back FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  CONTACT: June 25, 2004 Kate Dwyer: 202-226-7326 Ryan’s Budget Reform Bill Sparks Debate, Votes in House of Representatives WASHINGTON –  Late yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives considered major legislation proposed by Wisconsin’s First District Congressman Paul Ryan and several like-minded colleagues who have been working together to fix the broken budget process and reduce wasteful spending. Their legislation – a complete overhaul of the federal government’s budget process that would finally make the budget enforceable, rein in pork-barrel spending, and improve the government’s accounting practices – was voted on in several different ways.  First, several of its key components were considered separately, each on its own as an amendment to another, less-comprehensive budget enforcement bill (H.R.4663).  Later, Ryan’s complete budget process reform package (the Family Budget Protection Act) was voted on as a substitute to H.R.4663.  Eighty-eight House Republicans voted in favor of the Family Budget Protection Act, while support for the narrower reform amendments was stronger.  For example, Ryan’s amendment to initiate enhanced rescission, enabling the President to pinpoint a wasteful pork-barrel project in a spending bill and send that specific item back to Congress for votes, received 174 “yes” votes.  Although this support was insufficient to pass the budget reform legislation, Ryan said the debate was a necessary step in a long-term strategy.  Each of these measures was strongly opposed by the House Appropriations Committee, which is in charge of all annual spending bills. “This is how big changes begin in Washington,” Ryan said.  “It takes repeated debate and numerous votes over a period of years to pass major reforms in Congress.  This is especially true when those reforms make it tougher for Congress to spend taxpayers’ money. Going into this, we expected that our budget fix would most likely be defeated this time around. But these votes are important because they show who really supports spending restraint – in action, not just words.  Looking at all of yesterday’s votes, we see that the majority – but not all – Republicans and some Democrats will actually vote for reforms that begin to bring sanity to our federal budget process.  We need to keep pressing people on both sides of the aisle to be more accountable to the taxpayers we represent.  To put it bluntly, the status quo got a wake-up call yesterday.”   Among other improvements, Ryan’s comprehensive budget process reform legislation (the Family Budget Protection Act) would do the following: Give the federal budget the force of law, by changing the current non-binding concurrent budget resolution into a joint budget resolution. When signed by the President, this would have the force of law, and both Congress and the White House would have to abide by budget resolution spending levels.  Finally enable Members of Congress to achieve true savings from amendments that reduce spending, instead of seeing that savings go to increase spending elsewhere. It does this by creating budget protection accounts that allow Members to redirect savings from their amendments toward tax relief or deficit reduction.  Initiate enhanced rescission authority for the President to propose the elimination of wasteful spending identified in any appropriations bill and send that specific item back to Congress for a vote. Unlike the “line item veto,” with enhanced rescission authority both the House and Senate would have to vote to remove spending on the particular wasteful project in order to eliminate that spending. This would make it easier for pork-barrel and other wasteful spending to be pinpointed and eliminated, without taking away Congress’ power of the purse.  Simplify the current budget by replacing the 20 budget functions with a one-page budget, establishing spending levels for only five broad spending categories: mandatory spending, non-defense and defense discretionary spending, interest and emergencies. Abolish the practice of designating spending as “emergencies” to avoid spending safeguards. True non-military emergencies would be budgeted for with a new “rainy day” fund, and all spending from that fund must be for matters defined as sudden, urgent, unforeseen and temporary.  Allow for biennial budgeting in the future if the President and Congress agree during their negotiations to extend funding over a two-year fiscal period. This would enable Congress to budget in one year and spend the next year focusing on oversight – determining whether it is spending taxpayers’ money wisely on the programs for which it has budgeted funds.  Limit growth in entitlement spending to inflation and the growth in population. This would not apply to Social Security or the new Medicare prescription drug benefit until that program is fully phased in. Set caps on discretionary (non-mandatory) spending that allow it to grow for inflation, with a firewall separating defense, nondefense, and emergency spending. Raise the bar for points of order to require a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House and the Senate to sanction over-budget spending and spending in violation of the caps.   back