Porter Goss

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, my concern with this amendment is quite simple: while well intentioned, I think it undermines our efforts in the war on drugs. This amendment would end the ability of State law enforcement agencies to purchase equipment needed specifically for the war on drugs and the fight against terrorism. While the phrase ``war on drugs'' tends to bring to mind images of jungles in Latin America, the reality is that it is fought everyday on our streets, in our schoolyards and playgrounds. Vivid proof of this came a few years ago in my southwest Florida district--the regional office of the Drug Enforcement Agency was blown up by individuals involved in drug trafficking. Allowing the Defense Department to sell appropriate surplus equipment to law enforcement agencies ensures they have the tools they need to counter this very real threat. I encourage my colleagues to reject the Sanford amendment.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, congratulations are in order for the mock trial team from the Community School in Naples, FL, who recently represented the State of Florida at the National Mock Trial Competition. These young constituents of mine reached this distinction after contending on the county, circuit and State levels. In their advance to the national competition, the students were tenacious, resourceful and creative. Their performance combined professionalism and dignity. By participating in mock trial, the students cooperated to reach a goal. Honing their research and debate skills, the students attained invaluable knowledge that they will use in all of their endeavors. Perhaps even more importantly, they gained a better understanding of law, which will help their growth as informed and participatory citizens. I applaud the team for their dedication and salute them for their outstanding success.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am again privileged to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley); pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate on this subject only. (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining on both sides, please?

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), who is indeed an author of this and has worked long and hard, and in a very distinguished nonpartisan manner, to bring this process to Members to debate.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas). (Mr. GEKAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 499 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman and colleague from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

Mr. GOSS. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the clarification. The brilliance of it, I am sure, will shine through immediately to everybody. In any event, there is no sunsetting and the fact that we are reviewing programs every 10 years, I hope, does not come as an alarm bell. I hope it comes as confidence that Congress is doing its job. That is, as I said, what we are supposed to be here for. I do not feel that there is anything except politics involved in these things that suggest even that somehow veterans' programs are going to not survive after 10 years or students' programs or so forth. It reminds me of those Meals on Wheels scares and the school lunch scares that we went through a few years ago that were made out of, well, I guess I will not say what they were made out of but they were not true, and I do not think that these are serious worries. I think these are perhaps political debating points and they do not deserve much attention. Therefore, I am going to ask that we move the previous question and we support the move for the previous question and then we support the rule and then we support those elements of this good legislation that we like. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the great State of Delaware (Mr. Castle), the former governor.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), who has been instrumental in providing a good deal of the substance for this particular piece of legislation.

Mr. GOSS. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, this is an appropriate structured rule for consideration of the Comprehensive Budget Reform Act of 1999. As one of the authors of the underlying bill, I can tell my colleagues that great pains were taken to accommodate the concerns of our House committees and Members in this legislation. In fashioning this rule, we have taken similar care to ensure, as best as possible, a nonpartisan substantive debate about our budget process. Leaving aside our budget policy differences, and I emphasize policy, we do hope to come to a consensus on an improved, outcome- neutral budget process. The rule provides for 90 minutes of general debate, divided fairly between the three committees of jurisdiction, the Committee on Budget, the Committee on Rules, and Committee on Appropriations. The rule makes in order seven amendments from both sides of the aisle. Three of those amendments are attempts to put a section back into the bill that were dropped at the request of committees. One aims to strike altogether the linchpin of the bill, the Joint Budget Resolution. So I think that the Committee on Rules has clearly erred on the side of the inclusion of the amendment process, if we have erred at all on this. Mr. Speaker, when I came to Congress, I suspect I was like most Americans out there watching the debate on budget process. I knew little about how the budget process worked in Washington, and what I did know did not make a whole lot of sense. Since becoming the chairman of the Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process nearly 6 years ago, I had a chance to learn a great deal about the inner workings of our congressional budget process. I have really been down in the weeds on a lot of the issues and listened to the best and the brightest budget experts we can find and all their green eye shade associates who have come forward and tried to help us along in this process. I have also lived through a number of our annual budget battles, which have not been particularly pretty, as many will recall. Through these experiences, I have arrived at one simple truth about our budget process. The best reforms in the world are meaningless if at the end of the day, Members are not committed to enforcing them. So enforcement is a big issue, and we have certainly provided for it in this rule when we get to the debate. H.R. 853 recognizes this is a reality. It properly encourages the President and Congress to agree on a joint budget resolution, but provides the flexibility of a fallback in years they elect not to do that, although we create the incentives to do that. We get real about budgeting for emergencies by adding a rainy day reserve fund, but we do so in a way that is workable and serious. Instead of creating rigid procedural sticks that will be ignored, we encourage committees and Members to be better stewards of their programs and agencies under their jurisdiction. In Florida, we believe in sunshine, and I am hopeful a little sunshine will enhance oversight and accountability inside the Beltway as well. Along those lines, I think that the amendment of the chairman of the Committee on Rules, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), to convert the current annual budget and appropriations process to a biennial one is a particularly good fit for this bill. By structuring our calendar to prefer budget matters in the first year and oversight in the second, we will create an atmosphere where both responsibilities show signs of improvement. It is a good amendment, and I hope it is adopted once we consider it. Let me be very clear, H.R. 853 is not a panacea for all that ails us, and it is certainly not foolproof. We will still have our policy differences and we will still use, possibly abuse, the budget process to advance individual causes. But this is a good bipartisan work product, primarily because it does not attempt to solve every problem. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), from opposite sides of the aisle, should be commended for resisting the temptation to use this vehicle for partisan manipulation. While H.R. 853 has many parents, I would like to congratulate them in particular for their leadership and resolve throughout the last few years. As I say, this has been in the works for a long time. Whatever our view on the individual budget process reform pieces that are going to be offered up, we should be able to support this rule. All of the major substantive amendments presented to us have been made in order. We have not gamed the system to give preference to any controversial provision. We have taken the guidance of the Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), to heart and let the House work its will on a nonpartisan basis. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule. Biennial Budgeting Amendment to H.R. 853, the Comprehensive Budget Process Reform Act of 1999 section-by-section summary Offered by Reps. Dreier, Luther, Regula, Hall (OH), Bass, McCarthy (MO), Goss, Condit, et al. ``To provide for a biennial budget and appropriations process and to enhance programmatic oversight and the management, efficiency, and performance of the Federal Government.'' Short Summary: Establishes a two-year budgeting and appropriations cycle and timetable. Defines the budget biennium as the two consecutive fiscal years beginning on October 1 of any odd-numbered year. Sets forth a special timetable for any first session that begins in any year during which the term of a President begins (except one who starts a second consecutive term). Adds a New Title VII Entitled ``Biennial Budgeting'' Section 701. Findings. Outlines nine congressional findings on the budget process and biennial budgeting. Section 702. Revision of Timetable. Amends section 300 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to revise the timetable of the congressional budget process to reflect a biennial budget schedule. The first session of any Congress is primarily devoted to the consideration of the budget resolution, the regular appropriations bills, and any necessary reconciliation legislation. In general, the revised timetable is similar to the current timetable except that most of the milestones only apply to the first session of a Congress. The timetable is modified to extend the deadline for completion of the biennial budget resolution to May 15th. The revised timetable contains only three deadlines for the second session: (1) The President must submit a mid-biennium budget review to Congress by February 15th; (2) the Congressional Budget Office must submit its annual report to the Budget Committees of the House and the Senate no later than six weeks after the President submits the budget review; and (3) Congress must complete action on bills and resolutions authorizing new budget authority for the succeeding biennium by the last day of the session. This section also creates a new section 300(b) of the Budget Act that establishes a special timetable for the submission and consideration of a budget in the case of any first session of Congress that begins in any year during which the term of a President (except a President who succeeds himself) begins. Generally, the budget deadlines are extended by 6 weeks to give a new President more time to prepare and submit the budget. Section 701. Amendments to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Section 703(a) amends section 2(2) of the Budget Act relating to the ``Declaration of Purposes'' of the Budget Act to account for the congressional determination biennially of the appropriate level of Federal revenues and expenditures. Section 703(b)(1) amends the definition of a budget resolution in section 3(4) of the Budget Act to reflect its application to a biennium as opposed to a fiscal year. Section 703(b)(2) amends section 3 of the Budget Act by adding a new paragraph (13) to define the term biennium as ``the period of two consecutive fiscal years beginning on October 1 of any odd-number year.'' Section 703(c) amends the Budget Act to make the budget resolution a biennial concurrent resolution on the budget. Section 703(c)(1) amends section 301(a) of the Budget Act regarding the required contents of the budget resolution to conform its application to the biennium beginning on October 1 of each odd-numbered year and its consideration to the biennial timetable for completion, which is by May 15 of each odd-numbered year. Section 703(c)(2) amends action 301(b) of the Budget Act to ensure that the additional matters which may be included in the budget resolution apply to a biennium. Section 703(c)(3) amends section 301(d) of the Budget Act to conform the submission of committee views and estimates to the Budget Committees to a biennial cycle. Section 703(c)(4) amends section 301(e)(1) of the Budget Act to conform the requirements of the Budget Committee's hearings on the budget and the Budget Committee's reporting of the budget resolution to a biennial schedule. The House Budget Committee would report a biennial budget resolution by April 1st of each odd-numbered years. Section 703(c)(5) amends section 301(f) of the Budget Act relating to the achievement of goals for reducing unemployment to conform it to a biennial cycle. Section 703(c)(6) amends section 301(g)(1) of the Budget Act to conform the provisions relating to the economic assumptions of the budget resolution to a biennial schedule. Section 703(c)(7) and 8) amend section 301 to make conforming changes to the section heading and the table of contents of the Budget Act. Section 703(d) amends section 302(a) of the Budget Act regarding committee allocations in the budget resolution, to require the conference report on a budget resolution to include an allocation of budget authority and outlays to each committee for each year in the biennium and the total of all fiscal years covered by the resolution as well as makes conforming change to subsections (f) and (g) of section 302 to reflect a biennial cycle and the biennial timetable. Section 701(e)(1) amends section 303(a) of the Budget Act, which prohibits consideration of legislation, as reported, providing new budget authority, changes in revenues, or changes in the public debt for a fiscal year until the budget resolution for that year has been agreed to, to reflect the application of the budget resolution to a biennium. Section 703(e)(2) amends section 303(b) of the Budget Act relating to the exceptions in the House of Representatives from the application of this point of order, to account for a biennial budget cycle. The application of these exceptions are also amended to reflect the special biennial timetable utilized during the first term of a new President. Section 703(e)(3) amends section 303(c)(1) of the Budget Act to conform the application of this point of order in the Senate to a biennial budget cycle. Section 703(f) amends section 304 of the Budget Act, regarding permissible revisions of budget resolutions, to conform to the biennial budget cycle. This subsection maintains current law which allows Congress to revise the budget resolution at any time during the biennium. Section 703(g) amends section 305(a)(3) of the Budget Act, relating to the procedures for consideration of the budget resolution, to conform references to the budget resolution to account for its application to a biennium. Section 703(h) amends section 307 of the Budget Act to conform the timetable for completing House Appropriations Committee action on regular appropriations bills by June 10 to a biennial cycle. This section also makes conforming amendments to reflect the special biennial timetable utilized during the first term of a new President. Section 703(i) amends section 308 of the Budget Act to require the Congressional Budget Office to file quarterly budget reports with the House and Senate Budget Committees. These reports are to compare revenues, spending, and the deficit or surplus for the current fiscal year with the assumptions used in the congressional budget resolution. CBO is also required to make the reports available to other interested parties upon request. These reports will enable the Congress to compare actual budget results to earlier estimates. The frequent periodic reports by CBO on the progress of fiscal policy and economic developments since action on the budget resolution will inform the Congress about current status of the budget and its earlier underlying projections by using updated projects and actual budget figures to date. The reports can also serve to facilitate additional reconciliation legislation (between biennial budget resolutions) as necessary due to changes in the economy or policy emphasis. Section 703(j) amends section 309 of the Budget Act to conform the timetable for completion of all House action on the regular appropriation bills before the House adjourns for more than three calendar days during the month of July. This section also makes conforming amendments to reflect the special biennial timetable utilized during the first term of a new President. Section 703(k) amends section 310 of the Budget Act to conform the reconciliation process to a biennial budget cycle. It also strikes subsection (f) which currently prohibits the House from adjourning for more than 3 calendar days during the month of July until all required reconciliation legislation is completed. This is necessary to reflect the budget resolutions application to the biennium and the possibility of considering reconciliation legislation during the second session. Section 703(l)(1) and (2) amend section 311(a)(1) and (2) of the Budget Act respectively, to prohibit consideration in the House or Senate of any legislation that would cause the total levels of budget authority or total levels of outlays to greater than or that would cause the total level of revenues to be less than those levels set forth in the most recently agreed to budget resolution for either fiscal year of the biennium or for the total of each fiscal year in the biennium and the ensuing fiscal years for which allocations are provided in the budget resolution. Section 703(l)(3) amends section 311(a)(3) of the Budget Act to conform the point of order in the Senate against any legislation that would cause a decrease in the Social Security levels set forth in the budget resolution for a biennial budget cycle. Section 703(m) amends section 312(c) of the Budget Act to conform the Senate's maximum deficit amount point of order for a biennial budget cycle. Section 704. Amendments to the Rules of the House of Representatives. Section 704(a) amends clause 4(a)(1)(A) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, relating to the required Appropriations Committee hearings on the President's budget submission, to conform to the biennial timetable. Section 704(b) amends clause 4(a)(4) of Rule X of the Rules of the House, relating to the suballocations of the Appropriations Committee, to conform to a biennial budget resolution. Section 704(c) amends clause 4(b)(2) of Rule X of the Rules of the House, relating to the Budget Committee's hearings on the budget, to conform to a biennial budget resolution. Section 704(d) amends clause 4(b) of Rule X of the Rules of the House to add a new subparagraph (7), to require the House Budget committee to use the second session of each Congress to study issues with long-term budgetary and economic implications, including holding hearings and receiving testimony from committees of jurisdiction to identify problem areas and to report on the results of their oversight activities. The Budget Committee should issue to the Speaker by January 1 of each odd-numbered year a report identifying the key issues facing the Congress in the next biennium. Section 704(e) amends clause 11(i) of Rule X of the Rules of the House, relating to the duties of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, to conform to a biennial budget cycle. Section 704(f) amends clause 4(e) of Rule X of the Rules of the House, relating to the duties of the standing committees of the House to maximize annual appropriations for the programs and actives within their jurisdictions, to establish a new preference for biennial appropriations. Section 704(g) amends clause 4(f) of Rule X of the Rules of the house, relating to the Budget Act responsibilities of the standing committees of the House, to conform to a biennial timetable. Section 704(h) amends clause 3(d)(2)(A) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House, relating to committee cost estimates, to conform to a biennial timetable. Section 704(i) amends clause 5(a)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House, relating to privileged reports from the Appropriations Committee, to conform to a biennial timetable. Section 705. Amendments to Title 31, United States Code. Section 705(a) amends section 1101 of Title 31 to define the term biennium as ``the period of two consecutive fiscal years beginning on October 1 of any odd-numbered year.'' This is the same definition given such term in paragraph (11) of section 3 of the Budget Act. Section 705(b)(1) amends section 1105 of Title 31 to require that on or before the first Monday in February of each odd-numbered year (or, if applicable, as provided by section 300(b) of the Budget Act), the President shall transmit to Congress, the budget for the biennium beginning on October 1 of such calendar year. The President must include a budget message and summary and supporting information with the budget submission. Section 705(b)(2) amends section 1105(a)(5) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to expenditures to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(3) amends section 1105(a)(6) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to receipts to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(4) amends section 1105(a)(9)(C) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to balance statements to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(5) amends section 1105(a)(12) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to government functions and activities to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(6) amends section 1105(a)(13) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to allowances to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(7) amends section 1105(a)(14) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to allowances for unanticipated and uncontrollable expenditures to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(8) amends section 1105(a)(16) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to tax expenditures to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(9) amends section 1105(a)(17) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to estimates for future fiscal years to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(10) amends section 1105(a)(18) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to prior year outlays to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(b)(11) amends section 1105(a)(19) of Title 31 to conform the required contents of the budget submission with respect to prior year receipts to account for a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(c) amends section 1105(b) of Title 31, regarding estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations for the legislative and judicial branches, to require the submission of these proposals to the President by October 16th of even-number years. Section 705(d) amends section 1105(c) of Title 31, regarding the President's recommendations if there is a proposed deficit or surplus, to conform to a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(e) amends section 1105(e)(1) of Title 31, regarding capitol investment analyses, to conform to a biennial budget cycle. Section 705(f)(1) and (2) amends section 1106 (a) and (b) of Title 31 respectively, relating to the President's submission of supplemental budget estimates and changes, to conform to a biennial budget cycle. The President is still required to submit a Mid-session Review of the budget by July 16 of each year as well as will now be required to also submit a Mid-biennium Review on or before February 15 of each year even numbered year. Section 705(g)(1) amends section 1109(a) of Title 31, regarding the President's submission of current program and activity estimates, to conform to a biennial budget cycle and require its submission with the overall budget submission for each odd-numbered year as required by section 1105. Section 705(g)(2) amends section 1109(b) of Title 31, regarding the Joint Economic committee's analysis of the President's current program and activity estimates, to require the Joint Economic Committee to submit an economic evaluation of such estimates to the Budget Committee as part of its views and estimates within 6 weeks of the President's budget submission for each odd-numbered year. Section 705(h) amends section 1110 of Title 31, regarding advance requests for authorization legislation to require the President to submit requests for authorization legislation by March 31st of even-numbered years. Section 706. Two-Year Appropriations; Title and Style of Appropriations Acts. Section 706 amends section 105 of Title I of the U.S. Code to conform the statutory style and definition of appropriations Acts to require that they cover each of two fiscal years of a biennium. Section 707. Multi-Year Authorizations. Section 707(a) amends Title III of the Budget Act by adding a new section 318 that establishes a new point of order in the House and Senate against the consideration of any bill, joint resolution, amendment, motion or conference report that does contain a specific authorization of appropriations for any purpose for less than each fiscal year in one or more bienniums. This prohibition does not apply to an authorization of appropriations for a single fiscal year. For any program, project or activity if the measure (defined as a bill, joint resolution, amendment, motion or conference report) containing that authorization includes a provision expressly stating the following: ``Congress finds that no authorization of appropriation will be required for [Insert name of applicable program, project, or activity] for any subsequent fiscal year.'' It further defines a specific authorization of appropriations as an authorization for the enactment of an amount of appropriations or amounts not to exceed an amount of appropriations (whether stated as a sum certain, as a limit, or as such sums as may be necessary) for any purpose for a fiscal year. Section 707(b) amends section 1(b) of the Budget Act to conform the table of contents of the Budget Act to account for this new section 318. Section 708. Government Strategic and Performance Plans on a Biennial Basis. Section 708 amends the Government and Performance and Results Act of 1993 (the Results Act) to incorporate GPRA into the biennial budget cycle. The Results Act requires federal agencies to develop strategic plans, performance plans, and performance reports. Strategic plans set out the agencies' missions and general goals. Performance plans lay out the specific quantifiable goals and measures. Performance reports compare actual performance with the goals of past performance plans. The Results Act currently requires federal agencies to consult with congressional committees as they develop their strategic plans. The Results Act requires all federal agencies to submit their strategic and performance plans to the Office of Management and Budget, along with their budget submissions, by September 30 of each year. Finally, the Results Act requires the President to include a performance plan for the entire government. Sections 708(a) through (g) amend section 306 of title 5, sections 1105, 1119 and 9703 of title 31, and sections 2802 and 2803 of title 39 require agencies to prepare strategic and performance plans every two years, in conjunction with the President's development of a biennial budget. In addition, these amendments make other changes to conform strategic and performance plans to a biennial budget cycle. Section 708(h) amends section 301(d) of the Budget Act to require Congressional committees to review the strategic plans, performance plans, and performance reports of agencies in their jurisdiction. Committees may then provide their views on the agency's plans or reports as part of their views and estimates on the President's budget submitted to the Budget Committees. Section 708(i) provides that the amendments by this section shall take effect on March 1, 2003. Section 709. Biennial Appropriations Bills. Section 709(a)(1) amends clause 2(a) of House Rule XXI to provide that in the House of Representatives an appropriation may not be reported in a general appropriation bill (other than a supplemental appropriation bill), and may not be in order as an amendment thereto, unless it provides new budget authority or establishes a level of obligations under contract authority for each fiscal year of a biennium. If further provides that this prohibition shall not apply with respect to an appropriation for a single fiscal year for any program, project, or activity if the bill or amendment thereto containing that appropriation includes a provision expressly stating the following: Congress finds that no additional funding beyond one fiscal year will be required and the [Insert name of applicable program, project, or activity] will be completed or terminated after the amount provided has been expended.'' The subparagraph is further amended to provide that such a statement shall not constitute legislating on an appropriation bill if it is included with an appropriation for a single fiscal year for any program, project, or activity. Section 709(a)(2) amends clause 5(b)(1) of House Rule XXII to apply similar prohibitions against appropriation conference reports. Section 709(b)(1) amends Title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to add a new section 319 to create a point of order in the Senate against consideration in any odd- numbered year of any regular appropriation bill providing new budget authority or a limitation on obligations under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations for only the first fiscal year of a biennium, unless the program, project, or activity for which the new budget authority or obligation limitation is provided will require no additional authority beyond one year and will be completed or terminated after the amount provided has been expended. Section 709(b)(2) amends section 1(b) of the Budget Act to conform the table of contents of the Budget Act to account for this new section 319. Section 710. Assistance By Federal Agencies to Standing Committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Section 710(a) requires the head of each Federal agency under the jurisdiction of a standing committee to provide to committee those studies, information, analyses, reports, and assistance as may be requested by the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee. Section 710(b) requires the head of each Federal agency to furnish to such committee documentation containing information received, compiled, or maintained by the agency as part of the operation or administration of a program, or specifically compiled pursuant to a request in support of a review of a program, as may be requested by the chairman and ranking minority member of such committee. Section 710(c) requires that, within 30 days after the receipt of a request from a chairman and ranking minority member of a standing committee having jurisdiction over a program being reviewed, the Comptroller General furnish to the committee summaries of any audits or reviews of such program the Comptroller General has completed during the preceding six years. Section 710(d) reaffirms the role of the Comptroller General, the Director of the Congressional Research Service, and the Director of the Congressional Budget Office to furnish (consistent with established protocols) to each standing committee of the House and Senate such information, studies, analyses, and reports as the chairman and ranking minority member may request to assist the committee in conducting reviews and studies of programs under its jurisdiction. Section 711. Report on Two-Year Fiscal Period. Requires that, not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act, the Director of OMB shall determine the impact of changing the definition of a fiscal year and the budget process based on that definition to a 2 year fiscal period with a biennial budget process based on the 2 year period, and shall report his findings to the Committees on Budget in the House and Senate and the Committee on Rules in the House. Section 712. Special Transition Period for the 107th Congress. Section 712(a) requires the President to include in the FY 2002 budget submission an identification of the budget accounts for which an appropriation should be made for each fiscal year of the FY 2002-2003 biennium and any necessary budget authority that should be provided for each such fiscal year for those identified budget accounts. Section 712(b) requires the Appropriations Committees of each House to review the President's recommendations and include an assessment of those recommendations and any recommendations of their own in the committee's overall views and estimates on the President's budget which they are required to submit to their respective Budget Committees. Section 712(c)(1) requires the Budget Committees of each House to review the recommendations of both the President and the Appropriations Committees with respect to those budget accounts that should be funded for the biennium. Section 712(c)(2) requires the report of the Committee on the Budget of each House and the joint explanatory statement of the managers accompanying the budget resolution for FY 2002 to include an allocation to the Appropriations Committees for FY 2003 from which the Appropriations Committee can fund certain accounts in the FY 2002 appropriations bills for each of the fiscal years in the FY 2003-2004 biennium. Section 712(c)(3) requires the report of the Committee on the Budget of each House and the joint explanatory statement of the managers accompanying the budget resolution for FY 2002 to include the assumptions upon which the allocation to the Appropriations Committees for FY 2003 is made. Section 712(d)(2) directs the GAO to work with the Committees of Congress during the first session of 107th Congress to develop plans to transition program authorizations to a multi-year schedule. Section 712(d)(2) requires GAO to continue to provide assistance to the Congress with respect to programmatic oversight and in particular to assist committees in designing and conforming programmatic oversight procedures for the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 biennium. Section 712(e) provides for a CBO report to Congress (before January 15, 2002) listing all those programs and activities that were funded during FY 2002 with no authorization and all those programs and activities whose authorizations will expire during that fiscal year, FY 2003 and FY 2004. Section 712(f) requires the President's budget submission for FY 2003 to including an evaluation of and recommendations regarding the transitional biennial budget process for the fiscal year 2002-2003 biennium. Section 712(g) requires CBO to issue a report on or before March 31, 2002 include an evaluation of and recommendations regarding the transitional biennial budget process for the fiscal year 2002-2003 biennium. Section 713. Effective Date. Except as provided by sections 708, 711 and 712, the Act is effective January 1, 2003, and applicable to budget, authorization and appropriations legislation for the biennium beginning in FY 2004.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I will just take a minute to close up here. Mr. Speaker, first of all I think that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) hit it pretty well on the head in his remarks that this is really not a partisan matter, and it is certainly not a partisan rule. Consequently, I cannot think of a reason not to support the rule. The rule is, I think, a good rule, and it clearly will get us to the debate, which is the purpose of rules. We have been having a lot of conversation here and testimony about the elements and the substance of the legislation. The purpose is to get that forward into the debate mode, and that is what this rule purports to do. I think obviously there are differing opinions on the various pieces that we have talked about on our budget process reform. We know we need some reform. Some think it is too much, some think it is too little, some think we have the right pieces, some think we have the wrong pieces. Obviously, we should have the debate. The rule gets us to the debate. I suggest we follow the logic of that, vote for the rule, get on with the debate and vote up or down the pieces you like or do not like. As for some concerns we have heard a little bit about here on these three carveouts that were not made in order in the Committee on Rules, I suppose it would have been possible to make a bunch of carveouts for special elements and special programs. I do not know where one stops and starts that process. Do we leave out the environmentalist issues? Do we leave out the defense issues? Do we leave out one program or another at the expense of another? It seemed to us on the Committee on Rules, at least on the majority side, if you give one carveout, you tilt the budget process. We are talking about budget process reform, with a clean slate. Consequently, we did not make those amendments in order. Now, those amendments have been, I believe, mischaracterized, perhaps inadvertently, as sunset. I do not believe the word ``sunset'' shows up anywhere, and I think if you go to your word processor, I do not think you are going to find any program sunsetted, certainly not veterans or students or the Medicare programs. So I would suggest what is happening here is that perhaps over some confusion about the word ``sunset,'' which is not warranted in any way, that what we are calling for in budget process reform is enhanced transparency, enhanced accountability and enhanced oversight. Now, if enhanced oversight, that is reviewing programs every 10 years or so, which is kind of the thing we are sent here to do on behalf of the people we represent who pay us our salaries, is threatening, then that is a debate we can have; but I suggest that really our responsibility is to make sure the taxpayers' dollars are being used wisely, and I believe that is called oversight.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Rules and Organization of the House of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to focus my time on a couple of the rules changes in H.R. 853 that are designed to increase accountability. We think that is a reform. Accountability in Federal spending we think is something that most taxpayers feel we can do better about. Not surprisingly, some the reforms have been demagogued by opponents of accountability, in my view fostering unwarranted anxiety among some of our Nation's students, perhaps, and some of our veterans and some of our senior citizens, if they have not gotten the full understanding of what is actually in front of us. There is no need to worry. We are advocating good oversight and advocating more accountability, and I think all of those groups, in fact, all Americans, favor those types of accomplishments here. Currently our rules state you cannot appropriate money unless a program has been authorized first. That is the normal order. Despite this rule, however, in FY 2000 we appropriated $120 billion in taxpayer money to 137 programs that lack authorization. Now, that is just by our count. Probably somebody else could find more unauthorized programs, unauthorized programs that were funded in the appropriations process. To encourage committees to do a better job, we think that H.R. 853 adds a requirement that they provide specific timetables for authorization of those programs under their jurisdiction, and we have picked a 10-year time period, thinking that is a very fair chunk of time. While we still will be able to waive the rule and no program will be punished, as is the situation now, we think that providing some added sunshine in a 10-year period with oversight is going to give us greater accountability, and it certainly is going to create an incentive for more accountability and for the authorizers to do their jobs. Another rule changed would simply require that any new programs have a fixed year authorization. In our view, it makes sense that Congress should take a look at new programs it creates. We do not get it right every time the first time it turns out, and so maybe making a requirement that if we have a new program every 10 years or so, we ought to take a look at it and see if it is working and doing what we actually thought it was supposed to do. But, be clear, no matter what, the school lunches are still going to be served; we are still going to have senior prescriptions; we are still going to have our veterans services, and everybody getting their benefits. It is all going to happen. This process is not going to change that. There may be votes about policy change or appropriations amounts, but the process is not going to take away anything from anybody, and, hopefully, will give benefits to people that they lack now in terms of greater accountability and oversight. I think to argue otherwise indicates either a lack of understanding about how things really work here, or, worse, a desire perhaps to exploit anxieties for partisan reasons to some of our most vulnerable Americans. In either way, that is wrong, not acceptable, and not part of the spirit of the good substance we are trying to accomplish in this legislation. I encourage all Members to read the details of H.R. 835 before voting later this evening. It is a good bipartisan bill that promises nothing more than a better framework within to make our budgetary decisions. We have the joint budget resolution, we have the emergency rainy day fund, baseline budgeting reform, budgeting for unfunded liabilities, the Byrd rule reform, increased authorization oversight requirements, a lot of things we talk a lot about here. Well, we have brought them to the floor for debate, we are going to debate them under the rule and have a chance to vote them up or down. On top of that, there are several other issues that we did not include in the bill because we knew they were controversial, but we know that they will be debated in the amendment process, or we assume they will. I think of the lockbox, the continuing resolution and those types of things, we will be able to debate those too. So we will have some accountability on where we really stand when we talk about reform of our process here. I think that is a good outcome, and I think certainly worth our time. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I recall very well Members feeling some frustration, to say the least, at the end of the budget cycle for the past few years, thinking, gosh, we need to do better on this. Why does not the Committee on Rules and the Committee on the Budget and the people responsible get together and give us some choices? We filed a bill at the end of the last session just because we listened. We went through a couple of years of hard work, a lot of effort, to focus on issues that Members wanted to debate. We filed that bill. This year we have worked from that bill, taken the controversial issues out, brought them forward, and left the controversial issues available for amendment, and in addition, brought forward some other amendments that we know will have a lot of Member appeal, such as the biennial budget process that my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) of the Committee on Rules has championed so long and ardently. We think we have provided some good choices out here for debate. I think that any effort to get away from the chaos at the end of the budget year is right. Our good friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) has gotten up and said that bad things can happen. Yes, bad things can happen any time. I think the idea of getting together early with the President at the beginning of the session and working out an arrangement is a very good idea, but if it does not work, we have a fallback. The fallback is where we are now, so nobody loses power. We do not have these dire consequences that I keep hearing about. I think it is also true that if the other body decides that they wish to get off the subject of the budget matter, that there are provisions in this for a self-destruct mechanism, so that the dangers are not as great as they have been outlined. I think these are worthwhile changes. They deserve our careful attention during the debate, and I hope we will see strong support for good process reform.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee of the Interior. (Mr. REGULA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Madam Speaker, tonight a Dear Colleague letter will be sent to all Members informing them that the Committee on Rules may meet later this week to grant a rule for the consideration of H.R. 4392, the Intelligence Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2001. The Committee on Rules may grant a rule which would require that amendments be preprinted in the Congressional Record. In this case, amendments must be preprinted prior to their consideration on the floor. Amendments should be drafted to the version of the bill reported by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The language of the committee amendment is now available for Members on request to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The committee report will be filed tomorrow, Tuesday, May 16. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are properly drafted, and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, today a ``Dear Colleague'' letter will be sent to all Members informing them that the Committee on Rules is planning to meet the week of May 15 to grant a rule which may limit the amendment process on H.R. 4205, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001. Any Member who wishes to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment by 5 p.m. on Monday, May 15, to the Committee on Rules in room H-312 of the Capitol. Amendments should be drafted to the text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute reported by the Committee on Armed Services on May 10. That amendment in the nature of a substitute is available at the Committee on Armed Services and will be posted on their web site by 12 noon tomorrow. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure their amendments are properly drafted and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain their amendments comply with the rules of the House.