For Further Action on Helium Provisions See H.R.3967.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 21, 1993
Deficit Reduction Act of 1993 - Prohibits the annual travel budget for each non-defense executive branch agency (excluding the Postal Service) for FY 1994 from exceeding 90 percent of the budget level available to such agency for FY 1993. Abolishes the Interstate Commerce Commission. Transfers its functions, powers, and duties to the Department of Transportation. Limits the outlays for the legislative branch for FY 1994 to 85 percent of such outlays for FY 1993. Directs the Secretary of the Interior to sell to one or more joint ventures all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the helium reserves established pursuant to the Helium Act, including facilities and accessories. Limits the administrative and overhead budget (excluding travel expenses) for non-defense executive branch agencies (excluding the Postal Service) for FY 1995 to 99 percent of the budget level available for FY 1994. Repeals the Davis-Bacon Act (an Act which requires that the locally prevailing wage rate be paid to various classes of laborers and mechanics working under federally-financed or federally-assisted contracts for construction, alteration, and repair of public buildings or public works). Eliminates the honey price support and wool and mohair price support programs. Increases rental voucher authority and terminates loan authority for public housing construction. Prohibits the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from expending or obligating any budget authority for certain special projects. Rescinds such amounts remaining for FY 1993. Amends the United States Housing Act of 1937 to require competitive bidding for public housing modernization activities. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to require the disclosure of tenant income in information returns under housing assistance programs for income-based rent subsidies. Reduces Government contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan. Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to require competitive bidding for the radio spectrum for awarding initial licenses or new construction permits, with exceptions. Authorizes the Federal Communications Commission to consider relative economic values and other public interest benefits in making spectrum allocation decisions among services that are subject to competitive bidding.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1785 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1785 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1785 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1785 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.