Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1314

Raising the Debt Limit and Establishing a Two-Year Budget

Argument in favor

Approving this budget will end the cycle of governing by crisis that featured stopgaps and continuing resolutions — providing needed certainty to the economy and the government for the next two years.

···
06/15/2015
“Overall, we’ve got a bill where, for the first time, it looks like we’re going to take off the table having the Republicans shut down the government over raising the debt ceiling, and that’s a very important thing.” [salon.com]
Like (21)
Follow
Share
Cary's Opinion
···
04/17/2015
Every administrative function must have an appeal process, that the IRS does not is disheartening but not surprising.
Like (20)
Follow
Share
BarackObama's Opinion
···
10/29/2015
"The President's 2016 Budget is designed to bring middle class economics into the 21st Century. This Budget shows what we can do if we invest in America's future and commit to an economy that rewards hard work, generates rising incomes, and allows everyone to share in the prosperity of a growing America." [whitehouse.gov]
Like (14)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

There isn’t enough to like in this budget deal for either side of the debate — deficits will remain too high into the future, while spending on domestic programs and the military remains insufficient.

BernieSanders's Opinion
···
10/29/2015
"This is not the budget I would have written. It doesn’t ask the most profitable corporations and the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share in taxes and it increases Pentagon spending too much. But I will support it because it’s much better than across-the-board budget cuts, increased premiums for Medicare, cuts to Social Security and the constant threat we won’t pay our bills." [politicususa.com]
Like (61)
Follow
Share
Rod's Opinion
···
04/15/2015
1. fix the NFL problem - they have no business being exempt
Like (19)
Follow
Share
Tylersmith's Opinion
···
05/03/2016
Imagine your house is flooded with water.. The whole thing. Now would you raise the roof, let the water raise up to fill the now taller house and then wait awhile to then start trying to get the water out. Or would you get the water out immediately in an intelligent manner and not wait to raise the roof? I hope everybody with common sense would choose to hurry and go ahead and get the water out of their house methodically. But this is what is happening with our deficiency, we are raising the roof instead of getting the water out. We can't do this! It isn't helping!
Like (12)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • EnactedNovember 2nd, 2015
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The senate Passed May 23rd, 2015
    Roll Call Vote 62 Yea / 37 Nay
  • The house Passed April 15th, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      house Committees
      Committee on Ways and Means
    IntroducedMarch 4th, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

What is House Bill H.R. 1314?

This bill was originally the "Ensuring Tax Exempt Organizations the Right to Appeal Act," aimed at creating an appeals process for tax-exempt organizations who had their status rejected by the IRS. Passed through committee and approved by a House voice vote, and into the hands of the Senate, this bill became something completely unrelated. Through the amendment process, the Senate turned the original bill into a legislative vehicle for two other bills about trade. After alternative trade legislation passed Congress and was signed into law, this bill was repurposed again as the legislative vehicle for the bipartisan budget agreement constructed by Congressional Republicans and the White House.

As a two-year budget agreement, this legislation is quite expansive, and establishes spending levels for all areas of the federal government government over the next two years. On balance, the spending levels proposed in this budget agreement are expected to reduce aggregate deficits by more than $75 billion over the 2016-2025 period.

The budget proposal also raises discretionary spending caps (aka sequester caps) for both defense and domestic programs. In fiscal year 2016, the defense and domestic discretionary spending limits would rise by $25 billion, while the caps would be lifted by $15 billion for fiscal year 2017. This leads to a $50 billion increase in the caps for fiscal year 2016, and a $30 billion increase for fiscal year 2017 — leading to a total increase of $80 billion.


Health Care

The requirement for large employers (more than 200 employees) to automatically enroll new full-time employees into a qualifying health plan, if one is offered, would be repealed.

This bill prevents a substantial increase in Medicare Part B premiums paid by beneficiaries who are not held harmless. Rather than increasing to $159.30 the premium would be held at $120.


Social Security

Cooperative Disability Investigations (CDI) units would be empowered to investigate Social Security fraud nationally with the assistance of state and local law enforcement to investigate suspected fraud before benefits are awarded. There would also be new and stronger penalties for Social Security fraud, including a new felony punishable by up to five years in prison, fines of up to $250,000 or both.

The cap adjustment for Social Security would be increased for fiscal years 2017-2020 by $484 million over that periods. Beyond existing purposes, funds could be used for CDI units and Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys who prosecute Social Security fraud, and work-related continuing disability reviews.

The Disability Insurance Trust Fund would receive an additional 0.57 percentage points (or a total of 2.37 percentage points of the 12.4 percent payroll tax) in 2016, 2017, and 2018. This would enable the payment of benefits until 2022 without increasing the total payroll tax.

Unintended loopholes in Social Security’s rules related to dual enrollment and benefit suspension would be closed.

Coordination between the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) would be improved by allowing SSA to repay Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) benefits to OPM when OPM overpays.


Debt Limit

The debt limit would be lifted temporarily through March 15, 2017. On March 16 of that year, the public debt limit would be increased by the amount of obligations issued that have their interest and principal guaranteed by the federal government that are outstanding. Obligations that aren’t issued out of necessity to fund a commitment incurred by the government requiring payment before March 16, 2017 wouldn’t be considered.

The Secretary of the Treasury would be prohibited from abusing the suspension of the debt limit to build up cash balances beyond normal operating balances.


Judiciary

All federal agencies that have civil monetary penalties would be required to update the value of those penalties to reflect changes in inflation between 1996 and October 2015. The increase would be capped at 150 percent, so that a penalty currently set at $10,000 couldn’t increase to more than $25,000. Going forward, agencies would be required to adjust their penalties annually based on changes in the rate of inflation.

About $1.5 billion would be rescinded and permanently canceled from the Crime Victims Fund, which would preserve adequate balance to meet the program’s funding needs for the foreseeable future. Also, $756 million from the Dept. of Justice Asset Forfeiture Fund would be rescinded and permanently canceled.


Pensions

Single-employer fixed pension premiums would increase from $64 per person in 2016 to $68 in 2017, $73 in 2018, and $78 in 2019 — and premium increases would be indexed to inflation thereafter.

Pension plan liabilities have to be valued using spot interest rates or the interest rates on corporate grade bonds. Currently, liabilities from 2012-2017 aren’t deemed to vary by more than 10 percent from the average interest rates over the prior 25 years, and that cap grows by 5 percent per year through 2021 when it would remain at 30 percent. This legislation would change that, freezing the interest rate corridor at 10 percent through 2019, at which point it grow by 5 percent per year until 2023, after which it would remain at 30 percent. By changing this, Congress anticipates that employers would defer taking advantage of the tax deductible pension contributions to a later date, resulting in greater tax receipts during the interim.


Strategic Petroleum Reserve

The Dept. of Energy (DOE) would be required to notify Congress of any test sales from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). It would also be authorized to include terrorism in the definition of a “severe energy disruption” that would allow sales from the SPR.

58 million barrels of oil could be sold from the SPR between 2018 and 2025, but sales are prohibited if it’s determined the sales would undermine its ability to reduce the adverse impacts of severe domestic energy supply interruptions. Up to $2 billion in proceeds from such sales would go towards the Energy Security and Infrastructure Modernization Fund subject to approval by Congress.


Other Provisions

Federal Crop Insurance would be modified to require the renegotiation of the Standard Reinsurance Agreement before the end of 2016 and at least once every five years thereafter. The overall rate of return for the insurance providers would be capped at 8.9 percent, as it currently sits at 14.5 percent.

To improve the collection of debts owed to the U.S. government, automated telephone calls would now be allowed to be made to cell phones. The Federal Communications Commission would be directed to issue regulations on the matter.

Impact

Beneficiaries of Social Security, Medicare, and other federal programs; the military; and the federal government.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 1314

The CBO estimates that this legislation would decrease spending by nearly $46 billion and increase revenues by over $29 billion over the 2016-2025 period. It would lead to a net decrease in deficit spending totaling more than $75 billion over that period.

More Information

In-Depth: In a press release, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) emphasized the necessity of this legislation while also recognizing its flaws:

“This deal isn’t perfect by any means — but everyone should acknowledge what our alternative was. If we didn’t reach a bipartisan budget agreement, we would have been forced to accept another “clean” debt ceiling increase. Instead, we negotiated a plan that will also support our troops and deliver real entitlement reforms. In my view, this is the best possible deal at this moment for our troops, for taxpayers, and for the American people.”

Pursuing a bipartisan agreement played a role in Speaker Boehner’s resignation from Congress, but the fact that a deal was reached has “cleared the barn” for the next Speaker, presumably Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). But that didn’t necessarily endear the outgoing Speaker with members of his own party — in particular the Freedom Caucus — whose leader, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), blasted the agreement:

“It’s a bad deal. It was done in a process that was bad, and the product is not good. That is not the way we are supposed to be handling things around here if we are going to address the $18 trillion debt problem we have. It’s just not the way you want to do business.”

It should be noted that funding the government will still require the passage of appropriations legislation before December 11, 2015 to facilitate spending within the levels set forward in this bill.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: "Obama Boehner State of the Union 2011" by Pete Souza (Executive Office of the President of the United States) - http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/photogallery/2011-state-union-address. Licensed under Public Domain via Commons)

AKA

Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015

Official Title

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right to an administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-exempt status of certain organizations.

    “Overall, we’ve got a bill where, for the first time, it looks like we’re going to take off the table having the Republicans shut down the government over raising the debt ceiling, and that’s a very important thing.” [salon.com]
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    "This is not the budget I would have written. It doesn’t ask the most profitable corporations and the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share in taxes and it increases Pentagon spending too much. But I will support it because it’s much better than across-the-board budget cuts, increased premiums for Medicare, cuts to Social Security and the constant threat we won’t pay our bills." [politicususa.com]
    Like (61)
    Follow
    Share
    Every administrative function must have an appeal process, that the IRS does not is disheartening but not surprising.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    1. fix the NFL problem - they have no business being exempt
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    "The President's 2016 Budget is designed to bring middle class economics into the 21st Century. This Budget shows what we can do if we invest in America's future and commit to an economy that rewards hard work, generates rising incomes, and allows everyone to share in the prosperity of a growing America." [whitehouse.gov]
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    Imagine your house is flooded with water.. The whole thing. Now would you raise the roof, let the water raise up to fill the now taller house and then wait awhile to then start trying to get the water out. Or would you get the water out immediately in an intelligent manner and not wait to raise the roof? I hope everybody with common sense would choose to hurry and go ahead and get the water out of their house methodically. But this is what is happening with our deficiency, we are raising the roof instead of getting the water out. We can't do this! It isn't helping!
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    Churches, especially, should NOT be tax-exempt. Period.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Given partisan government's proclivity to discriminate against organizations that they don't like, I believe an appeals process in reasonable and necessary.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    We have far too many tax exempt "Charities" that benefit only their owner/operators. Political PACs should ALL be denied ANY tax exempt status and should be required to publicly list all their donors who contribute over $1000.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Everyone should have the right to appeal a legal decision.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Believe it or not. People actually have to pay taxes. I know tons of billion dollar corporations don't but they are supposed to.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    NO NO NO!!! ABSOLUTELY NOT!!! This "budget" was put together under the secrecy of night with no debate. When the Speaker of the House floats an unseen bill to the floor for a vote and every member of the opposition party votes for it while only 30% of the Speaker's Party does, you know this is the worst of the worst in the cesspool of DC.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Giving any President a blank check is foolish and irresponsible!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Given the pseudo-flap created by the GOP over groups that clearly were not non-profit "educational" groups, but rather political instruments. Let's make the process transparent. If your going to lie about the purpose of your tax exempt political group, and have it rejected, you should have a right to appeal... So long as you are willing to pay for the cost of the appeal
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a mix bag bill--- we need to pass a bill that spells out what needs to be done with the budget and what needs to be done with the debt ceiling-- as we are today is going to reach a point of no return!!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Too many tax cuts for those who don't need it
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to stop raising the budget. It's politicians who are driving our country into a unplayable debt. Like Rand Paul said " Why don't we spend what comes in?"
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    There has already been enough spending by our Commander and Chief. However military and social security recipients should be the ones to pay. How about shutting down government aid if you want to save money. Never hear of that threat
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    The debt ceiling should not be raised.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE