House Rules Changes Affecting the Congressional Budget Process in the 109th Congress (H.Res.5)

House Rules Changes Affecting the Congressional Budget Process in the 109th Congress (H.Res.5)

Order Code RS22021
January 7, 2005
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
House Rules Changes Affecting the
Congressional Budget Process in
the 109th Congress (H.Res. 5)
Bill Heniff Jr.
Analyst in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Summary
On the opening day of the 109th Congress, the House made several rules changes
affecting the congressional budget process. The House amended its standing rules
regarding the composition of the Budget Committee to provide for the inclusion of a
Member “designated by” each party’s elected leadership, instead of a Member “from”
each party’s leadership. The House also agreed to several separate orders that address
the applicability of certain points of order under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974,
and deem the FY2005 budget resolution adopted by the House in the 108th Congress to
have been agreed to by the 109th Congress for budget enforcement purposes. This report
will not be updated unless developments warrant.
The House customarily adopts its rules for a new Congress in H.Res. 5 on the first
day of the new Congress.1 In the 109th Congress, H.Res. 5, agreed to on January 4, 2005,
included several provisions affecting the congressional budget process. These changes
include an amendment to the standing rules of the House as well as four separate orders
that apply during the 109th Congress only (see Table 1). This report provides a brief
explanation of each of these rules changes.
Change in Standing Rules
H.Res. 5 contains one change in the House standing rules relative to the budget
process, involving the membership of the Budget Committee.2
1 The House must adopt its rules anew at the beginning of each Congress. The Senate, on the
other hand, is a continuing body, and its rules remain in effect from one Congress to the next.
2 H.Res. 5 (Section 2(l)(7)) also made a technical correction to the language of House Rule XXI,
which applies to the consideration of general appropriations bills.
Congressional Research Service { The Library of Congress

CRS-2
Table 1. House Rules Changes Affecting the Congressional
Budget Process in the 109th Congress (H.Res. 5)
Section of
Description
H.Res. 5
Amendment to House Standing Rules
2(c)(1)
Amends clause 5(a)(2) of Rule X, regarding the composition of the Budget Committee,
to provide for the inclusion of a Member “designated by” each party’s elected
leadership, instead of a Member “from” each party’s elected leadership.
Separate Orders
3(a)(1)
Provides that the term “resolution” in Section 306 of the CBA refers to a joint
resolution and not to a simple or concurrent resolution. Section 306 prohibits the
consideration of any “bill, resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report” under
the jurisdiction of the Budget Committee unless it is reported by that committee.
3(a)(2)
Provides that Section 303 of the CBA applies to the text made in order as an original
bill or joint resolution for the purpose of amendment or to the text on which the
previous question is ordered directly to passage. Section 303 prohibits the
consideration of budgetary legislation until Congress has agreed to a budget resolution.
3(a)(3)
Provides that a provision, in a measure, that establishes a new executive position at a
specified level of compensation subject to appropriation is not considered “new
entitlement authority” within the meaning of the CBA.
3(a)(4)
Provides that the conference report on the FY2005 budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 95,
H.Rept. 108-498), adopted by the House during the 108th Congress, be considered to
have been adopted by the 109th Congress, for budget enforcement purposes.
Note: “CBA” refers to the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Titles I-IX of P.L. 93-344), as amended.
Membership of Budget Committee. Clause 5(a)(2) of House Rule X specifies
the composition of the Budget Committee. During the 108th Congress, the rule required
that five Members from the Appropriations Committee, five Members from the Ways and
Means Committee, one Member from the Rules Committee, one Member “from” the
elected majority party leadership, and one Member “from” the elected minority party
leadership serve on the Budget Committee.3
Section 2(c)(1) of H.Res. 5 amends clause 5(a)(2) of Rule X regarding the Budget
Committee’s composition to provide for the inclusion of one Member “designated by” the
elected leadership of the majority party and one Member “designated by” the elected
leadership of the minority party, instead of a Member “from” each party’s elected
leadership. The rule change appears to formalize, or clarify, the practice of selecting
“leadership Members” of the Committee. At least in the past few Congresses, majority
3 Since 1974, when the House Budget Committee, along with the Senate Budget Committee, was
established, the House has made several changes to the membership composition requirements
of the Committee. See U.S. Congress, Constitution, Jefferson’s Manual, and Rules of the House
of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, H.Doc. 107-284, 107th Cong., 2nd sess.
(Washington: GPO, 2003) (hereafter House Rules and Manual), sec. 758, pp. 488-490.

CRS-3
Members of the Budget Committee designated by the elected leadership of the majority
party under this provision have not themselves been members of the elected leadership.4
Separate Orders
H.Res. 5 also contains four “separate orders” affecting the congressional budget
process. The term “separate orders” has come to be used for provisions in H.Res. 5 that
have procedural effects for the new Congress but are not codified in the standing rules of
the House. Three separate orders address the application of certain points of order under
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (CBA);5 each of these orders had been agreed to
in previous Congresses. The fourth separate order deems the FY2005 budget resolution
adopted by the House in the 108th Congress to have been agreed to by the 109th Congress
for budget enforcement purposes.
References to “Resolution” in Section 306 of the CBA. Section 306 of the
CBA prohibits the consideration of any “bill, resolution, amendment, motion, or
conference report” dealing with matter under the jurisdiction of the Budget Committee
unless that committee has reported it (or been discharged from its further consideration),
or unless it is an amendment to such a measure.
Section 3(a)(1) of H.Res. 5 renews a separate order, also adopted at the beginning
of the 107th and 108th Congresses,6 providing that the term “resolution” in Section 306
refers to a joint resolution. Under this separate order, therefore, a simple or concurrent
resolution dealing with matter under the jurisdiction of the Budget Committee (such as
a “deeming resolution,” reported by the House Rules Committee, as explained in the
“Enforcement of the FY2005 Budget Resolution” section, below) presumably would not
be subject to a Section 306 point of order.
Application of Point of Order under Section 303 of the CBA. Section 303
of the CBA prohibits the consideration of any measure that contains a spending, revenue,
or debt-limit provision for a fiscal year until Congress has agreed to a budget resolution
for that fiscal year.7 In the House, general appropriations measures may be considered
after May 15 if Congress has not agreed to a budget resolution by then.
Prior to 1997, Section 303 applied to any measure “as reported” only. Consequently,
a measure that was amended on the floor to contain a budgetary provision for a fiscal year
in which Congress had not agreed to a budget resolution would not be subject to this point
of order as long as the measure, as reported, did not itself contain such a budgetary
4 The Speaker’s designee on the Committee was Rep. Christopher Shays in the 108th Congress,
Rep. John Sununu in the 107th Congress, and Rep. Saxby Chambliss in the 106th Congress.
5 Titles I-IX of P.L. 93-344, as amended.
6 Section 3(b)(1) of H.Res. 5, 107th Congress; Section 3(a)(1) of H.Res. 5, 108th Congress.
7 The annual budget resolution, which the Congressional Budget Act requires to be completed
by April 15 of each year, sets forth spending, revenue, and debt levels for the upcoming fiscal
year and at least four fiscal years thereafter.

CRS-4
provision.8 Moreover, a measure that, as reported, contained such a budgetary provision
would remain subject to this point of order, even though a special rule eliminated the
violating provision by making in order as the text to be amended an amendment in the
nature of a substitute that omitted the provision.
The Budget Enforcement Act of 1997 (Title X of P.L. 105-33, Balanced Budget Act
of 1997) added a new section to the CBA that was intended to correct this anomaly.9
Section 315 provides that the words “as reported” in Titles III and IV of the CBA refer
to the text made in order for the purpose of amendment or the text on which the previous
question was ordered directly for passage. The BEA of 1997, however, also eliminated
the words “as reported” from Section 303 of the CBA. Consequently, there has been
some ambiguity about whether or not Section 303 applies to text made in order by a
special rule, as was intended. For example, during the 105th Congress, the House
continued to waive the point of order against reported measures that violated Section 303
even though the violation was corrected by the special rule making in order a different
text for purposes of amendment.10
Section 3(a)(2) of H.Res. 5 renews for the 109th Congress a separate order, also
agreed to at the beginning of the previous three Congresses,11 to provide that the Section
303 prohibition applies to the text made in order for the purpose of amendment or to the
text on which the previous question is ordered directly to passage.12
Prospective Compensation in Appropriations Measures. Section 3(9) of
the CBA defines “entitlement authority” as:
(A) the authority to make payments (including loans and grants), the budget
authority for which is not provided for in advance by appropriations Acts, to any
person or government if, under the provisions of the law containing that authority, the
United States is obligated to make such payments to persons or governments who
meet the requirements established by that law; and
8 In 1995, for example, the chair responded to a parliamentary inquiry about the application of
Budget Act points of order by noting that Section 303, among other sections, applied to a
measure “in its reported state,” and, therefore, did not apply to an unreported measure.
Congressional Record, vol. 141 (Mar. 21, 1995), p. 8491. For a detailed discussion of the effect
of the words “as reported” in the CBA, see William G. Dauster, Budget Process Law
Annotated–1993 Edition, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., S.Prt. 103-49 (Washington: GPO, Oct. 1993),
notes on pp. 107, 179-185.
9 See U.S. Congress, Committee on Conference, Balanced Budget Act of 1997, conference report
to accompany H.R. 2015, 105th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 105-217 (Washington: GPO, July 30,
1997), p. 994.
10 See, for example, the special rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 1252, Judicial Reform
Act of 1998, in the Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 144 (Apr. 23, 1998), p. H2242.
11 Sec. 2(a)(3) of H.Res. 5, 106th Congress; Section 3(b)(2) of H.Res. 5, 107th Congress; Section
3(a)(2) of H.Res. 5, 108th Congress.
12 Section 303(b)(3) of the CBA provides an exception to the Section 303(a) point of order for
any unreported bill or joint resolution. Presumably, the separate order also would supersede this
exception.

CRS-5
(B) the food stamp program.
Section 401(b) of the CBA prohibits the consideration of a measure that provides
new entitlement authority that is to become effective in the current fiscal year.13 In
addition, if a committee reports a measure that violates this prohibition and the amount
of such spending exceeds the committee’s spending allocation (also referred to as its
Section 302(a) allocation) associated with the most recently adopted budget resolution,
the measure may be referred to the House Appropriations Committee for a period not to
exceed 15 days.14 If the Appropriations Committee does not act within the 15 days, the
measure is discharged automatically and placed on the appropriate calendar. Within the
15-day period, however, the Appropriations Committee may report the measure with an
amendment that limits the amount of spending.
Several House precedents have established the meaning of “new entitlement
authority” as defined by the Congressional Budget Act.15 Among them, in 1992, the chair
ruled that an amendment creating a new executive position at a specified level of
compensation subject to appropriation was not a new entitlement authority, because no
payment would occur absent an appropriation.16
Section 3(a)(3) of H.Res. 5 effectively makes this ruling a standing order for the
109th Congress. The House also agreed to this separate order at the beginning of the
previous three Congresses.17 Specifically, the separate order provides that a provision, in
a measure, “that establishes prospectively for a Federal office or position a specified or
minimum level of compensation to be funded by annual discretionary appropriations shall
not be considered as providing new entitlement authority under section 401 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.” Therefore, during the 109th Congress, such a
provision presumably would not be subject to a point of order under Section 401(b) of the
CBA, and it also would not be subject to the 15-day referral to the House Appropriations
Committee.
Enforcement of the FY2005 Budget Resolution. Each year, Congress is
required to adopt a budget resolution, setting forth spending, revenue, and debt levels,
which are then enforced primarily through points of order during the consideration of
budgetary legislation.18 After a budget resolution has been agreed to by both the House
and Senate, the budget levels contained therein continue to be enforceable until they are
13 A measure that provides new entitlement authority that is to become effective after the current
fiscal year is not subject to this point of order.
14 In the Senate, Section 401(b) requires such a measure to be referred to the Senate
Appropriations Committee instead of simply providing the authority to do so, as in the House.
15 See the annotations to Section 401 of the CBA in House Rules and Manual, pp. 1015-1018.
16 Ibid, p. 1018. Also, see Congressional Record, vol. 138 (Mar. 26, 1992), pp. 7202-7203.
17 The separate order agreed to in the 106th Congress (Sec. 2(a)(3) of H.Res. 5) expired upon the
adoption of the FY2000 budget resolution, whereas the orders agreed to at the beginning of the
107th (Section 3(b)(2) of H.Res. 5) and 108th (Section 3(a)(2) of H.Res. 5) Congresses applied to
the entire duration of the Congresses.
18 For further information on the congressional budget process, see CRS Report RS20095, The
Congressional Budget Process: A Brief Overview, by James V. Saturno.

CRS-6
revised or superseded by a subsequently-adopted budget resolution, even from one
Congress to the next.
In 2004, however, Congress did not complete action on a budget resolution for
FY2005. The House adopted the conference report to the FY2005 budget resolution
(S.Con.Res. 95, H.Rept. 108-498) on May 19, 2004, but the Senate did not consider the
conference report.
In the absence of an agreement between the House and Senate on an FY2005 budget
resolution, the House adopted a so-called “deeming resolution.”19 The House included
a provision in the special rule (Section 2 of H.Res. 649, 108th Congress) governing the
consideration of the conference report to S.Con.Res. 95 “deeming” the conference report
to have been agreed to by Congress, for budget enforcement purposes.20 As a result, the
provisions of the conference report and the joint explanatory statement, such as the
committee spending allocations (commonly referred to as 302(a) allocations) and the
subsequent Appropriations Committee subdivisions (commonly referred to as 302(b)
allocations), could have been enforced in the House under the procedures of the
Congressional Budget Act, but only during the 108th Congress.
Section 3(a)(4) of H.Res. 5 provides that the conference report on S.Con.Res. 95
(H.Rept. 108-498) agreed to by the House in the 108th Congress be considered to have
been adopted by the 109th Congress and continue to serve as the basis for budget
enforcement in the House. Under this deeming resolution, as with the 2004 resolution,
the enforcement procedures of the Congressional Budget Act will have force and effect
in the House as if Congress had adopted the budget resolution, until Congress adopts an
FY2005 budget resolution.21
19 The Senate also separately adopted a so-called “deeming resolution” provision for budget
enforcement purposes. The Senate included a provision in the Defense Appropriations Act, 2005
(H.R. 4613, H.Rept. 108-622) setting forth the FY2005 spending allocations for the Senate
Appropriations Committee. President Bush signed the act into law (P.L. 108-287) on Aug. 5,
2004. Section 14007 of the act established new limits on the total amounts, subject to certain
adjustments and exemptions, for the FY2005 regular appropriations acts. For further information
on “deeming resolutions,” see CRS Report RL31443, The “Deeming Resolution”: A Budget
Enforcement Tool, by Robert Keith.
20 The House agreed to H.Res. 649 (H.Rept. 108-500) by a 220-204 vote on May 19, 2004. For
the consideration and adoption of H.Res. 649, see Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 150
(May 19, 2004), pp. H3236-H3241, H3256-H3257.
21 Section 3(a)(4) of H.Res. 5 also specifies that the committee spending allocations [302(a)s]
included in the conference report to S.Con.Res. 95, as adjusted during the 108th Congress, are to
be the committee spending allocations enforced under the Congressional Budget Act. For those
committee spending allocations and a revision to the House Appropriations Committee’s
allocations, see U.S. Congress, Committee on Conference, Concurrent Resolution on the Budget
for Fiscal Year 2005, conference report to accompany S.Con.Res. 95, 108th Cong., 2nd sess.,
H.Rept. 108-498 (Washington: GPO, 2004), pp. 113-116, and Congressional Record, daily
edition, vol. 150 (June 15, 2003), p. H4146, respectively.