A bill to provide for across-the-board rescissions of nonsecurity discretionary spending.
- Bill Number
- S. 360
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Economics and Public Finance
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-03: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
- Last Updated
- 2025-06-26T15:40:57Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
This bill, S. 360, aims to reduce federal spending by automatically canceling (rescinding) a portion of nonsecurity discretionary funding—meaning budget allocations for programs that are not related to national defense and are decided annually by Congress rather than being automatic entitlements like Social Security.
Key Provisions
- Definitions:
- Budget authority: The legal approval to spend federal funds, as defined in existing budget laws.
- Discretionary appropriations: Yearly funding for government programs that Congress must approve, separate from automatic spending.
- Security category: Includes defense and certain international security spending.
- Nonsecurity discretionary appropriations: All other discretionary funding not in the security category.
- Regular appropriation Act: Annual spending bills or continuing resolutions that provide new funding for federal programs.
- Rescission Requirements (automatic cuts applied proportionally across affected accounts):
- For Fiscal Year (FY) 2026: 1% cut to nonsecurity discretionary appropriations, effective the day after full-year funding is approved for the federal government.
- For FY 2027: 2% cut, applied similarly.
- For FY 2028 and beyond: 5% cut each year, applied similarly.
- Reporting Obligation:
- The Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) must submit a report to the Senate and House Appropriations Committees within 30 days of full-year funding approval. The report details each affected account and the exact amount cut.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This introduces mandatory, across-the-board percentage cuts to nonsecurity discretionary spending, starting in FY 2026, which are not currently required by law.
- It builds on existing budget frameworks (like the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 and the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985) by adding specific rescission triggers tied to appropriation approvals, without needing further congressional action each year.
- Unlike past sequestration measures (automatic broad cuts from 2013), these are permanent and escalating, targeting only non-defense discretionary funds.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Agencies funded through nonsecurity discretionary appropriations (e.g., those handling education, healthcare, environmental protection, and housing) will face reduced budgets, potentially leading to program cuts, staff reductions, or delayed projects.
- On Citizens: Individuals relying on affected programs—such as students, low-income families, or those needing public health services—may experience reduced access to federal support, though the exact effects depend on how agencies implement the cuts.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, as the bill spares security-related spending (e.g., foreign aid for defense purposes), but indirect effects could arise if nonsecurity international programs like diplomacy or humanitarian aid are trimmed.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies and Programs: Primarily those outside defense, such as the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Environmental Protection Agency.
- Congress: The Appropriations Committees will receive reports and oversee implementation, but the automatic nature limits their flexibility in future budgets.
- Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Responsible for calculating and reporting the cuts.
- Citizens and Advocacy Groups: Taxpayers benefiting from or advocating for nonsecurity programs, including educators, environmentalists, and social service organizations.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: The bill uses established definitions from prior laws to ensure cuts are implemented proportionally (pro rata, meaning evenly across eligible accounts), reducing risks of legal challenges over uneven application. However, it could invite lawsuits if viewed as an improper restriction on Congress's spending power under the Impoundment Control Act, which limits presidential withholding of funds.
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's authority to control the purse (Article I, Section 9), but the automatic, escalating mechanism might raise separation-of-powers concerns if it overly binds future Congresses.
- Political: Represents a fiscal restraint tool favoring reduced government spending, potentially appealing to budget hawks but contentious among those prioritizing social and domestic programs; its passage would signal a shift toward ongoing austerity in non-defense areas without annual debates.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-03: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
- 2025-02-03: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- To provide for across-the-board rescissions of nonsecurity discretionary spending. — issued 2025-02-03 — PDF (4 pages)