to obtain health insurance;
       (2) senior citizens and people with disabilities account 
     for two-thirds of Medicaid program spending and consequently 
     would be at particular risk of losing access to important 
     health care assistance under any policy to sever the link 
     between Medicaid funding and the actual costs of providing 
     services to the currently eligible Medicaid population;
       (3) Medicaid pays for 43 percent of long-term care services 
     in the United States, providing a critical health care safety 
     net for senior citizens and people with disabilities facing 
     significant costs for long-term care; and
       (4) at least 70 percent of people over age 65 will likely 
     need long-term care services at some point in their lives.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the House that the 
     important health care safety net for children, senior 
     citizens, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable 
     Americans provided by Medicaid should be preserved and should 
     not be dismantled by converting Medicaid into a block grant, 
     per capita cap, or other financing arrangement that would 
     limit Federal contributions and render the program incapable 
     of responding to increased need that may result from trends 
     in health care costs or economic conditions.

     SEC. 507. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY 
                   OPERATIONS.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that it is the stated 
     position of the Administration that Afghan troops will take 
     the full lead for security operations in Afghanistan by the 
     end of 2014.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of this resolution that 
     consistent with the Administration's stated position, no 
     funding shall be provided for operations in Afghanistan 
     through the Overseas Contingency Operations budget beyond 
     2014.

     SEC. 508. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON NATIONAL SECURITY.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) we must continue to support a strong military that is 
     second to none and the size and the structure of our military 
     have to be driven by a strategy;
       (2) those who serve in uniform are our most important 
     security resource and the Administration and Congress shall 
     continue to provide the support they need to successfully 
     carry out the missions the country gives them;
       (3) a growing economy is the foundation of our security and 
     enables the country to provide the resources for a strong 
     military, sound homeland security agencies, and effective 
     diplomacy and international development;
       (4) 750,000 jobs will be lost in calendar year 2013 if the 
     across-the-board cuts known as sequestration remain in 
     effect, hampering the economic recovery and jeopardizing the 
     foundation of our security,
       (5) because it puts our economy at risk, the Nation's debt 
     is an immense security threat to our country, just as former 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen has 
     stated, and we must have a deficit reduction plan that is 
     serious and realistic;
       (6) the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal 
     Responsibility and Reform and the bipartisan Rivlin-Domenici 
     Debt Reduction Task Force concluded that a serious and 
     balanced deficit reduction plan must put national security 
     programs on the table;
       (7) in 2011, the U.S. spent more on defense than the next 
     16 countries combined (and more than half of the amount spent 
     by those 16 countries was from seven NATO countries and four 
     other close allies);
       (8) Admiral Mullen argued that the permissive budget 
     environment over the last decade, a period when defense 
     spending increased by hundreds of billions of dollars, had 
     allowed the Pentagon to avoid prioritizing;
       (9) more can be done to rein in wasteful spending at the 
     Nation's security agencies, including the Department of 
     Defense -- the last department still unable to pass an audit 
     -- such as the elimination of duplicative programs that have 
     been identified by the Government Accountability Office;
       (10) effective implementation of weapons acquisition 
     reforms at the Department of Defense can help control 
     excessive cost growth in the development of new weapons 
     systems and help ensure that weapons systems are delivered on 
     time and in adequate quantities to equip our servicemen and 
     servicewomen;
       (11) the Department of Defense should continue to review 
     defense plans and requirements to ensure that weapons 
     developed to counter Cold War-era threats are not redundant 
     and are applicable to 21st century threats, which should 
     include, with the participation of the National Nuclear 
     Security Administration, examination of requirements for the 
     nuclear weapons stockpile, nuclear weapons delivery systems, 
     and nuclear weapons and infrastructure modernization;
       (12) weapons technologies should be proven to work through 
     adequate testing before advancing them to the production 
     phase of the acquisition process;
       (13) the Pentagon's operation and maintenance budget, which 
     now totals $200 billion per year, has grown for decades 
     between 2.5 percent and 3.0 percent above inflation each year 
     on a per service member basis, and it is imperative that 
     unsustainable cost growth be controlled in this area;
       (14) excluding those involved in war operations, 200,000 
     military personnel and their dependents are stationed 
     overseas, and the Administration should further review the 
     benefits and costs of alternatives to permanent overseas 
     basing of personnel;
       (15) more than 94 percent of the increase in the Federal 
     civilian workforce since 2001 is due to increases at 
     security-related agencies--Department of Defense (31 
     percent), Department of Homeland Security (32 percent), 
     Department of Veterans Affairs (26 percent), and Department 
     of Justice (6 percent)--and the increase, in part, represents 
     a transition to ensure civil servants, as opposed to private 
     contractors, are performing inherently governmental work and 
     an increase to a long-depleted acquisition and auditing 
     workforce at the Pentagon to ensure effective management of 
     weapons systems programs, to eliminate the use of contractors 
     to oversee other contractors, and to prevent waste, fraud, 
     and abuse;
       (16) proposals to implement an indiscriminate 10 percent 
     across-the-board cut to the Federal civilian workforce would 
     adversely affect security agencies, leaving them unable to 
     manage their total workforce, which includes contractors, and 
     their operations in a cost-effective manner; and
       (17) cooperative threat reduction and other 
     nonproliferation programs (securing ``loose nukes'' and other 
     materials used in weapons of mass destruction), which were 
     highlighted as high priorities by the 9/11 Commission, need 
     to be funded at a level that is commensurate with the 
     evolving threat.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of this resolution that--
       (1) the sequester required by the Budget Control Act of 
     2011 should be rescinded and replaced by a deficit reduction 
     plan that is balanced, that makes smart spending cuts, that 
     requires everyone to pay their fair share, and that takes 
     into account a comprehensive national security strategy that 
     includes careful consideration of international, defense, 
     homeland security, and law enforcement programs;
       (2) further savings can be achieved from the national 
     defense budget without compromising our security through 
     greater emphasis on eliminating duplicative and wasteful 
     programs, reforming the acquisition process, identifying and 
     constraining unsustainable operating costs, and through 
     careful analysis of our security strategy; and
       (3) veterans programs are fully funded and if there is new 
     information provided in the President's 2014 budget that 
     would justify the need for funds in excess of the amount 
     reflected in section 102(15), adjustments shall be made from 
     within the discretionary totals to meet any such new 
     requirements.

     SEC. 509. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON TAX REFORM TO REPLACE THE 
                   SEQUESTER AND REDUCE THE DEFICIT.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
       (1) the sequester represents a meat-ax approach to cutting 
     government spending and will cost the economy 750,000 jobs in 
     2013 alone, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget 
     Office;
       (2) the House must therefore replace the sequester with a 
     balanced approach to deficit reduction that would raise 
     revenues in addition to making targeted spending cuts;
       (3) this balanced approach to deficit reduction must 
     include overhauling our outdated tax code -which contains 
     numerous, wasteful tax breaks for special interests - to make 
     it simpler, more progressive, and more competitive;
       (4) these special tax breaks can greatly complicate the 
     effort to administer the code and the taxpayer's ability to 
     fully comply with its terms, while also undermining our basic 
     sense of fairness;
       (5) the corporate income tax does include a number of 
     incentives that help spur economic growth and innovation, 
     such as the research and development credit and clean energy 
     incentives;
       (6) but tax breaks for special interests can also distort 
     economic incentives for businesses and consumers and 
     encourage businesses to ship American jobs and capital 
     overseas for tax purposes;
       (7) the President's National Commission on Fiscal 
     Responsibility and Reform observed that the corporate income 
     tax is riddled with special interest tax breaks and 
     subsidies, is badly in need of reform, and it proposed to 
     streamline the code, capturing some of the savings in the 
     process, to achieve deficit reduction in a more balanced way;
       (8) even Speaker Boehner indicated that he has a plan that 
     would raise an additional $800

[[Page 4075]]

     billion in revenues through closing tax loopholes and 
     eliminating special interest tax breaks.
       (b) Policy.--
       (1) Policy on individual income taxes.--
       (A) This resolution encourages the House Committee on Ways 
     and Means to help reduce the deficit and replace the 
     sequester through a balanced approach that includes limits on 
     tax expenditures and tax breaks for very high-income 
     individuals. This resolution expressly rejects the approach 
     in the Republican resolution that provides millionaires with 
     even larger tax cuts at the expense of middle-class 
     taxpayers. This resolution also expressly rejects raising 
     taxes on middle-class taxpayers with adjusted gross incomes 
     below $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples) and reflects 
     the tax rates and income thresholds established in the 
     American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. This resolution 
     therefore encourages the House Committee on Ways and Means to 
     raise the revenue needed through closing loopholes and ending 
     tax breaks for special interests and the very wealthy, 
     consistent with key proposals made by both the President and 
     the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform 
     to limit tax expenditures.
       (B) This resolution supports working families, encourages 
     increased labor force participation, and boosts access to 
     higher education by permanently extending the expansions to 
     the child tax credit, the EITC, and the American Opportunity 
     Tax Credit, respectively, first legislated under the American 
     Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
       (C) This resolution extends policies that reinvest in 
     domestic manufacturing to bring jobs back to our shores; 
     builds up the renewable energy production capacity of the 
     United States in order to limit our reliance on foreign oil 
     while creating green jobs; expands access to higher 
     education, which everyone agrees is essential for building up 
     a highly-skilled workforce and building out the middle class; 
     and supports saving and capital formation that will raise 
     future standards of living.
       (2) Policy on corporate income taxes.--
       (A) This resolution proposes eliminating unproductive or 
     unwarranted corporate tax preferences and subsidies, as well 
     as pernicious tax breaks that reward U.S. corporations that 
     ship American jobs - rather than products - overseas for tax 
     purposes.
       (B) This resolution adopts pro-growth corporate tax 
     incentives like those in the President's FY 2013 budget 
     proposals, such as: enhancing incentives for domestic 
     manufacturing to support a ``Make it in America'' agenda, 
     including providing a tax credit for companies that return 
     operations and jobs to the U.S. while eliminating tax breaks 
     for companies that move operations and jobs overseas; closing 
     loopholes that allow businesses to avoid taxes, by subjecting 
     more of their foreign earnings sheltered in tax havens to 
     U.S. taxation; the research and development credit; and 
     enhancing clean energy incentives.
       (C) This resolution therefore urges the House Committee on 
     Ways and Means to consider the President's proposals for 
     business tax reform in determining how to best overhaul our 
     corporate tax code so that it promotes economic growth and 
     domestic job creation without increasing the deficit and the 
     debt.

     SEC. 510. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON AGRICULTURE SPENDING.

       It is the policy of this resolution that the House 
     Committee on Agriculture should reduce spending in farm 
     programs that provide direct payments to producers even in 
     robust markets and in times of bumper yields. The committee 
     should also find ways to focus assistance toward struggling 
     family farmers and ranchers in a manner that creates jobs and 
     economic growth while preserving the farm and nutrition 
     safety net.

     SEC. 511. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON THE USE OF TAXPAYER FUNDS.

        It is the policy of this resolution that the House should 
     lead by example and identify any savings that can be achieved 
     through greater productivity and efficiency gains in the 
     operation and maintenance of House services and resources 
     like printing, conferences, utilities, telecommunications, 
     furniture, grounds maintenance, postage, and rent. This 
     should include a review of policies and procedures for 
     acquisition of goods and services to eliminate any 
     unnecessary spending. The Committee on House Administration 
     shall review the policies pertaining to the services provided 
     to Members of Congress and House Committees, and shall 
     identify ways to reduce any subsidies paid for the operation 
     of the House gym, Barber shop, Salon, and the House dining 
     room. Further, it is the policy of this resolution that no 
     taxpayer funds may be used to purchase first class airfare or 
     to lease corporate jets for Members of Congress.

     SEC. 512. POLICY OF THE HOUSE ON A NATIONAL STRATEGY TO 
                   ERADICATE POVERTY AND INCREASE OPPORTUNITY.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) The prospect of upward mobility should be the right of 
     every American.
       (2) Targeted, means-tested Federal programs help lift 
     millions of Americans out of poverty.
       (3) These programs empower their beneficiaries through job 
     training, educational assistance, adequate food, housing, and 
     health care to rise to the middle class.
       (4) The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program alone 
     lifts over 4 million people out of poverty, including over 2 
     million children. It is particularly effective in keeping 
     children - over 1 million - out of deep poverty (below half 
     the poverty line). School breakfast and lunch programs help 
     keep children ready to learn, allowing them to reach their 
     full potential.
       (5) The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax 
     Credit together lift over 9 million people, including nearly 
     5 million children, out of poverty. President Ronald Reagan 
     proposed a major EITC expansion in 1985 and then referred to 
     the 1986 Tax Reform Act, which included the expansion, as 
     ``the best antipoverty, the best pro-family, the best job 
     creation measure to come out of Congress''.
       (6) However, some areas of the country have been left 
     behind. They face persistent high levels of poverty and 
     joblessness. Citizens of these areas often lack access to 
     quality schools, affordable health care, and adequate job 
     opportunities.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the House to support the 
     goal of developing a national strategy to eliminate poverty, 
     with the initial goal of cutting poverty in half in ten 
     years, and to extend equitable access to economic opportunity 
     to all Americans. As Congress works to protect low income and 
     middle class Americans from the negative impacts of budget 
     cuts on the critical domestic programs that millions of 
     American families rely on to get by, priority must be given 
     to creating a national strategy on poverty to maximize the 
     impact of anti-poverty programs across Federal, State, and 
     local governments. Improving the effective coordination and 
     oversight across agencies and implementing a true unity of 
     programs under a ``whole of government'' approach to shared 
     goals and client based outcomes will help to streamline 
     access, improve service delivery, and will strengthen and 
     extend the reach of every Federal dollar to fight poverty. 
     The plan should consider additional targeting of spending 
     toward persistent poverty areas to revitalize these areas of 
     pervasive poverty, unemployment and general distress. The 
     plan must also include provisions that work to remove the 
     barriers and obstacles that prevent the most vulnerable 
     Americans from taking advantage of economic and educational 
     opportunities and moving up the ladder of opportunity to join 
     the middle class and reach for the American Dream.

     SEC. 513. POLICY STATEMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION THROUGH THE 
                   REDUCTION OF UNNECESSARY AND WASTEFUL SPENDING.

       (a) Findings.--The House finds the following:
       (1) The Government Accountability Office (``GAO'') is 
     required by law to identify examples of waste, duplication, 
     and overlap in Federal programs, and has so identified dozens 
     of such examples.
       (2) In testimony before the Committee on Oversight and 
     Government Reform, the Comptroller General has stated that 
     addressing the identified waste, duplication, and overlap in 
     Federal programs ``could potentially save tens of billions of 
     dollars.''
       (3) The Federal Government spends about $80 billion each 
     year for information technology. GAO has identified 
     opportunities for savings and improved efficiencies in the 
     Government's information technology infrastructure.
       (4) Federal agencies reported an estimated $108 billion in 
     improper payments in fiscal year 2012.
       (5) Under clause 2 of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives, each standing committee must hold at least 
     one hearing during each 120 day period following its 
     establishment on waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in 
     Government programs.
       (6) According to the Congressional Budget Office, by fiscal 
     year 2014, 42 laws will expire. Timely reauthorizations of 
     these laws would ensure assessments of program justification 
     and effectiveness.
       (7) The findings resulting from congressional oversight of 
     Federal Government programs may result in programmatic 
     changes in both authorizing statutes and program funding 
     levels.
       (b) Policy Statement on Deficit Reduction Through the 
     Reduction of Unnecessary and Wasteful Spending.--Each 
     authorizing committee annually shall include in its Views and 
     Estimates letter required under section 301(d) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 recommendations to the 
     Committee on the Budget of programs within the jurisdiction 
     of such committee whose funding should be changed.
         Amend the title so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution 
     setting forth the congressional budget for the United States 
     Government for fiscal year 2014 and including the appropriate 
     budgetary levels for fiscal year 2013 and fiscal years 2015 
     through 2023.''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 122, the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) and a Member opposed each will control 15 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.

[[Page 4076]]



                              {time}  1610

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, today we are offering a budget with 
commonsense solutions that first focuses on the issue that's most 
pressing for the country and the American people today: kicking our 
economy into higher gear and putting more Americans back to work.
  We know from the Congressional Budget Office--the professionals--that 
one-half of this year's deficit is due to the fact that millions of 
Americans are still looking for work and that three-quarters of next 
year's deficit is because we're not at full employment.
  Our budget goes to the heart of the issue. It attacks the jobs 
deficit because we know we can't get the budget deficit under control 
until people are back to work and we take a balanced approach to long-
term deficit reduction where we ask for shared responsibility.
  We do ask people at the very high end of the income ladder to give up 
some of the tax preferences and tax breaks they have in order to help 
reduce the deficit. It's very different than the Republican budget that 
doesn't close one tax loophole for the purpose of reducing the deficit. 
Theirs only lowers tax rates for folks at the very top by increasing 
the tax burden on middle-income Americans. We don't do that.
  We make sure that people can get back to work by replacing the 
sequester, which we know will result in 750,000 fewer Americans working 
at the end of this year. We also have a jobs program investing in this 
country, especially in the area of infrastructure, to help rebuild our 
aging infrastructure and build the modern infrastructure that's 
necessary to compete in the 21st century. Those measures will make sure 
that, compared to our Republican colleague's budget, we have 1.2 
million more Americans working by the end of this year and 2 million 
more by the end of next year.
  We also make sure we keep our commitments to our seniors. Unlike the 
Republican budget, we don't reopen the prescription drug doughnut hole, 
which will mean seniors with high prescription drug costs will have to 
pay thousands more out of pocket over the period of this budget, and we 
don't turn Medicare into a voucher program that leaves seniors facing 
the risks and costs of escalating health care costs in the future.
  We make sure that students don't face a doubling of the interest rate 
in July, scheduled to go from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. The 
Republican budget keeps that doubling of interest rate in place. We 
don't.
  We fully fund the transportation program for the next 10 years. The 
Republican budget cuts it by 20 percent, even at a time when we have 15 
percent unemployment in the construction industry.
  Mr. Chairman, we get at the budget issues by putting more people back 
to work, by dealing with this in a balanced way. We reduce the deficit 
way down so it's growing much slower than the economy. We stabilize the 
debt, and we balance the budget in the same time period that the 
Republican budget for the last 2 years had balanced the budget, but our 
focus is on jobs and the jobs deficit as a way to tackle the budget 
deficit.
  With that, I'm very pleased to yield 3 minutes to my colleague and 
friend, the distinguished whip from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I first want to thank the ranking member for the work that 
he's done on this budget that he offers as an alternative.
  It is a reasonable alternative that can be implemented. To that 
extent, it's a stark difference to the majority's proposal, which will 
not be implemented, and they know it.
  Let me start with an observation, a headline, ``Blunt Report Says GOP 
Needs to Regroup for '16.''
  In that, there is this sentence from the report. It's not from a 
Democrat, not from the newspaper, not from an editorial writer. It 
says, ``We have become expert''--``we,'' being the Republican Party.

       We have become expert in how to provide ideological 
     reenforcement to like-minded people.

  With all due respect to my friend, Mr. Ryan, that's what his budget 
is: it is a vision. It is a vision that will not be implemented, and he 
knows it.
  He knows that the Appropriations Committee will not be able to report 
out bills consistent with his budget, nor will the Ways and Means 
Committee come even close to reporting out bills that will implement 
his budget. Why? Because they're so draconian. And as I have said 
before, if every Democrat were taken out of this House and every 
Democrat taken out of the Senate, you would not implement the Ryan 
budget.
  Mr. Van Hollen has put together a balanced plan. Yes, it has 
revenues, and, yes, it keeps the Affordable Care Act in place, and, 
yes, it provides for funding for investment in growing our economy.
  Mr. Ryan knows--and I have great respect for Mr. Ryan. I have great 
respect for his intellect and, frankly, from time to time, for his 
political courage. We voted together on TARP. It was a tough vote for 
him. It was a tough vote for me. It was a tough vote, period. But it 
was the right vote for the economy. We would have been in a depression 
had we not voted for that bill, and I congratulate Mr. Ryan on doing 
that.
  But I'll lament the fact that we do not have an equally honest but 
tough resolution of a big deal in how to get from where we are--too 
much debt, too much deficit--to where we need to be: a fiscally 
sustainable path.
  We will not get there, I tell my friend, by vision alone. Courage 
will be much more important than vision in that case. And Mr. Van 
Hollen has shown courage by offering a budget that will provide for our 
people, for our country, and for our economy.
  I urge all my colleagues to support the Van Hollen alternative. Why? 
Because it is a responsible, fiscally implementable--there's a word for 
you--fiscally doable alternative.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.
  Mr. HOYER. Ezra Klein, who may not be your favorite writer, says:

       Ryan's tax reform plan costs more than all his spending 
     cuts combined.

  That's why I say it can't be implemented. And if we were in private 
and there were no politics involved, I think my friend would admit 
that. He shakes his head ``no.'' I didn't expect anything different 
than that.
  Ladies and gentlemen, this is an important statement of vision. It's 
an important statement of what our priorities are. It's an important 
statement to the American people, to seniors, to students, to families, 
to children where our priorities are.
  The Van Hollen priorities are the right priorities for America, and I 
urge my colleagues to support the Van Hollen alternative.

                              {time}  1620

  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 15 minutes.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself 2 minutes.
  I enjoyed my friend from Maryland, and I appreciate his attempt to 
speak on my behalf. I will just try to do that myself. There is one 
thing that is identical in this budget--the base budget--and the Senate 
budget: it's the appropriations No. 966. It's the one thing that is 
equal in both the House and the Senate budgets.
  The reason I rise in opposition to this budget, unlike what the 
gentleman just said, is that there is no way this could pass. I would 
say the opposite. Why? This budget never balances the budget. You will 
hear Mr. Van Hollen claim that, in 2040, because of certain assumptions 
they, on their own, make and that cannot be verified by the CBO, they 
think they'll balance. It never, ever balances the budget. Here is why:
  We are going to go from a $16-plus trillion debt to a $25 trillion 
debt in this budget--period. What does this great budget do? It shaves 
$612 billion off the debt. It has a $1.2 trillion tax increase. It has 
a $476 billion spending increase. We've got a $1 trillion deficit.

[[Page 4077]]

We're piling debt as high as the eye can see, and they bring a budget 
to the floor that is increasing spending?
  Let's look at every budget offered by the other side: a $1.2 trillion 
tax increase by Mr. Van Hollen and a $476 billion spending increase; 
the Congressional Black Caucus has a $2.8 trillion tax increase with 
$1.1 trillion spending increase; the Progressive Caucus--that's the 
doozy of them all--has a $5.7 trillion tax increase with a $4.065 
trillion spending increase.
  Here is the theme:
  Take more money from the economy; take more money from families; take 
more money from small businesses--spend it in Washington, and hope 
everything works out.
  It's not working out.
  Families are struggling because of this borrowing, because of this 
debt. We need to reject this amendment and go with something that 
works, and that means balancing the budget to get a healthier economy 
to create jobs, which is precisely what our budget does.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

             [From the Wall Street Journal, Mar. 18, 2013]

              How the House Budget Would Boost the Economy

                 (By John F. Cogan and John B. Taylor)

       This week the House of Representatives will vote on its 
     Budget Committee plan, which would bring federal finances 
     into balance by 2023. The plan would do so by gradually 
     slowing the growth in federal spending without raising taxes.
       Still, the plan has been denounced by naysayers who assert 
     that it would harm the economic recovery and that, at the 
     least, any spending reductions should be put off until later. 
     This thinking is just as wrong now as it was in the 1970s.
       According to our research, the spending restraint and 
     balanced-budget parts of the House Budget Committee plan 
     would boost the economy immediately. With the Budget 
     Committee's proposed tax reform included, the immediate 
     impact would be even larger. The entire plan would raise 
     gross domestic product by one percentage point in 2014, 
     equivalent to about a $1,500 increase for each U.S. 
     household. Ten years from now, at the end of the official 
     budget horizon, we estimate that the entire plan would raise 
     GDP by three percentage points, or more than $4,000 for each 
     U.S. household.
       Our assessment is based on a modern macroeconomic model 
     (developed with Volker Wieland of the University of Frankfurt 
     and Maik Wolters of the University of Kiel) whose features 
     include a recognition that the resources to finance 
     government expenditures aren't free--they withdraw resources 
     from the private economy. The model provides for other 
     essential attributes of the economy--that consumers, 
     businesses and workers respond to incentives, and they are 
     influenced by their expectation of future economic conditions 
     when making decisions today. None of these features is 
     provided for in old-style Keynesian models.
       The House budget plan keeps total federal outlays at their 
     current level for two years. Thereafter, spending would rise 
     each year, but more slowly than if present policies continue. 
     By 2023, federal expenditures would decline to 19.1% of GDP 
     in 2023 from 22.2% today.
       Since the Congressional Budget Office projects that 
     revenues will equal 19.1% of GDP in 2023, the House plan will 
     balance the budget that year. Also by 2023, the publicly held 
     federal debt relative to GDP would decline to 55% from its 
     current high level of 76%.
       The House budget is hardly austere: The federal spending 
     claim on GDP would still be considerably higher than it was 
     in fiscal 2000 (18.2%) and only slightly below its claim on 
     GDP in 2007 (19.7%).
       The reductions in the growth rate of spending are to be 
     achieved primarily through entitlement reforms. The 
     Affordable Care Act would be repealed. Medicaid and food-
     stamp administration would be turned over to the states. 
     Medicare would be fundamentally reformed. Anti-fraud measures 
     would be applied to federal disability programs. Among the 
     major entitlement programs, only Social Security would remain 
     unchanged; this is a deficiency in the plan. As for 
     discretionary spending, the House budget plan would provide 
     for only slight reductions from the levels that are set by 
     the budget sequester.
       The long-run economic gains from restraining government 
     spending would not, despite what critics claim, harm the 
     economy in the short run. Instead, the economy would start to 
     grow right away. Why?
       First, the lower level of future government spending avoids 
     the necessity of sharply raising taxes. The expectation that 
     tax rates won't need to rise provides incentives for higher 
     investment and employment today.
       Second, since the expectation of lower future taxes has the 
     effect of raising people's estimation of future disposable 
     income, consumption increases today. This change comes thanks 
     to Milton Friedman's famous ``permanent income'' hypothesis 
     that the behavior of consumers reflects what they expect to 
     earn over a long period. According to our macroeconomic 
     model, the higher level of consumption induced by the House 
     budget's effect on consumer expectations is large enough to 
     offset the reduced growth of government spending.
       Third, the new budget's reduction in the growth of 
     government spending is gradual. That allows private 
     businesses to adjust efficiently without disruptions.
       Still, our macroeconomic model likely underestimates the 
     positive impact of the House budget plan. The model doesn't 
     account for the greater economic certainty that results from 
     preventing the national debt from soaring to dangerously high 
     levels and from stabilizing the federal tax burden. Nor does 
     the model account for beneficial changes in monetary policy 
     that could accompany enactment of the budget plan. Lower 
     deficits and national debt would reduce pressure on the 
     Federal Reserve to continue buying longterm Treasury bonds.
       The U.S. economy has been experiencing its slowest recovery 
     from a deep recession in modern history. Tragically, fewer 
     people are working as a percentage of the working-age 
     population than when the recovery began--and economic growth 
     was only 1.6% last year. The large federal budget deficits--
     by increasing uncertainty and delaying private spending--are 
     an important cause of this lackluster economic performance.
       For too long, policy makers have been misguided by models 
     that lend support to bigger government or to the politically 
     convenient objective of delaying any reduction in spending. 
     It is better to recognize the flaws in this approach and get 
     on with the sensible budget reforms the country so sorely 
     needs.

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I think, if you ask the American people, they know what 
the challenge is right now. It's getting the economy back in full gear, 
and they're struggling because too many of them can't find a job, and 
the Republican budget will make that even worse. That's not me saying 
it. That's not a Democratic economist saying it. Those are the 
professionals at the Congressional Budget Office saying it.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I don't have enough time. On your time, I'm happy to, 
my friend, but I can't do it right now.
  Let me say another thing, Mr. Chairman, with respect to balance. It's 
really interesting.
  One of the reasons the Republican budget that last year came into 
balance in 2040 and the year before was able to balance this year is 
that the increase in per capita health care costs has come down 
significantly, in part because of the Affordable Care Act and the 
changes in incentives. In fact, if you applied much more reasonable 
assumptions to our proposals than the Congressional Budget Office 
applied to the Republican budget last year, you'd get balance. I know 
our Republican colleagues don't want to hear it. Now our focus and our 
priority is on dealing with the jobs deficit. That is the best way to 
reduce the long-term deficit and to do it in a balanced way.
  I now yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished assistant Democratic 
leader, my friend from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn).
  Mr. CLYBURN. Thank you so much for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Ryan budget.
  The Ryan budget ignores the express will of the American people and 
doubles down on the ``you're on your own'' Republican platform that the 
voters soundly rejected just a few months ago. Rather than taking a 
fair and balanced approach to deficit reduction, the Ryan budget will 
kill millions of jobs, slash needed investments, raise taxes on working 
families, and create big, new tax breaks for the wealthiest few. The 
Ryan budget will block grant Medicaid, voucherize Medicare, and rip up 
the safety net that's at the heart of the social contract in this 
country. There are many words that can be used to describe the Ryan 
budget, but the one word that cannot be used is ``balanced.''
  I am pleased that the Democratic alternative and the CBC budget that 
we voted on both include versions of a proposal I have worked on for 
several years. We call it the ``10-20-30.'' The purpose of the 10-20-30 
plan is to target Federal funds to communities that have experienced 
persistent poverty.

[[Page 4078]]

Specifically, this proposal targets 10 percent of funding to neglected 
communities where 20 percent or more of the population has lived in 
poverty for 30 or more years.
  The 10-20-30 plan was originally signed into law as a part of the 
Recovery Act. It has proven to be successful in steering needed rural 
development funds into neglected communities for water and sewage and 
economic development projects. It's time to build on this success and 
expand the 10-20-30 plan.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. CLYBURN. Thank you.
  I am also pleased that all of the Democratic substitutes reject the 
austerity-for-working-families plan that the Republicans are proposing. 
Democrats will honor our commitment to senior citizens and invest in a 
brighter future. The Van Hollen budget will create jobs now, and that's 
the tried and true way to achieve deficit reduction.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to 
yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins).
  Ms. JENKINS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Today, we are stealing from the next generation--our kids and our 
grandkids. We are making false promises that Medicare and Social 
Security benefits will be there to take care of folks when we know that 
Medicare is bankrupt in 8 to 12 years. It's time for Congress to do 
something to help Americans and their families.
  While House Republicans seek to bring taxes and spending back to 
historically stable levels this country operated under for the past 60 
years and seek to balance the budget, there is nothing balanced about 
the Democrats' plan. We are spending more money today than we did last 
year, and we are collecting more taxpayer dollars than ever before. 
Instead of cutting spending, the Democrats' plan would add $4 trillion 
to the debt and take in another $1.2 trillion out of people's pockets, 
not to buy down our debt, but to spend even more.
  Instead of raising taxes, the House Republican plan includes pro-
growth, comprehensive tax reform. Tax reform is critical to increasing 
U.S. competitiveness abroad as well as attracting business here at 
home. It will close loopholes and special interest deductions and 
credits for personal and corporate income taxes and lower the rates for 
everyone.
  I am pleased House Republicans are the only people in this town with 
the courage to balance the budget. It's time to return the economy to 
an engine of growth and job creation and to increase opportunities for 
all hardworking Americans. This is what the House Republican budget 
will achieve, and this is what Americans deserve.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. The way to save Medicare is to bring down costs 
overall in the health care system, not give seniors a voucher that puts 
all the risk on the senior, which is what the Republican approach does.
  I now yield 1 minute to the distinguished ranking member of the 
Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Waxman).
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, a budget shows our 
priorities for financial expenditures but our moral priorities as well. 
There are many reasons to oppose the Ryan budget, but what it does to 
Medicare and Medicaid are on the top of my list.
  They would end Medicare as people have known it. Rather than have a 
guaranteed benefit, they turn it into a voucher. There would be no 
guarantee that people would be able to get the services they need and 
get those benefits provided to them under this voucher. Every year, 
that voucher would be capped, so they would have to buy a cheaper and 
cheaper policy with fewer and fewer benefits.
  For Medicaid, the Ryan budget cuts $810 billion, ending the coverage 
for over 70 million Americans: 17 million are seniors or people with 
disabilities, and 33 million are children, for whom we want to have at 
least a chance of starting life in the best of health. They would make 
this into a block grant, cutting $110 billion, shifting the cost on to 
the States, on to the providers, on to the beneficiaries. They don't 
hold down costs. They simply shift them.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the Ryan budget.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds to 
simply say that I think that people know over here that we're not 
proposing a voucher plan. The premium support is quite different, and 
it's the only bipartisan solution to save and strengthen Medicare.
  With that, I would like to yield 2 minutes to a member of the Budget 
Committee, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita).
  Mr. ROKITA. I thank Chairman Ryan for his leadership as well as to 
thank all of the members and staff of the Budget Committee.
  We have a good product here. It balances. Balance is important 
because, until you balance, you can't even begin to start paying off 
this debt, and we do that. The budget that's on the floor right now 
never balances. It might claim it does, but the math bears otherwise.

                              {time}  1630

  I want to address the Medicaid reforms that we put in our budget, 
because they were just attacked. We believe in balancing the budget. We 
believe in balancing, not by raising taxes, but by cutting spending. 
But you don't just have to cut to cut spending. You can reform.
  You can reform these programs, Mr. Chair, so that they are around for 
the generations to come. Medicaid, a program that by all accounts is 
failing those whom it is intending to serve, needs reform. It leads to 
poor outcomes for patients.
  A 2010 study suggested that surgical patients on Medicaid were 13 
percent more likely to die, Mr. Chairman, than those without health 
insurance at all. That bears repeating. If you're a surgical patient on 
Medicaid, you are 13 percent more likely to die. That needs reform.
  It drives away doctors who want to serve the poor. On average, 
doctors who participate in Medicaid earn 56 percent of what those in 
the private sector do. It also is pushing our States closer and closer 
to the brink of fiscal collapse. States on average now spend more on 
Medicaid than on any other expense, including K-12 education, Mr. 
Chairman. And the dramatic expansion of Medicaid under ObamaCare will 
only make these problems worse.
  We have to address these failing programs. The States are doing it 
already. In Rhode Island, with the help of a waiver from the Federal 
regulations, they are able to take a cap in spending for 5 years and 
put everyone in managed care successfully. In my home State of Indiana, 
40,000 more people who really needed the care were put on without one 
more dime of expense.
  Mr. Chairman, reform is needed, reform cuts costs, and reform will 
make sure these programs are around for generations to come. Please do 
not support this budget. Support the Ryan plan.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Indiana just made 
the point that under the current Medicaid system States have lots of 
flexibility, including Indiana, to help bring down costs. But when you 
have a tight program, cutting another $820 billion is not a lifeline; 
it's throwing them an anchor.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds simply 
to say that Indiana is being denied their waivers, so they're being 
denied the flexibility they are asking for to run Medicaid as they see 
fit to serve their populations. Point made.
  I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Wyoming (Mrs. 
Lummis).
  Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment the House majority 
party for putting together a budget that takes a balanced approach. It 
balances the interest of two very future vulnerable groups.
  One is my age, because in 11 years I'm going to be on Medicare and 
Medicare is going to be broke, completely insolvent, absolutely broke.

[[Page 4079]]

  At the same time, earlier today, I met with some kids who were here 
with the Close Up program. They were high school students full of hope. 
In 11 years, they're going to be starting families, buying cars and 
gasoline and houses and insurance and raising kids; and they'll be at a 
financially vulnerable age.
  Now, the House Republican budget protects both of us. It makes 
Medicare solvent for me when I am there and I need the money. And it 
doesn't do it on the backs of those young high school students today 
that will be 28-years-old when they need to be raising families and 
saving for their children's college and their own retirements. It 
doesn't with the premium support system, not a voucher system, a 
premium support system, which is what I have as a Member of Congress, 
where I get to choose from among government pre-approved insurance 
programs that don't deny me for a preexisting condition. I pay part of 
the premium and the government pays part of the premium. The healthy 
and wealthy get less premium support, the unhealthy and unwealthy get 
more.
  It solves both parties. It's the balanced approach. I ask you to 
reject the minority party's budget and support the House Republican 
budget.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, it is now my privilege to yield 1 
minute to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Pelosi), the very 
distinguished Democratic leader, who just returned from the Vatican and 
hopefully will bring some hope from the Pope, as I say.
  Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him, Mr. 
Chairman, for his tremendous, tremendous leadership and giving us an 
opportunity in the House today to vote on a budget that is a reflection 
of American values--values of work and jobs, promoting them, a value of 
fairness, a value of advancing the success of America's families. I 
thank him for giving us a budget--I think we can all be the judge--
where we say that a budget is a statement of our national values. What 
is important to us as a Nation is a place where we allocate our 
resources.
  This budget is in stark absolute contrast to the Republican budget 
that is on the floor today.
  Contrast number one: jobs. The Republican bill, the Ryan Republican 
budget, is a job killer. Nearly 2 million jobs lost right out of the 
gate, and more lost after that; whereas the Van Hollen Democratic 
substitute is a job creator. It invests in rebuilding the 
infrastructure of America. It invests in innovation, energy, and 
education. Speaking of infrastructure, the American Society of Civil 
Engineers has given us a D in terms of the condition of the 
infrastructure in our country. So the need is there. This budget 
recognizes that need, but it also does so in a way that creates jobs in 
a very innovative way.
  It is in strong contrast when it comes to fairness, fairness as to 
how we, again, establish our priorities to invest in education, rather 
than continue to give tax breaks, loopholes that are unnecessary, 
unworthy of a values budget that the Republican budget continues.
  And in terms of our seniors, the contrast could not be greater. The 
Ryan budget, in 10 years there will be no Medicare guarantee--flat out, 
absolutely. There will be no Medicare guarantee.
  In the meantime--in the meantime--the Ryan budget takes the resources 
that we have in the health care reform bill, repeals the bill, and 
takes the money and runs to give it to his priorities, rather than 
strengthening Medicare and keeping it strong for a longer period of 
time, keeping the benefits that are in the Affordable Care Act, 
prevention and wellness services right from the start, closing the 
prescription drug doughnut hole, and the list goes on.
  I listened intently to the gentlelady speak about our high school 18-
year-old seniors and where they'll be when they're 28 years old. And 
since young people are always used as sort of a point of discussion, 
and rightfully so--we're here to provide for their future--I think it's 
important to listen to what they have to say.
  And the young people that have passed through the Capitol--as you 
know, many do--I frequently invite them to sit down and tell me what 
they would like us to say at the table of the discussion of the 
budget--especially when it comes to them--because we always say we 
cannot heap mountains of debt on the next generation. I fully agree. 
That is why I support the Van Hollen budget.
  These young people say, We want a strong education system, a strong 
public education system. We need student loans that are affordable. We 
need Pell Grants. We need our families to be able to focus on us, and 
so we need Medicare and Medicaid so that our grandparents' health needs 
are met.
  For a long time to come, they hope, loving their grandparents. But 
these young people want to be helpful in solving the budget crisis. 
That's what they have told us: We want to do our share.
  The initiative that brings more money to the Federal Treasury is 
education--education, early childhood, K-12, higher education, post-
grad, all the rest of that lifetime learning.

                              {time}  1640

  Nothing brings more money to the Treasury than educating the American 
people, and that is why investing in education, creating jobs, that 
brings revenue. It's hard to see why we would put forth a budget that 
stunts the growth of jobs, the growth of our economy with jobs and our 
investments in education.
  On the subject of education, tens of billions of dollars are struck 
in the Ryan Republican anti-job bill, in that job-killer bill, tens of 
billions of dollars. They say, it's better to give a tax break to a 
special interest than to invest in the education of our children.
  Would that be a statement of your national values if you were writing 
a budget for our country? I don't think so. It certainly was not a 
statement of the values of the young people who have come through here 
saying how they would help solve the budget deficit challenge we face.
  We all know the deficit must be reduced. We've known it for a long 
time. We've recognized it for a long time. President Clinton recognized 
it and took us on a path of soundness.
  It was totally reversed in the Bush years when our Republican 
colleagues didn't say a word. They said, no problem; it's the 
appropriate percentage of GDP. No problem with the deficit. They never 
complained about it.
  But now, with their initiatives, the Ryan Republican job-killer 
budget is making matters worse in terms of reducing the deficit because 
it deprives our economy of the very initiatives that would create 
growth, the education of our people, lifetime learning for the American 
people.
  Investments in education, as I said, nothing brings more money. 
Investments in jobs, whether it's infrastructure, energy, innovation--
absent in the Ryan Republican job-killer budget.
  Medicare, so important to the stability of America's working 
families, the provisions in the Affordable Care Act that affect 
Medicare have already demonstrated that it is halting the rapid 
increase in the cost of health care spending, and so that is what has 
enabled the CBO to say, with more promise, that we can use a different 
baseline to reduce the deficit, and that has been used in the 
Republican budget.
  So I urge my colleagues to think about the kitchen tables of people 
in our country. We sit at a table here and have these discussions. 
What's really important is how the decisions we make here, what we 
think, and how that relates to the challenges they face, the education 
of their children, are they going to be able to keep their home, keep 
their job, keep their pension, all of this heaped one on top of another 
of concerns.
  And the economic and health security of our seniors not only has an 
impact on them, the seniors, but on their families. And if we're going 
to be true to those young people, those 18-year olds, we must recognize 
how important their education is, but also, how important caring for 
their grandparents is to the economic success of their entire family.
  I'll end where I began. The most important part of all of this is 
this issue

[[Page 4080]]

of jobs, jobs, jobs, and the fairness in our budget to promote jobs and 
to reduce the deficit for the success of America's families.
  The choice is clear: Job-killer Ryan Republican budget bill, job-
creator Van Hollen substitute bill. I urge my colleagues to support the 
Van Hollen bill.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I'm just not going to agree with that one, Mr. 
Chairman. I'll yield myself 30 seconds.
  The minority leader says she's concerned about the debt that is 
befalling the next generation. I'm glad to hear that. Doing nothing, 
the debt will go up by 56 percent if we just do nothing.
  If this budget passes, the Democratic substitute, it will go up by 54 
percent. That's basically doing nothing as well.
  Jobs: the CBO statistic the gentleman talks about, it's not even an 
estimate of this budget, it's the sequester.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself another 10 seconds.
  But the Stanford economist who did look at this Republican budget 
says that we will create 500,000 jobs in the first year and 1.7 million 
each and every year by the end of this budget window. Faster economic 
growth, more jobs, getting the government to live within its means, 
balancing the budget.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), a member of the Budget Committee.
  Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Chairman, today we're not talking about balancing 
a budget for the sake of balancing a budget. The goal is not to just 
check a box. What we're discussing today is about more than just this 
procedure of a budget. We're debating the kind of future that we're 
going to leave our kids.
  Today, the choice is clear: if Congress does not get spending under 
control, our Nation faces a debt crisis that will only make our 
financial situation worse. House Republicans did recognize this and the 
urgency of the hour, and we acted.
  I'm proud to have worked with my colleagues on the Budget Committee 
to produce a budget that does make responsible reforms, promotes 
economic growth and job creation. The House Republican budget does 
balance in 10 years and gets our Nation back on track.
  The Democrats' budget doesn't balance at all within CBO's budget 
window, and it includes a $1.2 trillion increase in taxes. Our budget 
reforms the Tax Code and lowers taxes for everyone.
  Hardworking Hoosier families sit around their kitchen tables today, 
tonight, this evening, and make tough choices to keep their budgets. 
Our households and businesses work hard to live within their means, and 
the Federal Government should do the same.
  The basic principle of keeping budgets is important to all American 
families. When I'm home in the Second District in the State of Indiana 
and I'm in the grocery store on Saturday mornings, there are moms that 
come up to me and they're worried about the rising cost of eggs. 
They're talking about the price of a gallon of milk.
  They're concerned about whether their kids will have a future. Will 
they really go to college? Will there be jobs for them when they come 
out of college? Will there be jobs for them if they don't go to 
college? What happens when they do enter the workforce?
  The truth is this: the uncertainty in Washington is what burdens our 
families at home. It's time for us in Washington to be accountable and 
pass a responsible budget.
  According to Stanford University, in addition to what the chairman 
mentioned, their economists said that this Republican budget would 
result in $1,500 more for each household in 2014 and $4,000 more for 
each household by 2024.
  Our budget includes commonsense policies that will spur investments 
and job creation and roll back the regulations that hurt businesses and 
stifle economic growth.
  History will be our judge by the future that we leave to our 
children. If we refuse to make responsible, serious decisions about 
this budget, we'll jeopardize the American Dream for future 
generations. We have to ensure that our children have the same, if not 
better, opportunities to succeed than we have.
  I urge my colleagues to make a responsible decision, oppose this 
amendment, and support the House Republican budget.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  Mr. ANDREWS. I support the Van Hollen budget because it recognizes 
that reducing our deficit is important, and that fiscal restraint, 
spending cuts, more revenues in a balanced way, is the way to do that. 
But I also support it because it chooses American economic growth over 
the European-style austerity.
  Prior to 1965, in this country, when you got old and retired, you 
moved in with your kids and hoped you didn't get sick. And only the 
very lucky or the very wealthy got to go to college.
  In 1965, two things changed. We adopted Medicare that said that 
retired people had health security, and we adopted the Higher Education 
Act that said that sons and daughters of truckdrivers and teachers 
could get a college education.
  What happened?
  Prior to 1965, on a per capita basis, our economy grew by $323 per 
person per year. After 1965, our economy grew by $523 per person per 
year. Investing in Medicare, investing in education yields growth.
  The Republican budget ends the Medicare guarantees and will severely 
raise the cost of going to college for American families. Vote ``yes'' 
on the Van Hollen plan.

                              {time}  1650

  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Little do some know that ObamaCare ended 
Medicare as we know it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to a distinguished senior member of 
the Budget Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, Mr. Van Hollen recently pointed out that Democrats and 
Republicans both want to get rid of a range of tax loopholes but 
Democrats want to spend that money and Republicans want to lower the 
overall burden. That difference is very important.
  We have the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. 
That's the principle reason why we're losing American jobs to nations 
with much lower taxes. As economist Arthur Laffer has warned, there's 
nothing more portable in this world than money.
  This policy might fit the left's ``eat the rich'' crusade, but the 
jobs it destroys are eating our middle class alive. We are sacrificing 
permanent, upwardly mobile, productive private sector jobs for 
makeshift subsidized ones that disappear the moment the money runs out. 
That is precisely the difference between FedEx and the post office or 
between Apple and Solyndra. And that's all the difference in the world.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. May I inquire again how much time remains?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  The fundamental choice here is whether we want a budget like the 
Democratic budget that focuses on economic growth and strengthening the 
middle class or whether you want to take a budget like the Republican 
budget that imposes European-style austerity by more than doubling the 
size of the sequester on essential investments to help the economy 
grow. Investment in our infrastructure, when we know we have 15 percent 
unemployment in the construction industry. Investment in our kids' 
education, not doubling the student loan interest rate in July, as the 
Republican budget would do. Investment in science and research. If we 
don't make those investments, our global competitors are going to eat 
our lunch.
  And yes, we do ask the very wealthy to get rid of some of their tax 
breaks

[[Page 4081]]

and loopholes to help contribute to the reduction of the deficit so 
that we can reduce the deficit in a balanced way that calls for shared 
responsibility. And no, we do not ask middle-income families to pay 
higher taxes in order to finance tax breaks for the wealthy. And yes, 
we get the deficit down in a steady way. We balance it in the same year 
the Republican bill balanced last year, and we don't pretend that we're 
going to balance and get rid of ObamaCare at the same time. That's fake 
balance, not real balance.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Wisconsin has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, this green graph shows you the 
revenues we've historically had in America. The blue line shows you the 
tax increases our friends are hoping to achieve, some of which have 
already occurred. The red line shows you where spending is going. We 
have a spending problem. But the time my kids are my age, the 
government will be taking twice as much money to spend on the Federal 
Government.
  Austerity is what you do when you have a debt crisis. You raise taxes 
and you cut spending on seniors to try and please the bond markets to 
stop the panic. That's the path we're on. What we're trying to do is 
prevent austerity.
  What do we propose? Let's grow the economy. Let's reform the tax 
system. Let's stop picking winners and losers through loopholes, lower 
tax rates for everybody--families and businesses--to create jobs and 
economic growth. Let's open up the resources we have in this country--
oil, coal, and gas--so we can bring down gas prices, increase 
paychecks, create jobs, help manufacturing.
  We have a safety net that isn't working. We have the highest poverty 
rates in a generation. There are 46 million people in poverty. We need 
to fix this safety net so it works to get people back on their feet 
again. We need to save Medicare so that it's not bankrupt--because it 
is on a path to bankruptcy--so that current seniors can rest in comfort 
knowing it's not going to be taken away from them, so that the 
ObamaCare rationing board won't take it from them, and so that those of 
us who are younger can plan for it.
  We need to balance the budget. Balancing the budget is necessary for 
a healthy economy, for creating jobs, and for giving our kids a debt-
free Nation. That's why we do this. Their budget, despite what they 
say, never, ever balances. The budget the Senate is considering today 
never, ever balances.
  The budget that they're talking about here, the budget that they're 
passing in the Senate, it actually has a net spending increase. And 
don't forget the fact that taxes just went up by $1.6 trillion. What do 
they want to do? Throw another trillion on top. Guess what? They may 
say it's for the rich. They may say it's for the loophole. Watch out, 
middle class. The tax man is coming to you. Because that's exactly what 
all these deficits and all these tax increases are pointing at--taking 
more out of the paychecks of hardworking families. We're going to 
balance the budget and stop that from happening. That's why I urge a 
defeat of the Van Hollen substitute and passage of the base bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, I support the Democratic budget. 
It is a responsible roadmap that invests in our future and approaches 
deficit reduction in a balanced way. It accomplishes this without 
singling out domestic energy production with unfair tax provisions.
  I cannot support the Republican budget. It cuts taxes for the wealthy 
and pays for it by raising taxes on middle income earners and betraying 
our commitment to our seniors. It is misguided and does not reflect the 
values Americans hold dear.
  The Republican budget slashes Medicaid, which provides necessary care 
to our nation's most vulnerable, especially low-income seniors and 
children. Denying them the care they need does not make the costs go 
away, it just shifts the burden on to doctors, hospitals, non-profits, 
and others.
  The Majority budget repeats the same tired and failed tactic of 
repealing the Affordable Care Act. Repeal increases the deficit and 
means Seniors will pay more for prescription drugs, receive less 
preventive care, and bring back the days of abusive insurance companies 
capping coverage and denying coverage to those with pre-existing 
conditions.
  Alternatively, the Democratic budget makes good on the commitments we 
have made to our Seniors. It makes sure that the Affordable Care Act is 
fully implemented and that the benefits are maximized to protect 
patients and begin to bring down the cost of healthcare. This budget 
also provides the necessary funding for medical research, which will 
spur the innovations of the future that end disease and improve 
outcomes.
  Additionally, I appreciate the Ranking Member for making education a 
top priority in this budget. Investing in education is key to growing 
our economy, strengthening the middle class, allowing for upward 
mobility and ensuring our children and grandchildren have brighter 
futures than previous generations. Robust early education programs, 
jobs initiatives and financial aid programs to make college more 
affordable invest in our future and build a stronger America in the 
long-term. Making it harder for out-of-work Americans to get job 
training or for families to access quality early learning programs 
undermines the strength of our workforce and diminishes our ability to 
compete in the global economy.
  Spending on domestic programs is already on track to be at the lowest 
level as a percentage of the economy since the 1960s, but the Ryan 
budget would make even deeper cuts. It imposes spending caps on non-
defense programs for two additional years at a level that is $700 
billion below the level set by the Sequester. It slashes billions of 
dollars in mandatory funding for Pell Grants and allows interest rates 
on student loans to double this summer at a time when student loan debt 
is nearing $1 trillion and is the only type of household debt that 
continued to rise through the Great Recession. We should be working to 
help Americans who seek to better their livelihood through higher 
education rather than allowing them to be crushed by debt or denied 
access due to skyrocketing costs.
  Under the Ryan budget, students will face larger class sizes, more 
debt, fewer afterschool programs, and less support for special needs. 
Robust funding for educational investments is critical to growing our 
economy. Cutting these programs shortchanges our future and threatens 
the ability of our children to pursue the American Dream.
  Finally, I want to thank our Ranking Member on the House Budget 
Committee and Democratic Leadership for not including provisions in 
this budget that would unfairly single-out and punish our domestic 
energy industry by repealing tax provisions for them that are afforded 
to any business operating in our country. The oil and natural gas 
industry is one of the largest employers in our country, supporting 
more than 9.2 million jobs. In fact, this industry delivers $86 million 
a day to the federal government in revenue. Any changes to these tax 
incentives should be addressed in the context of comprehensive tax 
reform and not a budget.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Chair, let me thank our Ranking Member, 
Congressman Van Hollen.
  As a Member of the Budget Committee, I rise in strong support of the 
Democratic Alternative Budget to the disastrous Republican Budget.
  The Democratic budget will close special interest tax loopholes to 
raise the critical revenue we need to create 1.2 million new jobs, and 
make key investments in education, health care and clean energy.
  Mr. Chair, the Democratic Alternative not only fully funds the SNAP 
program, it includes language that calls for the creation of a National 
Strategy on Poverty.
  Democrats understand that fully supporting our safety net programs, 
like Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, and Social Security, will reduce 
poverty, grow the middle class, and promote job creation and economic 
growth.
  Finally, the Democratic Budget eliminates off budget spending in the 
Oversees Contingency Operations slush fund to stop our cycle of 
perpetual wars and bring our troops home safely.
  The Democratic Budget offers a balanced alternative to the failed 
economic and fiscal policies of the Republican majority.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Democratic Budget.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Democratic 
budget alternative offered by Ranking Member Van Hollen, and I thank 
you for allowing me the opportunity to be heard on this important 
issue. Today I am supporting the Van Hollen Budget and opposing the 
budget blueprint laid out by Budget Committee Chairman Ryan. The Van 
Hollen budget acknowledges the concerns that have been expressed to us 
loudly and clearly by constituents since sequestration took effect

[[Page 4082]]

March 1st; the Ryan budget exacerbates the problems caused by across-
the-board cuts and attempts to recycle ideas that the American people 
have repeatedly rejected.
  According to the Congressional Budget Office, half of our current 
budget deficit is attributable to high unemployment and lagging 
economic growth. The approach taken by Chairman Ryan's budget would 
make the problem worse by cutting investments in education, research, 
and infrastructure. Implementing this kind of harmful austerity 
approach will handicap our fledgling economic recovery. The budget I 
voted for makes strategic cuts, closes tax loopholes, and lays a 
foundation for economic growth going forward. And perhaps most 
importantly, the Van Hollen budget ends the damaging sequester and puts 
our country on a sustainable fiscal path without ending the guarantee 
of Medicare.
  In the months preceding our self-imposed March 1st deadline, 
sequestration was a central theme in almost every conversation I had 
with constituents. I spoke with researchers at universities across 
Oregon who expressed concern about the impact cuts would have on 
scientific advancement, business leaders who told me they had not hired 
new workers because of the uncertainty caused by sequestration, and 
teachers who worried about cuts to vital special education programs. 
Oregonians, like most Americans, do not support this detrimental 
approach to policymaking.
  In the weeks following the implementation of the sequester, my 
offices in Oregon and here in Washington, DC continue to hear numerous 
additional stories of the hardships brought about by budget 
uncertainty. For those who rightly raise concern, the budget proposed 
by Chairman Ryan is another example of DC putting politics over 
solutions. My constituents want fiscal responsibility from their 
elected officials; not a budget balanced on the back of the working 
class and the elderly.
  Congress has reduced projected deficits by about $2.7 trillion since 
August 2010 by cutting discretionary spending, increasing tax rates for 
families with taxable income over $450,000 a year, and eliminating 
related debt servicing. The combination of deficit reduction included 
in Ranking Member Van Hollen's budget and the total deficit reduction 
achieved to date meets the $4 trillion goal set forth by the bipartisan 
Simpson-Bowles Commission. Further, the Van Hollen alternative I am 
supporting today achieves this deficit reduction without implementing 
the Ryan budget's Medicare voucher plan, while also preserving the 
Affordable Care Act reforms that currently provide seniors with reduced 
prescription drug costs and free preventive health care.
  Our constituents sent us here to solve the problems created by our 
predecessors, not to make them worse. The Van Hollen budget alternative 
puts us on the road to economic recovery while preserving the social 
safety net. For this reason I am proud to support it.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 165, 
noes 253, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 87]

                               AYES--165

     Andrews
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Garamendi
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Holt
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (MI)
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--253

     Alexander
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallego
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Scalise
     Schneider
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Aderholt
     Amodei
     Engel
     Fortenberry
     Grimm
     Hinojosa
     Langevin
     Lipinski
     Meng
     Miller, George
     Schock
     Smith (NJ)
     Wasserman Schultz

                              {time}  1718

  Messrs. COFFMAN and ROHRABACHER changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now 
rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Joyce) having assumed the chair, Mr. Hastings, 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. 25) establishing the budget for the United States Government 
for fiscal year 2014 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for 
fiscal years 2015 through 2023, had come to no resolution thereon.

[[Page 4083]]



                          ____________________