PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and read twice and referred jointly to the Committees on Budget; Governmental Affairs pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977, with instructions that if one Committee reports, the other Committee have thirty days to report or be discharged.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 21, 1994
Budget Control Act of 1994 - Directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to submit a report to the Congress setting forth projected direct spending targets for FY 1994 through 1997. Makes the initial targets equal to the total outlays for all direct spending (except net interest and deposit insurance) as determined above by OMB, subject to annual adjustment for increases in numbers of direct spending program beneficiaries, and for revenue and emergency legislation. Requires an annual review of direct spending and receipts by the President as part of the budget process. Specifies the information to be included in the President's budget, such as information on target adjustments, and, in appropriate cases such as where direct spending outlays for the current year are projected to exceed applicable targets, a special direct spending message that includes a draft resolution recommending reduced outlays or increased revenues by specified amounts. Sets forth procedures governing congressional consideration of such recommendations (which may not consist of any proposed changes under the Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance Program), including: (1) requirements for a separate vote in the House of Representatives to increase direct spending targets; and (2) special rules regarding the applicability of budget process and enforcement provisions of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) whenever budget resolutions or reconciliation legislation proposing target changes, outlay reductions, or revenue increases are reported. States that: (1) the procedures set forth in this Act shall not apply when the coverage for any fiscal year is less than one-half of one percent of the direct spending target for that year; and (2) the President and the Congress should seriously consider all other alternatives before recommending reductions in means-tested programs. Declares it shall not be in order in the House to consider any general appropriation bill if the President has submitted a special direct spending message until the Congress has adopted a concurrent budget resolution meeting the requirements of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Spratt, John M., Jr. [D-SC-5] · D–SC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred jointly to the Committees on Budget; Governmental Affairs pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977, with instructions that if one Committee reports, the other Committee have thirty days to report or be discharged.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 316 - 107 (Roll no. 346).
House roll call 346 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 316 - 107 (Roll no. 346).
House roll call 346 · Individual votesPursuant to the foregoing order of the House, the Committee on Rules reported the bill back to the House with the following amendments.
On motion to recommit with instructions Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 424 - 0 (Roll No. 345). (consideration: CR H6004-6005)
House roll call 345 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with ten minutes of debate on the Goss motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Rules with instructions that the Committee report the bill back to the House with amendments to delete the bill's prohibition on proposing reductions in Social Security benefits to achieve additional spending cuts, in the event that entitlement outlays exceed the caps agreed to in the budget resolution.
Mr. Goss moved to recommit with instructions to Rules.
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 4604.
DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with 40 minutes of debate on the Stupak amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 484, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 40 minutes of debate on the Stenholm amendment in the nature of a substitute.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 484, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 40 minutes of debate on the Kasich amendment in the nature of a substitute.
GENERAL DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 484, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Peter J. Visclosky to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 484 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4604 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the bill modified by the amendment printed in Part 1 of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 484. (consideration: CR H5969-6006)
Rule H. Res. 484 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 484 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4604 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the bill modified by the amendment printed in Part 1 of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Reported by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 103-602, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 103-602, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Operations.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Feb 4, 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.4604 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.4604 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.4604 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.4604 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.