PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 260.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Jan 31, 2012
Legally Binding Budget Act of 2011 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (CBA) to require joint budget resolutions signed by the President instead of the concurrent resolutions now required (which do not have to be signed by the President).
(Sec. 4) Prohibits the consideration of budget-related legislation before the joint budget resolution becomes law. Makes a conforming amendment to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
(Sec. 5) Permits revisions of joint budget resolutions already enacted. Authorizes the chairs of the congressional budget committees to adjust budgetary levels and allocations as needed for enforcement of budget resolutions.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 6) Makes it out of order in both chambers to consider any joint budget resolution, amendment, or conference report that contains certain matter prohibited by the CBA, particularly inclusion in the surplus or deficit totals of any outlays and revenue totals of the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program under title II of the Social Security Act.
(Sec. 7) Considers the aggregates, allocations, and any other matters that pertain solely to Congress specified in a joint budget resolution as enforceable upon enactment, or 15 days following presentment to the President, whichever occurs earlier. (Thus creates automatic congressional enforcement of a joint budget resolution.)
(Sec. 9) Makes conforming amendments to: (1) the Rules of the House of Representatives, and (2) the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act).
People & committees
Rep. Black, Diane [R-TN-6] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 260.
Committee on The Budget discharged.
Committee on The Budget discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 112-379, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 112-379, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 5 - 2.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, 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 Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, 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.3575 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.3575 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.3575 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.3575 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.