To make 2 percent across-the-board rescissions in non-defense, non-homeland-security discretionary spending for fiscal year 2005.
Referred to the House Committee on Appropriations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 17, 2004
Provides a two-percent rescission in the: (1) budget authority provided (or obligation limitation imposed) for FY 2005 for any non-defense, non-homeland-security discretionary account in any FY 2005 appropriation Act; (2) budget authority provided in any advance appropriation for FY 2005 for such account in any prior fiscal year appropriation Act; and (3) contract authority provided in FY 2005 for any program that is subject to a limitation contained in any FY 2005 appropriation Act for the account.
Excludes any account: (1) included in a Department of Defense Appropriations Act, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, or Military Construction Appropriations Act; or (2) for Department of Energy defense activities included in an Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. 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.3985 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.3985 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.3985 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.3985 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.