PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 24, 1995
District of Columbia Budget Efficiency Act of 1995 - Amends the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act to require the annual budget submitted by the Mayor of the District of Columbia to the District Council to include recommended expenditures at a reasonable level for the forthcoming fiscal year for the District courts and the Board of Education. Removes provisions that prohibit the Mayor and the District Council from making revisions to the annual estimates, prepared by the District's courts for submission in the annual budget, of the expenditures and appropriations necessary for the maintenance and operation of its court system. Allows the Mayor to reduce amounts appropriated or otherwise made available to the District courts for a fiscal year if the Mayor determines that it is necessary to balance the District's budget. Requires the Mayor to notify the courts of any proposed reductions that are part of the Mayor's submission to the District Council. Revises the limitations of the District Council to allow it to enact legislation to establish the rates of compensation for judges in the District courts. Authorizes the District to enter into multiyear contracts to obtain goods and services for which funds are appropriated on an annual fiscal year basis and available for obligation only within such fiscal year. Provides that for any fiscal year that the funds are not made available for the continuation of such contract, it shall be canceled or terminated and any cost of cancellation or termination may be paid from: (1) appropriations available for the performance of such contract or for procurement of the type of acquisition covered by the contract and not otherwise obligated; or (2) funds appropriated for the payment of such costs. Prohibits such contract entered into from being valid unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote, authorizes it by resolution. Requires the contract to be made pursuant to criteria established by act of the Council.
People & committees
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] · D–DC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1503-1504)
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: Aug 21, 2025. 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.2103 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.2103 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.2103 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.2103 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.