PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 31, 2009
Taxpayer Empowerment and Advocacy Act of 2009 - Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to extend through FY2014 the spending limits (spending caps) for the discretionary categories in new budget authority and outlays.
Revises requirements for adjustments to discretionary spending limits in sequestration reports by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Repeals such requirements relating to: (1) continuing disability reviews by the Social Security Administration (SSA); (2) allowances for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and for specified international arrearages; (3) an Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) compliance initiative; (4) adoption incentive payments for the Department of Health and Human Services; and (5) conservation spending.
Requires that, if legislation is enacted that charges federal agencies for the full cost of accrued federal retirement and health benefits, and a measure is enacted making appropriations that provides new budget authority to carry out such legislation, the adjustment shall be equal to the reduction in mandatory budget authority and outlays estimated resulting from such legislation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Extends Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) requirements and enforcement mechanisms through FY2014.
Revises formulae for the calculation of a deficit increase or decrease and for elimination of a deficit increase.
Requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to assume an automatic deficit increase of $58.160 billion for FY2010 before making a calculation of deficit increase or decrease.
Modifies the formula for eliminating a deficit increase. Repeals the limitation on reductions of certain Medicare programs and the increase (if necessary) to the uniform percentage applicable to all other direct spending programs to a level sufficient to achieve the required reduction in direct spending.
Assumes non-exempt direct spending accounts to be at the level in the baseline for FY2011, and for FY2012-FY2015 at the baseline after adjusting for any sequester in FY2010.
Repeals the exclusion from Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates and OMB reports to Congress on emergency legislation of direct spending legislation to cover agricultural crop disaster assistance. (Thus requires the amount of new budget authority, outlays, and receipts of all fiscal years resulting from direct spending legislation to cover such crop disaster assistance.)
Modifies the baseline to exclude certain emergency appropriations and emergency spending legislation.
Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to make it out of order to consider in the Senate or House any legislation that contains an emergency designation under the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act unless it meets a specified new definition of "emergency" set out in the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
Makes it out of order to consider in the House a rule or order that waives such application.
People & committees
Rep. Barrett, J. Gresham [R-SC-3] · R–SC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to House Rules
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 House Budget
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H4132-4133)
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.1814 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.1814 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.1814 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.1814 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.