PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 7, 1994
Requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to reduce discretionary spending limits for new budget authority for a fiscal year by the net aggregate amount for that fiscal year in all deficit reduction line items set forth in an appropriation bill or rescission bill. Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to establish congressional procedures for the inclusion of deficit reduction line items in such bills.
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.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.5282 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.5282 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.5282 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.5282 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.