PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Reported (Amended) by the Committee on The Budget. H. Rept. 104-89, Part I.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 13, 1995
Discretionary Spending Reduction and Control Act of 1995 - Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to establish discretionary spending limits for FY 1996 through 2000. Extends congressional committee allocation and enforcement provisions and the applicability of certain points of order through FY 2000. Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to establish amounts for FY 1996 through 2000 to eliminate budgetary excess from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund. Revises the general statement of budget enforcement to apply to discretionary spending limits and pay-as-you-go requirements rather than expired maximum deficit amounts. Extends enforcement of discretionary spending limits, pay-as-you- go requirements, and reporting requirements through FY 2000. Provides a special rule on the interrelationship between changes in discretionary spending limits and pay-as-you-go requirements for enforcement purposes. Prohibits changes in direct spending and receipts resulting from this Act from being reflected in pay-as-you-go estimates. Revises the final sequestration report to be made by the Office of Management and Budget for FY 1996.
People & committees
Rep. Kasich, John R. [R-OH-12] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on The Budget. H. Rept. 104-89, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on The Budget. H. Rept. 104-89, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 11.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1219 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1219 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1219 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1219 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.