S.Amdt. 1292

SA 1292. Mr. PAUL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to
amendment SA 1116 proposed by Mr. Enzi to the concurrent resolution H.
Con. Res. 71, establishing the congressional budget for the United
States Government for fiscal year 2018 and setting forth the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2019 through 2027; which
was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place insert the following:

SEC. ___. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON TREATMENT OF REDUCTION OF
APPROPRIATIONS LEVELS TO ACHIEVE SAVINGS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) H. Con. Res. 448 (96th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1981, gave
authorizing committees reconciliation instructions which
amounted to approximately two-thirds of the savings required
under reconciliation.
(2) The language in H. Con. Res. 448 resulted in a debate
about how reconciling discretionary spending programs could
be in order given that authorizations of appropriations for
programs did not actually change spending and the programs
authorized would be funded through later annual
appropriation. The staff of the Committee on the Budget of
the Senate and Marty Gold, counsel to the Majority Leader,
advised that upon consultation with the Parliamentarian, the
original instructions on discretionary spending would be out
of order because of the phrase, ``to modify programs''. This
was seen as too broad and programs could be modified without
resulting in changes to their future appropriations.
(3) To rectify this violation, the Committee on the Budget
of the Senate reported S. Con. Res. 9 (97th Congress),
revising the congressional budget for the United States
Government for fiscal years 1981, 1982, and 1983, to include
reconciliation, which revised the language in the
reconciliation instructions to change entitlement law and
``to report changes in laws within the jurisdiction of that
committee sufficient to reduce appropriations levels so as to
achieve savings''.
(4) This was understood to mean changes in authorization
language of discretionary programs would be permissible under
reconciliation procedures provided such changes in law would
have the result in affecting a change in later outlays
derived from future appropriations. Further it was understood
that a change in authorization language that caused a change
in later outlays was considered to be a change in outlays for
the purpose of reconciliation.
(5) On April 2, 1981, the Senate voted 88 to 10 to approve
S. Con. Res. 9 with the modified reconciliation language.
(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate
that committees reporting changes in laws within the
jurisdiction of that committee sufficient to reduce
appropriations levels so as to achieve savings shall be
considered to be changes in outlays for the purpose of
enforcing the prohibition on extraneous matters in
reconciliation bills.
______