PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget. (text of measure as introduced: CR S324)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 2, 2012
Down Payment to Protect National Security Act of 2012 - Requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine the number of full-time employees employed in each federal agency. Prohibits a federal agency head from hiring more than 2 employee for every 3 full-time employees who leave employment in such agency until the OMB Director makes a determination that the number of full-time federal employees is 5% less than the initial level as determined by OMB. Allows a waiver of such workforce limitation by the President for national security reasons or in the case of an extraordinary emergency.
Amends the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 to extend the freeze on the pay of federal employees, including Members of Congress, until June 30, 2014.
Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act), as amended by the Budget Control Act of 2011, to offset mandatory sequestration in security and nonsecurity categories in FY2013-FY2021 with revenues resulting from the reduction in the federal workforce and the pay freeze under this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Kyl, Jon [R-AZ] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget. (text of measure as introduced: CR S324)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.2065 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.2065 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.2065 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.2065 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.