PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 10, 2023
Nickel Plan Act
This bill modifies the federal budget process to establish and enforce new spending caps.
The bill establishes an outlay cap (less net interest payments) for FY2024 of $5.953 trillion, less 5%. For each year from FY2025-FY2027, the outlay cap is 5% less than the previous year's outlay cap.
For FY2028 and subsequent years, total outlays (including net interest payments) may not exceed 17.5% of the gross domestic product (GDP) for that year as estimated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Beginning in FY2029, total projected outlays for any year may not be less than the total projected outlays for the preceding year.
The OMB must enforce the spending caps using a sequester to eliminate any excess spending through automatic cuts. The bill eliminates the existing exemptions from sequestration.
If the OMB projects a sequester, the congressional budget committees may report a resolution directing congressional committees to change existing law to achieve the spending reductions necessary to meet the outlay limits.
The bill also establishes procedures for Congress to enforce the outlay caps established by this bill.
People & committees
Rep. Good, Bob [R-VA-5] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.
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.260 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.260 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.260 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.260 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.