PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 18, 2010
STRONG Budget Act of 2010 - Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to require a second, general sequestration within 15 days after the end of any session of Congress if, first, a particular sequestration occurs at that time under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010. Requires the general sequestration to equal 2% of the budget baseline for the fiscal year beginning on October 1 of the calendar year during which such sequestration occurs.
Prohibits such sequestration order from reducing: (1) benefits payable under title II (Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) (OASDI) of the Social Security Act (SSA); (2) annuities payable to certain employees under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974; (3) benefits payable under any program administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) or Special Benefits for Certain World War II Veterans (28-0401-0-1-701); (4) benefits payable under SSA title IV part A (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) (TANF) relating to hospital insurance benefits for the aged and disabled; (5) payments for net interest (all of major functional category 900); and (6) other specified federal retirement and disability accounts.
Requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), within 14 days after the end of a session, to issue an annual deficit reduction report and, if the report requires a sequestration, to prepare and the President to issue a sequestration order reducing nonexempt accounts by enough to eliminate the deficit. Prohibits such reduction, however, from exceeding 2% of the total amount of such nonexempt accounts.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides for: (1) suspension of such sequestration procedures if OMB determines that the federal budget is not in deficit; and (2) restoration of such procedures in the first fiscal year after OMB determines there is a deficit.
Amends Rule XXI (Restrictions on Certain Bills) of the Rules of the House of Representatives to prohibit legislation carrying an additional exemption to sequestrations under the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act (and this Act) from being considered as passed or agreed to unless by a vote of at least three-fifths of the Members.
People & committees
Rep. Barton, Joe [R-TX-6] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to House Rules
Referred to the Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, 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 House Budget
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.4883 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.4883 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.4883 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.4883 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.