Text: H.Con.Res.68 — 106th Congress (1999-2000)All Information (Except Text)

Text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?

Shown Here:
Enrolled Bill

 
[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 68 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.68
                                        Agreed to April 15, 1999        

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America


                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the sixth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine


                          Concurrent Resolution


 


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

SECTION 1. CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000.

    (a) Declaration.--Congress determines and declares that this 
concurrent resolution is the concurrent resolution on the budget for 
fiscal year 2000 including the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal 
years 2001 through 2009 as authorized by section 301 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (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 2000.

                       TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

Sec. 101. Recommended levels and amounts.
Sec. 102. Social Security.
Sec. 103. Major functional categories.
Sec. 104. Reconciliation of revenue reductions in the Senate.
Sec. 105. Reconciliation of revenue reductions in the House of 
          Representatives.

              TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

Sec. 201. Safe deposit box for Social Security surpluses.
Sec. 202. Reserve fund for retirement security.
Sec. 203. Reserve fund for Medicare.
Sec. 204. Reserve fund for agriculture.
Sec. 205. Tax reduction reserve fund in the Senate.
Sec. 206. Emergency designation point of order in the Senate.
Sec. 207. Pay-as-you-go point of order in the Senate.
Sec. 208. Application and effect of changes in allocations and 
          aggregates.
Sec. 209. Establishment of levels for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 210. Deficit-neutral reserve fund to foster the employment and 
          independence of individuals with disabilities in the Senate.
Sec. 211. Reserve fund for fiscal year 2000 surplus.
Sec. 212. Reserve fund for education in the Senate.
Sec. 213. Exercise of rulemaking powers.

       TITLE III--SENSE OF CONGRESS, HOUSE, AND SENATE PROVISIONS

                Subtitle A--Sense of Congress Provisions

Sec. 301. Sense of Congress on the protection of the Social Security 
          surpluses.
Sec. 302. Sense of Congress on providing additional dollars to the 
          classroom.
Sec. 303. Sense of Congress on asset-building for the working poor.
Sec. 304. Sense of Congress on child nutrition.
Sec. 305. Sense of Congress concerning funding for special education.

                Subtitle B--Sense of the House Provisions

Sec. 311. Sense of the House on the Commission on International 
          Religious 
          Freedom.
Sec. 312. Sense of the House on assessment of welfare-to-work programs.

               Subtitle C--Sense of the Senate Provisions

Sec. 321. Sense of the Senate that the Federal Government should not 
          invest the Social Security trust funds in private financial 
          markets.
Sec. 322. Sense of the Senate regarding the modernization and 
          improvement of the Medicare Program.
Sec. 323. Sense of the Senate on education.
Sec. 324. Sense of the Senate on providing tax relief to Americans by 
          returning the non-Social Security surplus to taxpayers.
Sec. 325. Sense of the Senate on access to Medicare services.
Sec. 326. Sense of the Senate on law enforcement.
Sec. 327. Sense of the Senate on improving security for United States 
          diplomatic missions.
Sec. 328. Sense of the Senate on increased funding for the National 
          Institutes of Health.
Sec. 329. Sense of the Senate on funding for Kyoto Protocol 
          implementation prior to Senate ratification.
Sec. 330. Sense of the Senate on TEA-21 funding and the States.
Sec. 331. Sense of the Senate that the One Hundred Sixth Congress, first 
          session should reauthorize funds for the farmland protection 
          program.
Sec. 332. Sense of the Senate on the importance of Social Security for 
          individuals who become disabled.
Sec. 333. Sense of the Senate on reporting of on-budget trust fund 
          levels.
Sec. 334. Sense of the Senate regarding South Korea's international 
          trade practices on pork and beef.
Sec. 335. Sense of the Senate on funding for natural disasters.

                      TITLE I--LEVELS AND AMOUNTS

SEC. 101. RECOMMENDED LEVELS AND AMOUNTS.

    The following budgetary levels are appropriate for the fiscal years 
2000 through 2009:
        (1) Federal revenues.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
    concurrent resolution--
            (A) The recommended levels of Federal revenues are as 
        follows:
            Fiscal year 2000: $1,408,082,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $1,434,837,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $1,454,757,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003: $1,531,512,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004: $1,584,969,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005: $1,648,259,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006: $1,681,438,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007: $1,735,646,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008: $1,805,517,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009: $1,868,515,000,000.
            (B) The amounts by which the aggregate levels of Federal 
        revenues should be changed are as follows:
            Fiscal year 2000: $0.
            Fiscal year 2001: -$7,810,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: -$53,519,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003: -$31,806,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004: -$49,180,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005: -$62,637,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006: -$109,275,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007: -$135,754,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008: -$150,692,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009: -$177,195,000,000.
        (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 2000: $1,426,720,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $1,455,785,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $1,486,875,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003: $1,559,079,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004: $1,612,910,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005: $1,666,657,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006: $1,698,214,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007: $1,753,326,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008: $1,814,537,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009: $1,874,778,000,000.
        (3) Budget outlays.--For purposes of the enforcement of this 
    concurrent resolution, the appropriate levels of total budget 
    outlays are as follows:
            Fiscal year 2000: $1,408,082,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $1,434,837,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $1,454,757,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003: $1,531,512,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004: $1,583,753,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005: $1,639,568,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006: $1,667,838,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007: $1,717,042,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008: $1,781,865,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009: $1,841,858,000,000.
        (4) Deficits or surpluses.--For purposes of the enforcement of 
    this concurrent resolution, the amounts of the deficits or 
    surpluses are as follows:
            Fiscal year 2000: $0.
            Fiscal year 2001: $0.
            Fiscal year 2002: $0.
            Fiscal year 2003: $0.
            Fiscal year 2004: $1,216,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005: $8,691,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006: $13,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007: $18,604,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008: $23,652,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009: $26,657,000,000.
        (5) Public debt.--The appropriate levels of the public debt are 
    as follows:
            Fiscal year 2000: $5,628,400,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001: $5,708,500,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002: $5,793,500,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003: $5,877,400,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004: $5,956,300,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005: $6,024,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006: $6,084,600,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007: $6,136,500,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008: $6,173,900,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009: $6,203,400,000,000.

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 2000: $468,020,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001: $487,744,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002: $506,293,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2003: $527,326,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2004: $549,876,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2005: $576,840,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2006: $601,834,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2007: $628,277,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2008: $654,422,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2009: $681,313,000,000.
    (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 2000: $327,256,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2001: $339,789,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2002: $350,127,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2003: $362,197,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2004: $375,253,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2005: $389,485,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2006: $404,596,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2007: $420,616,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2008: $438,132,000,000.
        Fiscal year 2009: $459,496,000,000.

SEC. 103. MAJOR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES.

    Congress determines and declares that the appropriate levels of new 
budget authority and budget outlays for fiscal years 2000 through 2009 
for each major functional category are:
        (1) National Defense (050):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $288,812,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $276,567,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $303,616,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $285,949,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $308,175,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $291,714,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $318,277,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $303,642,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $327,166,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $313,460,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $328,370,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $316,675,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $329,600,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $315,110,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $330,869,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $313,686,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $332,175,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $317,102,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $333,451,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $318,040,000,000.
        (2) International Affairs (150):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,511,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $14,850,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $11,679,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $15,212,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,885,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $14,581,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,590,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,977,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $13,994,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,716,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,151,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,352,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,352,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,069,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,429,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,886,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,498,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,701,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,462,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,560,000,000.
        (3) General Science, Space, and Technology (250):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,955,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $18,214,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,946,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,907,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,880,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,784,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,772,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000
                (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,912,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,768,000,000.
        (4) Energy (270):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $49,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$650,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, -$1,435,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$3,136,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, -$163,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,138,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, -$84,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,243,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, -$319,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,381,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, -$447,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,452,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, -$452,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,453,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, -$506,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,431,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, -$208,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,137,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, -$76,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$1,067,000,000.
        (5) Natural Resources and Environment (300):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $22,820,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,644,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $21,833,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $21,879,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $21,597,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $21,223,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $22,479,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,579,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $22,992,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $23,003,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $23,036,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,929,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $23,066,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,966,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $23,167,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,925,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $23,158,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,861,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $23,541,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $23,238,000,000.
        (6) Agriculture (350):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,331,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,160,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $13,519,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $11,279,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $11,788,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,036,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $11,955,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,252,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,072,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,526,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,553,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,882,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,609,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,083,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,711,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,145,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,763,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,162,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,853,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,223,000,000.
        (7) Commerce and Housing Credit (370):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $9,664,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $4,270,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $10,620,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $5,754,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,450,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,188,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,529,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,875,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $13,859,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,439,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,660,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,437,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,635,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $9,130,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,666,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $8,879,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,642,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $8,450,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $13,415,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $8,824,000,000.
        (8) Transportation (400):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $51,825,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $45,833,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $50,996,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $47,711,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $50,845,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $47,265,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,255,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,769,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,285,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,255,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,314,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,071,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,345,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,039,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,378,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,039,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,412,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,056,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $52,447,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,082,000,000.
        (9) Community and Regional Development (450):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $6,369,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $10,462,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $4,011,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $8,298,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,608,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $5,857,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,851,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $4,536,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,828,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $3,812,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,819,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $3,012,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,816,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $2,732,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,810,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $2,606,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,811,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $2,522,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $3,808,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $2,483,000,000.
        (10) Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 
    (500):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $66,347,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $63,806,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $66,030,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $64,574,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $66,476,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $64,847,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $70,963,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $67,460,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $73,277,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $70,162,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $74,093,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $72,672,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $74,858,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $73,843,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $75,762,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $74,748,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $76,773,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $75,738,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $76,680,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $75,688,000,000.
        (11) Health (550):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $156,181,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $152,986,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $164,089,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $162,357,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $173,330,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $173,767,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $184,679,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $185,330,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $197,893,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $198,499,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $212,821,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $212,637,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $228,379,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $228,323,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $246,348,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $245,472,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $265,160,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $264,420,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $285,541,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $284,941,000,000.
        (12) Medicare (570):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $208,652,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $208,698,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $222,104,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $222,252,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $230,593,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $230,222,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $250,743,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $250,871,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $268,558,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $268,738,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $295,574,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $295,188,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $306,772,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $306,929,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $337,566,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $337,761,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $365,642,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $365,225,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $394,078,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $394,249,000,000.
        (13) Income Security (600):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $244,390,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $248,088,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $250,473,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $257,033,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $262,970,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $266,577,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $276,386,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $276,176,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $286,076,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $285,533,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $298,442,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $298,424,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $304,655,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $305,093,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $310,547,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $311,448,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $323,815,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $325,266,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $334,062,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $335,604,000,000.
        (14) Social Security (650):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $14,239,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $14,348,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $13,768,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,750,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $15,573,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $15,555,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $16,299,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $16,281,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,087,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,069,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $17,961,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $17,943,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $18,895,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $18,877,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $19,907,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $19,889,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $21,033,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $21,015,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $22,233,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $22,215,000,000.
        (15) Veterans Benefits and Services (700):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $45,424,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $45,564,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $44,255,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $44,980,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $44,728,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $45,117,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $45,897,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,385,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $46,248,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,713,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $48,789,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $49,292,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $47,266,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $47,812,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $47,805,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $46,231,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $48,451,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $48,997,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $49,099,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $49,671,000,000.
        (16) Administration of Justice (750):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $23,434,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $25,349,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $24,656,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $25,117,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $24,657,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $24,932,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $24,561,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $24,425,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $26,195,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $26,084,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $26,334,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $26,221,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $26,370,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $26,249,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $26,403,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $26,285,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $26,450,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $26,346,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $26,481,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $26,368,000,000.
        (17) General Government (800):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,339,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $13,476,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $11,916,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,605,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,060,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,282,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,083,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,150,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,099,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,186,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,112,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $11,906,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,134,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $11,839,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,150,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $11,873,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,169,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $12,064,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $12,178,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $11,931,000,000.
        (18) Net Interest (900):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, $275,486,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $275,486,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, $271,071,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $271,071,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, $267,482,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $267,482,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, $265,200,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $265,200,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, $263,498,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $263,498,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, $261,143,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $261,143,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, $258,985,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $258,985,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, $257,468,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $257,468,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, $255,085,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $255,085,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, $252,968,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, $252,968,000,000.
        (19) Allowances (920):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, -$9,833,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$10,794,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, -$8,481,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$12,874,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, -$6,437,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$19,976,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, -$4,394,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$4,835,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, -$4,481,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$5,002,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, -$4,515,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$5,067,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, -$4,619,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$5,192,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, -$5,210,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$5,780,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, -$5,279,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$5,851,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, -$5,316,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$5,889,000,000.
        (20) Undistributed Offsetting Receipts (950):
            Fiscal year 2000:
                (A) New budget authority, -$34,275,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$34,275,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2001:
                (A) New budget authority, -$36,881,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$36,881,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2002:
                (A) New budget authority, -$43,654,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$43,654,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2003:
                (A) New budget authority, -$37,102,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$37,102,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2004:
                (A) New budget authority, -$37,329,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$37,329,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2005:
                (A) New budget authority, -$38,465,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$38,465,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2006:
                (A) New budget authority, -$39,364,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$39,364,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2007:
                (A) New budget authority, -$40,856,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$40,856,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2008:
                (A) New budget authority, -$41,925,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$41,925,000,000.
            Fiscal year 2009:
                (A) New budget authority, -$43,039,000,000.
                (B) Outlays, -$43,039,000,000.

SEC. 104. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN THE SENATE.

    Not later than July 23, 1999, the Senate Committee on Finance shall 
report to the Senate a reconciliation bill proposing changes in laws 
within its jurisdiction necessary to reduce revenues by not more than 
$0 in fiscal year 2000, $142,315,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 
2000 through 2004, and $777,868,000 for the period of fiscal years 2000 
through 2009.

SEC. 105. RECONCILIATION OF REVENUE REDUCTIONS IN THE HOUSE OF 
              REPRESENTATIVES.

    Not later than July 16, 1999, the Committee on Ways and Means shall 
report to the House of Representatives a reconciliation bill proposing 
changes in laws within its jurisdiction necessary to reduce revenues by 
not more than $0 in fiscal year 2000, $142,315,000,000 for the period 
of fiscal years 2000 through 2004, and $777,868,000,000 for the period 
of fiscal years 2000 through 2009.

             TITLE II--BUDGETARY RESTRAINTS AND RULEMAKING

SEC. 201. SAFE DEPOSIT BOX FOR SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUSES.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
        (1) under the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, the Social 
    Security trust funds are off-budget for purposes of the President's 
    budget submission and the concurrent resolution on the budget;
        (2) the Social Security trust funds have been running surpluses 
    for 17 years;
        (3) these surpluses have been used to implicitly finance the 
    general operations of the Federal Government;
        (4) in fiscal year 2000, the Social Security surplus will 
    exceed $137 billion;
        (5) for the first time, a concurrent resolution on the budget 
    balances the Federal budget without counting the Social Security 
    surpluses;
        (6) the only way to ensure that Social Security surpluses are 
    not diverted for other purposes is to balance the budget exclusive 
    of such surpluses; and
        (7) Congress and the President should take such steps as are 
    necessary to ensure that future budgets are balanced excluding the 
    surpluses generated by the Social Security trust funds.
    (b) Point of Order.--
        (1) In general.--It shall not be in order in the House of 
    Representatives or the Senate to consider any revision to this 
    concurrent resolution or a concurrent resolution on the budget for 
    fiscal year 2001, or any amendment thereto or conference report 
    thereon, that sets forth a deficit for any fiscal year.
        (2) Deficit levels.--For purposes of this subsection--
            (A) a deficit shall be the level (if any) set forth in the 
        most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for 
        that fiscal year pursuant to section 301(a)(3) of the 
        Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and
            (B) in setting forth the deficit level pursuant to section 
        301(a)(3) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, that level 
        shall not include any adjustments in aggregates that would be 
        made pursuant to any reserve fund that provides for adjustments 
        in allocations and aggregates for legislation that enhances 
        retirement security through structural programmatic reform.
        (3) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply if the deficit 
    for a fiscal year results solely from legislation enacted pursuant 
    to section 202.
        (4) Budget committee determinations.--For purposes of this 
    subsection, the levels of new budget authority, outlays, direct 
    spending, new entitlement authority, revenues, deficits, and 
    surpluses for a fiscal year shall be determined on the basis of 
    estimates made by the Committee on the Budget of the House of 
    Representatives or the Senate, as applicable.

SEC. 202. RESERVE FUND FOR RETIREMENT SECURITY.

    Whenever the Committee on Ways and Means of the House or the 
Committee on Finance of the Senate reports a bill, or an amendment 
thereto is offered, or a conference report thereon is submitted that 
enhances retirement security through structural programmatic reform, 
the appropriate chairman of the Committee on the Budget may--
        (1) increase the appropriate allocations and aggregates of new 
    budget authority and outlays by the amount of new budget authority 
    provided by such measure (and outlays flowing therefrom) for that 
    purpose;
        (2) in the Senate, adjust the levels used for determining 
    compliance with the pay-as-you-go requirements of section 207; and
        (3) reduce the revenue aggregates by the amount of the revenue 
    loss resulting from that measure for that purpose.

SEC. 203. RESERVE FUND FOR MEDICARE.

    (a) In General.--Whenever the Committee on Ways and Means of the 
House or the Committee on Finance of the Senate reports a bill, or an 
amendment thereto is offered (in the House), or a conference report 
thereon is submitted that implements structural Medicare reform and 
significantly extends the solvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance 
Trust Fund without the use of transfers of new subsidies from the 
general fund, the appropriate chairman of the Committee on the Budget 
may change committee allocations and spending aggregates if such 
legislation will not cause an on-budget deficit for--
        (1) fiscal year 2000;
        (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004; or
        (3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
    (b) Prescription Drug Benefit.--The adjustments made pursuant to 
subsection (a) may be made to address the cost of the prescription drug 
benefit.

SEC. 204. RESERVE FUND FOR AGRICULTURE.

    (a) Adjustment.--
        (1) In general.--Whenever the Committee on Agriculture of the 
    House or the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of 
    the Senate reports a bill, or an amendment thereto is offered (in 
    the House), or a conference report thereon is submitted that 
    provides risk management or income assistance for agriculture 
    producers that complies with paragraph (2), the appropriate 
    chairman of the Committee on the Budget shall increase the 
    allocation of budget authority and outlays to that committee by the 
    amount of budget authority (and the outlays resulting therefrom) 
    provided by that legislation for such purpose in accordance with 
    subsection (b).
        (2) Condition.--Legislation complies with this paragraph if it 
    does not cause a net increase in budget authority or outlays for 
    fiscal year 2000 and does not cause a net increase in budget 
    authority that is greater than $2,000,000,000 for any of fiscal 
    years 2001 through 2004.
    (b) Limitations.--The adjustments to the allocations required by 
subsection (a) shall not exceed--
        (1) $6,000,000,000 in budget authority (and the outlays 
    resulting therefrom) for the period of fiscal years 2000 through 
    2004; and
        (2) $6,000,000,000 in budget authority and outlays for the 
    period of fiscal years 2000 through 2009.

SEC. 205. TAX REDUCTION RESERVE FUND IN THE SENATE.

    In the Senate, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget may 
reduce the spending and revenue aggregates and may revise committee 
allocations for legislation that reduces revenues if such legislation 
will not increase the deficit or decrease the surplus for--
        (1) fiscal year 2000;
        (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004; or
        (3) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2009.

SEC. 206. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.

    (a) Designations.--
        (1) Guidance.--In making a designation of a provision of 
    legislation as an emergency requirement under section 251(b)(2)(A) 
    or 252(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act 
    of 1985, the committee report and any statement of managers 
    accompanying that legislation shall analyze whether a proposed 
    emergency requirement meets all the criteria in paragraph (2).
        (2) Criteria.--
            (A) In general.--The criteria to be considered in 
        determining whether a proposed expenditure or tax change is an 
        emergency requirement or whether it is--
                (i) necessary, essential, or vital (not merely useful 
            or beneficial);
                (ii) sudden, quickly coming into being, and not 
            building up over time;
                (iii) an urgent, pressing, and compelling need 
            requiring immediate action;
                (iv) subject to subparagraph (B), unforeseen, 
            unpredictable, and unanticipated; and
                (v) not permanent, temporary in nature.
            (B) Unforeseen.--An emergency that is part of an aggregate 
        level of anticipated emergencies, particularly when normally 
        estimated in advance, is not unforeseen.
        (3) Justification for failure to meet criteria.--If the 
    proposed emergency requirement does not meet all the criteria set 
    forth in paragraph (2), the committee report or the statement of 
    managers, as the case may be, shall provide a written justification 
    of why the requirement should be accorded emergency status.
    (b) Point of Order.--When the Senate is considering a bill, 
resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report, a point of order 
may be made by a Senator against an emergency designation in that 
measure and if the Presiding Officer sustains that point of order, that 
provision making such a designation shall be stricken from the measure 
and may not be offered as an amendment from the floor.
    (c) Waiver and Appeal.--This section may be waived or suspended in 
the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, 
duly chosen and sworn. An affirmative vote of three-fifths of the 
Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required in the 
Senate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of 
order raised under this section.
    (d) Definition of an Emergency Requirement.--A provision shall be 
considered an emergency designation if it designates any item an 
emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) or 252(e) of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    (e) Form of the Point of Order.--A point of order under this 
section may be raised by a Senator as provided in section 313(e) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    (f) Conference Reports.--If a point of order is sustained under 
this section against a conference report the report shall be disposed 
of as provided in section 313(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.
    (g) Exception for Defense Spending.--Subsection (b) shall not apply 
against an emergency designation for a provision making discretionary 
appropriations in the defense category.
    (h) Sunset.--This section shall expire on the adoption of the 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2001.

SEC. 207. PAY-AS-YOU-GO POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.

    (a) Purpose.--The Senate declares that it is essential to--
        (1) ensure continued compliance with the balanced budget plan 
    set forth in this concurrent resolution; and
        (2) continue the pay-as-you-go enforcement system.
    (b) Point of Order.--
        (1) In general.--It shall not be in order in the Senate to 
    consider any direct spending or revenue legislation that would 
    increase the on-budget deficit or cause an on-budget deficit for 
    any one of the three applicable time periods as measured in 
    paragraphs (5) and (6).
        (2) Applicable time periods.--For purposes of this subsection 
    the term ``applicable time period'' means any one of the three 
    following periods:
            (A) The first year covered by the most recently adopted 
        concurrent resolution on the budget.
            (B) The period of the first five fiscal years covered by 
        the most recently adopted concurrent resolution on the budget.
            (C) The period of the five fiscal years following the first 
        five fiscal years covered in the most recently adopted 
        concurrent resolution on the budget.
        (3) Direct-spending legislation.--For purposes of this 
    subsection and except as provided in paragraph (4), the term 
    ``direct-spending legislation'' means any bill, joint resolution, 
    amendment, motion, or conference report that affects direct 
    spending as that term is defined by and interpreted for purposes of 
    the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
        (4) Exclusion.--For purposes of this subsection, the terms 
    ``direct-spending legislation'' and ``revenue legislation'' do not 
    include--
            (A) any concurrent resolution on the budget; or
            (B) any provision of legislation that affects the full 
        funding of, and continuation of, the deposit insurance 
        guarantee commitment in effect on the date of the enactment of 
        the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990.
        (5) Baseline.--Estimates prepared pursuant to this section 
    shall--
            (A) use the baseline used for the most recently adopted 
        concurrent resolution on the budget; and
            (B) be calculated under the requirements of subsections (b) 
        through (d) of section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
        Deficit Control Act of 1985 for fiscal years beyond those 
        covered by that concurrent resolution on the budget.
        (6) Prior surplus.--If direct spending or revenue legislation 
    increases the on-budget deficit or causes an on-budget deficit when 
    taken individually, then it must also increase the on-budget 
    deficit or cause an on-budget deficit when taken together with all 
    direct spending and revenue legislation enacted since the beginning 
    of the calendar year not accounted for in the baseline under 
    paragraph (5)(A).
    (c) Waiver.--This section may be waived or suspended in the Senate 
only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly 
chosen and sworn.
    (d) Appeals.--Appeals in the Senate from the decisions of the Chair 
relating to any provision of this section 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, as the case may be. An 
affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly 
chosen and sworn, shall be required in the Senate to sustain an appeal 
of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under this 
section.
    (e) Determination of Budget Levels.--For purposes of this section, 
the levels of new budget authority, outlays, and revenues for a fiscal 
year shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the 
Committee on the Budget of the Senate.
    (f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 202 of House Concurrent 
Resolution 67 (104th Congress) is repealed.
    (g) Sunset.--Subsections (a) through (e) of this section shall 
expire September 30, 2002.

SEC. 208. APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF CHANGES IN ALLOCATIONS AND 
              AGGREGATES.

    (a) Application.--Any adjustments of allocations and aggregates 
made pursuant to this concurrent resolution for any measure 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 concurrent resolution.
    (c) Enforcement in the House.--In the House, for the purpose of 
enforcing this concurrent resolution, sections 302(f) and 311(a) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall apply to fiscal year 2000 and 
the total for fiscal year 2000 and the four ensuing fiscal years.

SEC. 209. ESTABLISHMENT OF LEVELS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999.

    The levels submitted pursuant to H. Res. 5 of the 106th Congress or 
S. Res. 312 of the 105th Congress, and any revisions authorized by such 
resolutions, shall be considered to be the levels and revisions of the 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1999.

SEC. 210. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND TO FOSTER THE EMPLOYMENT AND 
              INDEPENDENCE OF INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES IN THE 
              SENATE.

    (a) In General.--In the Senate, revenue and spending aggregates and 
other appropriate budgetary levels and limits may be adjusted and 
allocations may be revised for legislation that finances disability 
programs designed to allow individuals with disabilities to become 
employed and remain independent if, to the extent that this concurrent 
resolution on the budget does not include the costs of that 
legislation, the enactment of that legislation will not increase the 
deficit or decrease the surplus in this concurrent resolution for--
        (1) fiscal year 2000;
        (2) the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004; or
        (3) the period of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
    (b) Revised Allocations.--
        (1) Adjustments for legislation.--Upon the consideration of 
    legislation pursuant to subsection (a), the Chairman of the 
    Committee on the Budget of the Senate may file with the Senate 
    appropriately-revised allocations under section 302(a) of the 
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and revised functional levels and 
    aggregates to carry out this section.
        (2) Adjustments for amendments.--If the Chairman of the 
    Committee on the Budget of the Senate submits an adjustment under 
    this section for legislation in furtherance of the purpose 
    described in subsection (a), upon the offering of an amendment to 
    that legislation that would necessitate such submission, the 
    Chairman shall submit to the Senate appropriately-revised 
    allocations under section 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
    1974 and revised functional levels and aggregates to carry out this 
    section.

SEC. 211. RESERVE FUND FOR A FISCAL YEAR 2000 SURPLUS.

    (a) Congressional Budget Office Updated Budget Forecast for Fiscal 
Year 2000.--Pursuant to section 202(e)(2) of the Congressional Budget 
Act of 1974, the Congressional Budget Office shall update its economic 
and budget forecast for fiscal year 2000 by July 1, 1999.
    (b) Reporting a Surplus.--If the report provided pursuant to 
subsection (a) estimates an on-budget surplus for fiscal year 2000, the 
appropriate chairman of the Committee on the Budget may make the 
adjustments as provided in subsection (c).
    (c) Adjustments.--The appropriate chairman of the Committee on the 
Budget may make the following adjustments in an amount equal to the on-
budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 as estimated in the report 
submitted pursuant to subsection (a)--
        (1) reduce the on-budget revenue aggregate by that amount for 
    fiscal year 2000;
        (2) increase the on-budget surplus levels used for determining 
    compliance with the pay-as-you-go requirements of section 207; and
        (3) adjust the instruction in sections 104 and 105 of this 
    concurrent resolution to--
            (A) reduce revenues by that amount for fiscal year 2000; 
        and
            (B) increase the reduction in revenues for the period of 
        fiscal years 2000 through 2004 and for the period of fiscal 
        years 2000 through 2009 by that amount.

SEC. 212. RESERVE FUND FOR EDUCATION IN THE SENATE.

    (a) In General.--In the Senate, upon reporting of a bill, the 
offering of an amendment thereto, or the submission of a conference 
report thereon that allows local educational agencies to use 
appropriated funds to carry out activities under part B of the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that complies with 
subsection (b), the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the 
Senate may--
        (1) increase the outlay aggregate and allocation for fiscal 
    year 2000 by not more than $360,000,000; and
        (2) adjust the levels used for determining compliance with the 
    pay-as-you-go requirements of section 207.
    (b) Condition.--Legislation complies with this subsection if it 
does not cause a net increase in budget authority or outlays for the 
periods of fiscal years 2000 through 2004 and 2000 through 2009.

SEC. 213. EXERCISE OF RULEMAKING POWERS.

    Congress adopts the provisions of this title--
        (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate and 
    the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such they shall 
    be considered as part of the rules of each House, or of that House 
    to which they specifically apply, and such rules shall supersede 
    other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent 
    therewith; and
        (2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of either 
    House to change those rules (so far as they relate to that House) 
    at any time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as in the 
    case of any other rule of that House.

       TITLE III--SENSE OF CONGRESS, HOUSE, AND SENATE PROVISIONS
                Subtitle A--Sense of Congress Provisions

SEC. 301. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE PROTECTION OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY 
              SURPLUSES.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
        (1) Congress and the President should balance the budget 
    excluding the surpluses generated by the Social Security trust 
    funds;
        (2) reducing the Federal debt held by the public is a top 
    national priority, strongly supported on a bipartisan basis, as 
    evidenced by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's comment that 
    debt reduction ``is a very important element in sustaining economic 
    growth'', as well as President Clinton's comments that it ``is 
    very, very important that we get the Government debt down'' when 
    referencing his own plans to use the budget surplus to reduce 
    Federal debt held by the public;
        (3) according to the Congressional Budget Office, balancing the 
    budget excluding the surpluses generated by the Social Security 
    trust funds will reduce debt held by the public by a total of 
    $1,723,000,000,000 by the end of fiscal year 2009, 
    $417,000,000,000, or 32 percent, more than it would be reduced 
    under the President's fiscal year 2000 budget submission;
        (4) further, according to the Congressional Budget Office, that 
    the President's budget would actually spend $40,000,000,000 of the 
    Social Security surpluses in fiscal year 2000 on new spending 
    programs, and spend $158,000,000,000 of the Social Security 
    surpluses on new spending programs from fiscal year 2000 through 
    2004; and
        (5) Social Security surpluses should be used for Social 
    Security reform, retirement security, or to reduce the debt held by 
    the public and should not be used for other purposes.
    (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the 
functional totals in this concurrent resolution on the budget assume 
that Congress shall pass legislation which--
        (1) reaffirms the provisions of section 13301 of the Omnibus 
    Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 that provides that the receipts 
    and disbursements of the Social Security trust funds shall not be 
    counted for the purposes of the budget submitted by the President, 
    the congressional budget, or the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
    Deficit Control Act of 1985, and provides for a point of order 
    within the Senate against any concurrent resolution on the budget, 
    an amendment thereto, or a conference report thereon that violates 
    that section;
        (2) mandates that the Social Security surpluses are used only 
    for the payment of Social Security benefits, retirement security, 
    Social Security reform, or to reduce the Federal debt held by the 
    public and such mandate shall be implemented by establishing a 
    super-majority point of order in the Senate against limits 
    established on the level of debt held by the public;
        (3) provides for a Senate super-majority point of order against 
    any bill, resolution, amendment, motion or conference report that 
    would use Social Security surpluses on anything other than the 
    payment of Social Security benefits, Social Security reform, 
    retirement security, or the reduction of the Federal debt held by 
    the public;
        (4) ensures that all Social Security benefits are paid on time; 
    and
        (5) accommodates Social Security reform legislation.

SEC. 302. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON PROVIDING ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO THE 
              CLASSROOM.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
        (1) strengthening America's public schools while respecting 
    State and local control is critically important to the future of 
    our children and our Nation;
        (2) education is a local responsibility, a State priority, and 
    a national concern;
        (3) working with the Nation's governors, parents, teachers, and 
    principals must take place in order to strengthen public schools 
    and foster educational excellence;
        (4) education initiatives should boost academic achievement for 
    all students; and excellence in American classrooms means having 
    high expectations for all students, teachers, and administrators, 
    and holding schools accountable to the children and parents served 
    by such schools;
        (5) successful schools and school systems are characterized by 
    parental involvement in the education of their children, local 
    control, emphasis on basic academics, emphasis on fundamental 
    skills and exceptional teachers in the classroom;
        (6) the one-size-fits-all approach to education often creates 
    barriers to innovation and reform initiatives at the local level; 
    America's rural schools face challenges quite different from their 
    urban counterparts; and parents, teachers, and State and local 
    officials should have the freedom to tailor their education plans 
    and reforms according to the unique educational needs of their 
    children;
        (7) the consolidation of various Federal education programs 
    will benefit our Nation's children, parents, and teachers by 
    sending more dollars directly to the classroom; and
        (8) our Nation's children deserve an educational system that 
    will provide opportunities to excel.
    (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
        (1) Congress should enact legislation that would consolidate 31 
    Federal K-12 education programs;
        (2) the Department of Education, the States, and local 
    educational agencies should work together to ensure that not less 
    than 95 percent of all funds appropriated for the purpose of 
    carrying out elementary and secondary education programs 
    administered by the Department of Education is spent for our 
    children in their classrooms;
        (3) increased funding for elementary and secondary education 
    should be directed to States and local school districts; and
        (4) decision making authority should be placed in the hands of 
    States, localities, and families to implement innovative solutions 
    to local educational challenges and to increase the performance of 
    all students, unencumbered by unnecessary Federal rules and 
    regulations.

SEC. 303. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON ASSET-BUILDING FOR THE WORKING POOR.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
        (1) 33 percent of all American households and 60 percent of 
    African American households have no or negative financial assets.
        (2) 46.9 percent of all children in America live in households 
    with no financial assets, including 40 percent of Caucasian 
    children and 75 percent of African American children.
        (3) In order to provide low-income families with more tools for 
    empowerment, incentives which encourage asset-building should be 
    established.
        (4) Across the Nation, numerous small public, private, and 
    public-private asset-building incentives, including individual 
    development accounts, are demonstrating success at empowering low-
    income workers.
        (5) Middle and upper income Americans currently benefit from 
    tax incentives for building assets.
        (6) The Federal Government should utilize the Federal tax code 
    to provide low-income Americans with incentives to work and build 
    assets in order to escape poverty permanently.
    (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the 
provisions of this concurrent resolution assume that Congress should 
modify the Federal tax law to include provisions which encourage low-
income workers and their families to save for buying a first home, 
starting a business, obtaining an education, or taking other measures 
to prepare for the future.

SEC. 304. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON CHILD NUTRITION.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
        (1) both Republicans and Democrats understand that an adequate 
    diet and proper nutrition are essential to a child's general well-
    being;
        (2) the lack of an adequate diet and proper nutrition may 
    adversely affect a child's ability to perform up to his or her 
    ability in school;
        (3) the Federal Government currently plays a role in funding 
    school nutrition programs; and
        (4) there is a bipartisan commitment to helping children learn.
    (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the 
Committees on Education and the Workforce and Agriculture in the House, 
and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry in the Senate 
should examine our Nation's nutrition programs to determine if they can 
be improved, particularly with respect to services to low-income 
children.

SEC. 305. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING FUNDING FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION.

    (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
        (1) In the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 
    U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) (referred to in this concurrent resolution as 
    the ``Act''), Congress found that improving educational results for 
    children with disabilities is an essential element of our national 
    policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, 
    independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals 
    with disabilities.
        (2) In the Act, the Secretary of Education is instructed to 
    make grants to States to assist them in providing special education 
    and related services to children with disabilities.
        (3) The Act represents a commitment by the Federal Government 
    to fund 40 percent of the average per-pupil expenditure in public 
    elementary and secondary schools in the United States.
        (4) The budget submitted by the President for fiscal year 2000 
    ignores the commitment by the Federal Government under the Act to 
    fund special education and instead proposes the creation of new 
    programs that limit the manner in which States may spend the 
    limited Federal education dollars received.
        (5) The budget submitted by the President for fiscal year 2000 
    fails to increase funding for special education, and leaves States 
    and localities with an enormous unfunded mandate to pay for growing 
    special education costs.
    (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the 
budgetary levels in this concurrent resolution assume that part B of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) should 
be fully funded at the originally promised level before any funds are 
appropriated for new education programs.

               Subtitle B--Sense of the House Provisions

SEC. 311. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON THE COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL 
              RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.

    (a) Findings.--The House finds that--
        (1) persecution of individuals on the sole ground of their 
    religious beliefs and practices occurs in countries around the 
    world and affects millions of lives;
        (2) such persecution violates international norms of human 
    rights, including those established in the Universal Declaration of 
    Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
    Rights, the Helsinki Accords, and the Declaration on the 
    Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on 
    Religion or Belief;
        (3) such persecution is abhorrent to all Americans, and our 
    very Nation was founded on the principle of the freedom to worship 
    according to the dictates of our conscience; and
        (4) in 1998 Congress unanimously passed, and President Clinton 
    signed into law, the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, 
    which established the United States Commission on International 
    Religious Freedom to monitor facts and circumstances of violations 
    of religious freedom and authorized $3,000,000 to carry out the 
    functions of the Commission for each of fiscal years 1999 and 2000.
    (b) Sense of the House.--It is the sense of the House that--
        (1) this concurrent resolution assumes that $3,000,000 will be 
    appropriated within function 150 for fiscal year 2000 for the 
    United States Commission on International Religious Freedom to 
    carry out its duties; and
        (2) the House Committee on Appropriations is strongly urged to 
    appropriate such amount for the Commission.

SEC. 312. SENSE OF THE HOUSE ON ASSESSMENT OF WELFARE-TO-WORK PROGRAMS.

    (a) In General.--It is the sense of the House that, recognizing the 
need to maximize the benefit of the Welfare-to-Work Program, the 
Secretary of Labor should prepare a report on Welfare-to-Work Programs 
pursuant to section 403(a)(5) of the Social Security Act. This report 
should include information on the following--
        (1) the extent to which the funds available under such section 
    have been used (including the number of States that have not used 
    any of such funds), the types of programs that have received such 
    funds, the number of and characteristics of the recipients of 
    assistance under such programs, the goals of such programs, the 
    duration of such programs, the costs of such programs, any evidence 
    of the effects of such programs on such recipients, and accounting 
    of the total amount expended by the States from such funds, and the 
    rate at which the Secretary expects such funds to be expended for 
    each of the fiscal years 2000, 2001, and 2002;
        (2) with regard to the unused funds allocated for Welfare-to-
    Work for each of fiscal years 1998 and 1999, identify areas of the 
    Nation that have unmet needs for Welfare-to-Work initiatives; and
        (3) identify possible Congressional action that may be taken to 
    reprogram Welfare-to-Work funds from States that have not utilized 
    previously allocated funds to places of unmet need, including those 
    States that have rejected or otherwise not utilized prior funding.
    (b) Report.--It is the sense of the House that, not later than 
January 1, 2000, the Secretary of Labor should submit to the Committee 
on the Budget and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House and the 
Committee on Finance of the Senate, in writing, the report described in 
subsection (a).

               Subtitle C--Sense of the Senate Provisions

SEC. 321. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT 
              INVEST THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS IN PRIVATE 
              FINANCIAL MARKETS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the assumptions underlying the 
functional totals in this concurrent resolution assume that the Federal 
Government should not directly invest contributions made to the Federal 
Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability 
Insurance Trust Fund established under section 201 of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401) in private financial markets.

SEC. 322. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE MODERNIZATION AND 
              IMPROVEMENT OF THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
        (1) The health insurance coverage provided under the Medicare 
    Program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
    1395 et seq.) is an integral part of the financial security for 
    retired and disabled individuals, as such coverage protects those 
    individuals against the financially ruinous costs of a major 
    illness.
        (2) Expenditures under the Medicare Program for hospital, 
    physician, and other essential health care services that are 
    provided to nearly 39,000,000 retired and disabled individuals will 
    be $232,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2000.
        (3) During the nearly 35 years since the Medicare Program was 
    established, the Nation's health care delivery and financing system 
    has undergone major transformations. However, the Medicare Program 
    has not kept pace with such transformations.
        (4) Former Congressional Budget Office Director Robert 
    Reischauer has described the Medicare Program as it exists today as 
    failing on the following four key dimensions (known as the ``Four 
    I's''):
            (A) The program is inefficient.
            (B) The program is inequitable.
            (C) The program is inadequate.
            (D) The program is insolvent.
        (5) The President's budget framework does not devote 15 percent 
    of the budget surpluses to the Medicare Program. The Federal budget 
    process does not provide a mechanism for setting aside current 
    surpluses for future obligations. As a result, the notion of saving 
    15 percent of the surplus for the Medicare Program cannot 
    practically be carried out.
        (6) The President's budget framework would transfer to the 
    Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund more than $900,000,000,000 
    over 15 years in new IOUs that must be redeemed later by raising 
    taxes on American workers, cutting benefits, or borrowing more from 
    the public, and these new IOUs would increase the gross debt of the 
    Federal Government by the amounts transferred.
        (7) The Congressional Budget Office has stated that the 
    transfers described in paragraph (6), which are strictly 
    intragovernmental, have no effect on the unified budget surpluses 
    or the on-budget surpluses and therefore have no effect on the debt 
    held by the public.
        (8) The President's budget framework does not provide access 
    to, or financing for, prescription drugs.
        (9) The Comptroller General of the United States has stated 
    that the President's Medicare Proposal does not constitute reform 
    of the program and ``is likely to create a public misperception 
    that something meaningful is being done to reform the Medicare 
    Program''.
        (10) The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 enacted changes to the 
    Medicare Program which strengthen and extend the solvency of that 
    program.
        (11) The Congressional Budget Office has stated that without 
    the changes made to the Medicare Program by the Balanced Budget Act 
    of 1997, the depletion of the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund 
    would now be imminent.
        (12) The President's budget proposes to cut Medicare Program 
    spending by $19,400,000,000 over 10 years, primarily through 
    reductions in payments to providers under that program.
        (13) The recommendations by Senator John Breaux and 
    Representative William Thomas received the bipartisan support of a 
    majority of members on the National Bipartisan Commission on the 
    Future of Medicare.
        (14) The Breaux-Thomas recommendations provide for new 
    prescription drug coverage for the neediest beneficiaries within a 
    plan that substantially improves the solvency of the Medicare 
    Program without transferring new IOUs to the Federal Hospital 
    Insurance Trust Fund that must be redeemed later by raising taxes, 
    cutting benefits, or borrowing more from the public.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the 
provisions contained in this budget resolution assume the following:
        (1) This resolution does not adopt the President's proposals to 
    reduce Medicare Program spending by $19,400,000,000 over 10 years, 
    nor does this resolution adopt the President's proposal to spend 
    $10,000,000,000 of Medicare Program funds on unrelated programs.
        (2) Congress will not transfer to the Federal Hospital 
    Insurance Trust Fund new IOUs that must be redeemed later by 
    raising taxes on American workers, cutting benefits, or borrowing 
    more from the public.
        (3) Congress should work in a bipartisan fashion to extend the 
    solvency of the Medicare Program and to ensure that benefits under 
    that program will be available to beneficiaries in the future.
        (4) The American public will be well and fairly served in this 
    undertaking if the Medicare Program reform proposals are considered 
    within a framework that is based on the following five key 
    principles offered in testimony to the Senate Committee on Finance 
    by the Comptroller General of the United States:
            (A) Affordability.
            (B) Equity.
            (C) Adequacy.
            (D) Feasibility.
            (E) Public acceptance.
        (5) The recommendations by Senator Breaux and Congressman 
    Thomas provide for new prescription drug coverage for the neediest 
    beneficiaries within a plan that substantially improves the 
    solvency of the Medicare Program without transferring to the 
    Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund new IOUs that must be 
    redeemed later by raising taxes, cutting benefits, or borrowing 
    more from the public.
        (6) Congress should move expeditiously to consider the 
    bipartisan recommendations of the Chairmen of the National 
    Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare.
        (7) Congress should continue to work with the President as he 
    develops and presents his plan to fix the problems of the Medicare 
    Program.

SEC. 323. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON EDUCATION.

    It is the sense of the Senate that--
        (1) the levels in this concurrent resolution assume that--
            (A) increased Federal funding for elementary and secondary 
        education should be directed to States and local school 
        districts;
            (B) the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 
        U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) should be fully funded at the originally 
        promised level before any funds are appropriated for new 
        education programs;
            (C) decisionmaking authority should be placed in the hands 
        of States, localities, and families to implement innovative 
        solutions to local education challenges and to increase the 
        performance of all students, unencumbered by unnecessary 
        Federal rules and regulations; and
            (D) the Department of Education, the States, and local 
        education agencies should work together to ensure that not less 
        than 95 percent of all funds appropriated for the purpose of 
        carrying out elementary and secondary education programs 
        administered by the Department of Education is spent for our 
        children in their classrooms; and
        (2) within the discretionary allocation provided to the 
    Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate for function 
    500 that to the maximum extent practicable--
            (A) the Federal Pell Grant maximum award should be 
        increased;
            (B) funding for the Federal Supplemental Education 
        Opportunity Grants Program should be increased;
            (C) funding for the Federal capital contributions under the 
        Federal Perkins Loan Program should be increased;
            (D) funding for the Leveraging Educational Assistance 
        Partnership Program should be increased;
            (E) funding for the Federal Work-Study Program should be 
        increased; and
            (F) funding for the Federal TRIO Programs should be 
        increased.

SEC. 324. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON PROVIDING TAX RELIEF TO AMERICANS BY 
              RETURNING THE NON-SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS TO TAXPAYERS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that--
        (1) the levels in this concurrent resolution assume that the 
    Senate not only puts a priority on protecting Social Security and 
    Medicare and reducing the Federal debt, but also on tax reductions 
    for working families in the form of family tax relief and 
    incentives to stimulate savings, investment, job creation, and 
    economic growth;
        (2) such tax relief could include an expansion of the 15-
    percent bracket, marginal rate reductions, a significant reduction 
    or elimination of the marriage penalty, retirement savings 
    incentives, estate tax relief, an above-the-line income tax 
    deduction for Social Security payroll taxes, tax incentives for 
    education savings, parity between the self-employed and 
    corporations with respect to the tax treatment of health insurance 
    premiums, and capital gains tax fairness for family farmers;
        (3) the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 needs comprehensive 
    reform, and Congress should move expeditiously to consider 
    comprehensive tax reform and simplification proposals; and
        (4) Congress should reject the President's proposed tax 
    increase on investment income of associations as defined under 
    section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

SEC. 325. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON ACCESS TO MEDICARE SERVICES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution assume Congress should review payment levels in the Medicare 
Program to ensure beneficiaries have a range of choices available under 
the Medicare+Choice program and have access to high quality skilled 
nursing services, home health care services, and inpatient and 
outpatient hospital services in rural areas.

SEC. 326. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON LAW ENFORCEMENT.

  It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution assume that--
        (1) significant resources should be provided for strong law 
    enforcement and aggressive crimefighting programs and that funding 
    in fiscal year 2000 for critical programs should be equal to or 
    greater than funding for these programs in 1999;
        (2) critical programs include--
            (A) State and local law enforcement assistance, especially 
        with respect to the development and integration of anticrime 
        technology systems and upgrading forensic laboratories and the 
        information and communications infrastructures upon which they 
        rely;
            (B) continuing efforts to reduce violent crime; and
            (C) significant expansion of intensive Federal firearms 
        prosecutions projects such as the ongoing programs in Richmond 
        and Philadelphia into America's most crime plagued cities; and
        (3) the existence of a strong Federal drug control policy is 
    essential in order to reduce the supplies of illegal drugs 
    internationally and to reduce the number of children who are 
    exposed to or addicted to illegal drugs and this can be furthered 
    by--
            (A) investments in programs authorized in the Western 
        Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act and the proposed Drug Free 
        Century Act; and
            (B) securing adequate resources and authority for the 
        United States Customs Service in any legislation reauthorizing 
        the Service.

SEC. 327. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPROVING SECURITY FOR UNITED STATES 
              DIPLOMATIC MISSIONS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution assume that--
        (1) there is an urgent and ongoing requirement to improve 
    security for United States diplomatic missions and personnel 
    abroad; and
        (2) additional budgetary resources should be devoted to 
    programs within function 150 to enable successful international 
    leadership by the United States.

SEC. 328. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE NATIONAL 
              INSTITUTES OF HEALTH.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution and legislation enacted pursuant to this concurrent 
resolution assume that--
        (1) there shall be a continuation of the pattern of budgetary 
    increases for biomedical research; and
        (2) additional resources should be targeted towards autism 
    research.

SEC. 329. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FUNDING FOR KYOTO PROTOCOL 
              IMPLEMENTATION PRIOR TO SENATE RATIFICATION.

    It is the sense of Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution assume that funds should not be provided to put into effect 
the Kyoto Protocol prior to its Senate ratification in compliance with 
the requirements of the Byrd-Hagel Resolution and consistent with 
previous Administration assurances to Congress.

SEC. 330. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON TEA-21 FUNDING AND THE STATES.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution and any legislation enacted pursuant to this concurrent 
resolution assume that the President's fiscal year 2000 budget proposal 
to change the manner in which any excess Federal gasoline tax revenues 
are distributed to the States will not be implemented, but rather any 
of these funds will be distributed to the States pursuant to section 
1105 of TEA-21.

SEC. 331. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS, 
              FIRST SESSION SHOULD REAUTHORIZE FUNDS FOR THE FARMLAND 
              PROTECTION PROGRAM.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the functional totals contained 
in this concurrent resolution assume that the One Hundred Sixth 
Congress, first session will reauthorize funds for the Farmland 
Protection Program.

SEC. 332. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL SECURITY FOR 
              INDIVIDUALS WHO BECOME DISABLED.

    It is the sense of the Senate that levels in the resolution assume 
that--
        (1) Social Security plays a vital role in providing adequate 
    income for individuals who become disabled; and
        (2) Congress and the President should take this fact into 
    account when considering proposals to reform the Social Security 
    program.

SEC. 333. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON REPORTING OF ON-BUDGET TRUST FUND 
              LEVELS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution assume, effective for fiscal year 2001, the President's 
budget and the budget report of Congressional Budget Office required 
under section 202(e) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 should 
include an itemization of the on-budget trust funds for the budget 
year, including receipts, outlays, and balances.

SEC. 334. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING SOUTH KOREA'S INTERNATIONAL 
              TRADE PRACTICES ON PORK AND BEEF.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the Senate--
        (1) believes strongly that while a stable global marketplace is 
    in the best interest of America's farmers and ranchers, the United 
    States should seek a mutually beneficial relationship without 
    hindering the competitiveness of American agriculture;
        (2) calls on South Korea to abide by its trade commitments;
        (3) calls on the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the 
    United States Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund 
    to promote vigorously policies that encourage the opening of 
    markets for beef and pork products by requiring South Korea to 
    abide by its existing international trade commitments and to reduce 
    trade barriers, tariffs, and export subsidies;
        (4) calls on the President and the Secretaries of the Treasury 
    and Agriculture to monitor and report to Congress that resources 
    will not be used to stabilize the South Korean market at the 
    expense of United States agricultural goods or services; and
        (5) requests the United States Trade Representative and the 
    United States Department of Agriculture to pursue the settlement of 
    disputes with the Government of South Korea on its failure to abide 
    by its international trade commitments on beef market access, to 
    consider whether Korea's reported plans for subsidizing its pork 
    industry would violate any of its international trade commitments, 
    and to determine what impact Korea's subsidy plans would have on 
    United States agricultural interests, especially in Japan.

SEC. 335. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON FUNDING FOR NATURAL 
              DISASTERS.

    It is the sense of the Senate that the levels in this concurrent 
resolution assume that, given that emergency spending for natural 
disasters continues to have an unpredictable yet substantial impact on 
the Federal budget and that consequently budgeting for disasters 
remains difficult, the Administration and Congress should review 
procedures for funding emergencies, including natural disasters, in any 
budget process reform legislation that comes before the Congress.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

Share This