PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S104-105)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 24, 2000
Social Security and Medicare Surplus Protection Act of 2000 - Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act) to require a sequestration to eliminate any on-budget deficit (excluding any surplus in the social security trust funds and the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund). Bars the deficit from being subject to adjustment for any purpose.Requires, in determining rates of pay for service performed in any fiscal year beginning after September 30, 2000, the rate of pay for a Member of Congress to be determined as if the pay adjustment for such year had resulted in a rate equal to the rate that would otherwise have taken effect beginning in such year (if this Act had not been enacted) reduced by the same percentage as any reduction made as a result of the amendment made by this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Grams, Rod [R-MN] · R–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S104-105)
Read twice and referred jointly to the Committees on the Budget; and Governmental Affairs pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10-11)
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 20, 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 S.2001 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 S.2001 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 S.2001 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 S.2001 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.