PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Budget.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 8, 2006
Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to require a sequestration on December 31, 2009, of an amount equivalent to the actual amount of the deficit (if any) for FY2009, as determined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Prescribes a general formula for mandatory permanent reduction of each account of the United States, with specified exceptions, under such a sequestration.
Exempts from such a sequestration specified accounts, including: (1) Social Security benefits under title II (Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) (OASDI) of the Social Security Act (SSA); (2) tier I railroad retirement benefits; (3) Medicare benefits under SSA title XVIII; (4) certain federal retirement and disability benefits; (5) certain federal administrative expenses; (6) certain veterans' life and disability insurance programs and the Post-Vietnam Era Veterans Education Account; and (7) certain automatic spending increases under the National Wool Act and the special milk program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prescribes formulae for partial reductions for: (1) foster care and adoption assistance programs under part E of SSA title IV; (2) veterans' medical care; (3) specified federal retirement programs; (4) specified veterans' programs, including pension and education benefits; (5) military health and retirement funds; (6) federal civilian and military pay; and (7) certain Commodity Credit Corporation cash payments.
Requires reductions under any sequestration order in the federal matching rate for state administrative costs under the child support enforcement program of SSA title
Authorizes a state, when a sequestration is in effect, to reduce each weekly benefit payment made under the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970.
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 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.
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.6426 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.6426 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.6426 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.6426 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.