PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On passage Failed by recorded vote: 146 - 268 (Roll no. 318).
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 23, 2004
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.
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.
Extends PAY-AS-YOU-GO requirements through FY 2009 to provide for an offsetting sequestration for direct spending (currently, direct spending and receipts) legislation that is enacted before October 1, 2009, that causes a net increase in direct spending (currently, net deficit increase).
Provides, under specified conditions, for additional new budget authority in FY 2005 or 2006 for fire suppression and for an adjustment in the discretionary spending limit for FY 2005 for appropriations for the global war on terrorism.
Excludes from Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and OMB estimates certain extending provisions in the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.
Requires the estimates set forth in the discretionary sequestration preview and final reports issued by OMB and 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: (1) certain budget enforcement requirements through FY 2006 (or 2009 for enforcement of spending caps for highway and mass transit categories); and (2) PAY-AS-YOU-GO requirements through FY 2013.
People & committees
Rep. Nussle, Jim [R-IA-1] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On passage Failed by recorded vote: 146 - 268 (Roll no. 318).
House roll call 318 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Failed of passage/not agreed to in House: On passage Failed by recorded vote: 146 - 268 (Roll no. 318).
House roll call 318 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 196 - 218 (Roll no. 317).
House roll call 317 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Stenholm motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment adding a new section which extends the Pay-As-You-Go Requirement, as specified in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, until 2009.
Mr. Stenholm moved to recommit with instructions to The Budget. (consideration: CR 6/25/2004 H5064-5065)
The House adopted the amendments en gross 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. (consideration: CR 6/25/2004 H5064)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 4663.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question of adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Kirk amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Kirk demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 30 minutes of debate on the Kirk amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Hensarling amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Hensarling demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 30 minutes of debate on the Hensarling amendment.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question of adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Spratt amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Spratt demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 30 minutes of debate on the Spratt amendment in the nature of a substitute.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Ryan (WI) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Ryan (WI) demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Ryan (WI) amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Ryan (WI) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Ryan (WI) demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions in H. Res. 692 the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Ryan (WI) amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Ryan (WI) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Spratt demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions in H. Res. 692 the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Ryan (WI) amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Kirk amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Kirk demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692 the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Kirk amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692 the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 30 minutes of debate on the Young (FL) substitute amendment.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (CR 6/25/2004 H4961-5066)
ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Dreier asked unanimous consent that during futher consideration of H.R. 4663 pursuant to H. Res. 692, amendment number 18 in House Report 108-566 may be considered out of sequence in the Committee of the Whole, and that amendment may be withdrawn by its proponent after debate thereon. Agreed to without objection.
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 4663 as unfinished business.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Hensarling amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Spratt demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Hensarling amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Hensarling amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Spratt demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Hensarling amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Castle amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Spratt demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Castle amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Chocola amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Chocola demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Chocola amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Brady (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Brady (TX) demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to the rule, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 692, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Brady (TX) amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 4663.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Steven C. LaTourette 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. 692 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4663 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 692. (consideration: CR H4898-4908; text of measure as reported in House: CR 6/25/2004 H6970-6972)
Rule H. Res. 692 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 692 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4663 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Referred to the House Committee on the Budget.
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.4663 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.4663 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.4663 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.4663 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.