PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.4649 / 108th Congress

Discretionary Spending Control Act of 2004

Referred to the House Committee on the Budget.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 22, 2004

Discretionary Spending Control Act of 2004 - Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to: (1) revise for FY 2004 discretionary spending limits (spending caps) for the highway and mass transit categories; (2) set forth for FY 2005 and 2006 new budget authority and outlays for the general purpose discretionary category, outlays for the highway category and new budget authority and outlays for the mass transit category; and (3) set forth for FY 2007 through 2009 outlays for the highway category and new budget authority and outlays for the mass transit category.

Revises the requirement that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) make adjustments to the highway category to conform to estimated levels of highway receipts.

Sets forth the level of obligation limitations (sum of budget authority and obligation limitations) for the highway and mass transit categories for FY 2004 through 2009.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Provides that, in any of FY 2005 through 2006, discretionary advance appropriations provided in appropriation Acts in excess of $23,558 billion shall be counted against the discretionary spending limits for the fiscal year for which the appropriation Act containing the advance appropriation is enacted.

Provides, under specified conditions, for additional new budget authority in FY 2005 or 2005 for fire suppression and for an adjustment in the discretionary spending limit for FY 2005 for supplemental appropriations for the global war on terrorism.

Requires the estimates set forth in the discretionary sequestration preview and final reports issued by OMB and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to include the current year and each subsequent year through FY 2006 (or FY 2009 solely to enforce the discretionary spending limits for the highway and mass transit categories).

Extends certain budget enforcement requirements through FY 2006 (or 2009 for enforcing the spending caps for the highway and mass transit categories).

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Nussle, Jim [R-IA-1] · R–IA

Committees

  • Budget Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Referred to the House Committee on the Budget.

    2. Introduced in House

    3. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    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.4649 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.4649 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.4649 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.4649 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.

    View full prompt & sources