To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to provide for a sequestration of all budgetary accounts for fiscal year 1998 (except Social Security, Federal retirement, and interest on the debt) equal to 5 percent of the OMB baseline.
Referred to the House Committee on the Budget.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 5, 1997
Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to require: (1) a sequestration of FY 1998 appropriations (including any under a continuing resolution) equivalent to five percent of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) FY 1998 baseline; and (2) the President to issue an order, by a specified date, to fully implement the sequestration. Prohibits any reduction in benefits under title II (Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance) of the Social Security Act, Federal retirement benefits for members of the uniformed services or Federal officers or employees, and payments for net interest on the national debt.
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
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.593 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.593 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.593 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.593 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.