The Budget Reconciliation Process: Timing for Legislative Action

The Budget Reconciliation Process:
Timing of Legislative Action
Updated November 14, 2008
Robert Keith
Specialist in American National Government
Government and Finance Division



The Budget Reconciliation Process:
Timing of Legislative Action
Summary
The budget reconciliation process is an optional procedure under the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 that operates as an adjunct to the annual budget
resolution process. The chief purpose of the reconciliation process is to enhance
Congress’s ability to change current law in order to bring revenue and spending
levels into conformity with the policies of the budget resolution. Accordingly,
reconciliation probably is the most potent budget enforcement tool available to
Congress for a large portion of the budget.
Reconciliation is a two-stage process in which reconciliation instructions are
included in the budget resolution, directing the appropriate committees to develop
legislation achieving the desired budgetary outcomes, and the resultant legislation
(usually incorporated into an omnibus bill) is considered under expedited procedures
in the House and Senate.
Reconciliation was first used by the House and Senate in calendar year 1980 for
FY1981. As an optional procedure, it has not been used every year. During the
period from 1980 to the present, 19 reconciliation measures were enacted into law
and three were vetoed.
Under a revised timetable in effect since FY1987, the annual budget resolution
is scheduled for final adoption by the House and Senate by April 15. The current
timetable prescribes June 15 as the deadline for completing action on any required
reconciliation legislation, but there is no explicit requirement to that effect.
The record of experience with reconciliation legislation over the period covering
1980 to the present indicates considerable variation in the time needed to process
such measures, from the date the reconciliation instructions take effect (upon final
adoption of the budget resolution) until the resultant reconciliation legislation is
approved or vetoed by the President. The interval for the 22 reconciliation measures
ranged from a low of 27 days (for the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990)
to a high of 384 days (for the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of

2005). On average, the process was completed in nearly five months (142 days),


more than twice the amount of time contemplated by the congressional budget
process timetable.
With regard to the use of reconciliation by congressional session, action on 11 such
measures was completed during the first session, and on 11 such measures during the
second session. Congress and the President have shown the ability to initiate the
reconciliation process and conclude it reasonably early in the same session; in the case
of eight bills (for seven different years), reconciliation measures were enacted or vetoed
before the end of August. On the other hand, the reconciliation process can be lengthy
and drawn out; in four instances, reconciliation measures were not enacted or vetoed until
December, and in four other instances, carried over to the following year.
This report will be updated as developments warrant.



Contents
Overview of the Budget Reconciliation Process......................1
Timing of Legislative Action.....................................5
Time of Year That Reconciliation Is Scheduled to Occur...........5
Overall Record of Experience................................6
Adoption of Reconciliation Instructions........................6
House and Senate Action on Omnibus Reconciliation Legislation...10
List of Figures
Figure 1. Number of Days Needed to Process Reconciliation Acts...........7
List of Tables
Table 1. Budget Resolutions and Resultant Reconciliation Acts:
FY1981-FY2009 ..............................................3
Table 2. Dates of Enactment or Veto of Reconciliation Measures by Session
of Congress..................................................8
Table 3. Adoption of Reconciliation Instructions in Budget Resolutions for
FY1981-FY2009 ..............................................9
Table 4. Dates of House and Senate Action on Reconciliation Legislation
(Fiscal Years 1981-2009).......................................11



The Budget Reconciliation Process:
Timing of Legislative Action
The budget reconciliation process has been one of the chief tools used by
Congress during the period covering from 1980 to the present to implement major
changes in budget policy. Following a brief overview of the budget reconciliation
process, this report provides information on the timing of House and Senate action
on reconciliation measures.
Overview of the Budget Reconciliation Process
Under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (P.L.
93-344, as amended), the House and Senate are required to adopt at least one budget
resolution each year.1 The budget resolution, which takes the form of a concurrent
resolution and is not sent to the President for his approval or veto, serves as a
congressional statement in broad terms regarding the appropriate revenue, spending,
and debt policies, as well as a guide to the subsequent consideration of legislation
implementing such policies at agency and programmatic levels. Budget resolution2
policies are enforced through a variety of mechanisms, including points of order.
The House and Senate Budget Committees, which were created by the 1974 act,
exercise exclusive jurisdiction over budget resolutions and are responsible for
monitoring their enforcement.
In developing a budget resolution, the House and Senate Budget Committees
rely on baseline budget projections prepared by the Congressional Budget Office
(CBO). A budget resolution typically reflects many different assumptions regarding
legislative action expected to occur during a session that would cause revenue and
spending levels to be changed from baseline amounts. However, most revenue and3
direct spending occurs automatically each year under permanent law; therefore, if


1 Beginning with the inception of the congressional budget process in 1975 (for FY1976),
the House and Senate have met this requirement every year except in 1998 (for FY1999),
2002 (for FY2003), 2004 (for FY2005), and 2006 (for FY2007). For background
information on budget resolutions, see CRS Report RL30297, Congressional Budget
Resolutions: Selected Statistics and Information Guide, by Bill Heniff Jr.
2 The congressional budget process, and its enforcement procedures, are discussed in more
detail in CRS Report 98-721 GOV, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, by Robert
Keith.
3 Direct spending is provided in substantive law under the jurisdiction of the legislative
committees, in contrast to discretionary spending, which is provided in annual
appropriations acts under the jurisdiction of the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees. Most direct spending programs are entitlements, such as Social Security,
(continued...)

the committees with jurisdiction over the revenue and direct spending programs do
not report legislation to carry out the budget resolution policies by amending existing
law, revenue and direct spending for these programs likely will continue without
change.
The budget reconciliation process is an optional procedure that operates as an
adjunct to the budget resolution process.4 The chief purpose of the reconciliation
process is to enhance Congress’s ability to change current law in order to bring
revenue and spending levels into conformity with the policies of the budget
resolution. Accordingly, reconciliation probably is the most potent budget
enforcement tool available to Congress for a large portion of the budget.
Reconciliation is a two-stage process. First, reconciliation instructions are
included in the budget resolution, directing the appropriate committees to develop
legislation achieving the desired budgetary outcomes. The instructed committees
submit their legislative recommendations to their respective Budget Committees by
the deadline prescribed in the budget resolution; the Budget Committees incorporate
them into an omnibus budget reconciliation bill without making any substantive
revisions.
The second step involves consideration of the resultant reconciliation legislation
by the House and Senate under expedited procedures. Among other things, debate
in the Senate on any reconciliation measure is limited to 20 hours (and 10 hours on
a conference report) and amendments must be germane. The House Rules
Committee typically sets limitations on debate and the offering of amendments
during consideration of reconciliation measures in the House.
In cases where only one committee has been instructed, the process allows that
committee to report its reconciliation legislation directly to its parent chamber, thus
bypassing the Budget Committee. In some years, budget resolutions included
reconciliation instructions that afforded the House and Senate the option of
considering two or more different reconciliation bills. Once the reconciliation
legislation called for in the budget resolution has been approved or vetoed by the
President, the process is concluded; Congress cannot develop another reconciliation
bill in the wake of a veto without first adopting another budget resolution containing
reconciliation instructions.
Reconciliation was first used by the House and Senate during the administration
of President Jimmy Carter, in calendar year 1980 for FY1981.5 As an optional


3 (...continued)
Medicare, federal civilian and military retirement, and unemployment compensation.
4 For a detailed discussion of the budget reconciliation process, see CRS Report RL33030,
The Budget Reconciliation Process: House and Senate Procedures, by Robert Keith and
Bill Heniff Jr.
5 The Senate considered a revenue-reduction bill for FY1976 (H.R. 5559) under
reconciliation procedures in December 1975. It was initiated under a second budget
resolution for that fiscal year and was not considered to be a reconciliation bill in the House;
(continued...)

procedure, it has not been used every year. During the period covering budget
resolutions for FY1981-FY2009, 19 omnibus reconciliation measures were enacted
into law and three were vetoed (see Table 1).
Table 1. Budget Resolutions and Resultant
Reconciliation Acts: FY1981-FY2009
FiscalBudgetResultant Reconciliation Act(s)Date
Year Re s o l u t i on Enacted
1981H.Con.Res. 307Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980 (P.L.12-05-80

96-499)


1982H.Con.Res. 115Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of08-13-81

1981 (P.L. 97-35)


1983S.Con.Res. 92Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of09-03-82

1982 (P.L. 97-248)


Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of09-08-82

1982 (P.L. 97-253)


1984H.Con.Res. 91Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of04-18-84

1983 (P.L. 98-270)


1986S.Con.Res. 32Consolidated Omnibus Budget04-07-86
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-272)
1987S.Con.Res. 120Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of10-21-86

1986 (P.L. 99-509)


1988S.Con.Res. 93Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of12-22-87

1987 (P.L. 100-203)


1990H.Con.Res. 106Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of12-19-89

1989 (P.L. 101-239)


1991H.Con.Res. 310Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of11-05-90

1990 (P.L. 101-508)


1994H.Con.Res. 64Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of08-10-93

1993 (P.L. 103-66)


1996H.Con.Res. 67Balanced Budget Act of 199512-06-95
(vetoed)

1997H.Con.Res. 178Personal Responsibility and Work08-22-96


Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996
(P.L. 104-193)
5 (...continued)
the bill did not become law. This report presents data on the timing of action on
reconciliation measures initiated in conjunction with budget resolutions scheduled for
adoption in the spring and thus excludes Senate consideration of H.R. 5559 in 1975.

FiscalBudgetResultant Reconciliation Act(s)Date
Year Re s o l u t i on Enacted
1998H.Con.Res. 84Balanced Budget Act of 199708-05-97
(P.L. 105-33)
Taxpayer Relief Act of 199708-05-97
(P.L. 105-34)
2000H.Con.Res. 68Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act of 199909-23-99
(H.R. 2488)(vetoed)
2001H.Con.Res. 290Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of08-05-00

2000 (H.R. 4810)(vetoed)


2002H.Con.Res. 83Economic Growth and Tax Relief06-07-01
Reconciliation Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-16)
2004H.Con.Res. 95Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation05-28-03
Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-27)
2006H.Con.Res. 95Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-02-08-06

171)


Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation05-17-06
Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-222)
2008S.Con.Res. 21College Cost Reduction and Access Act of09-27-07

2007 (P.L. 110-84)


Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
In some years, reconciliation was proposed by one or both chambers, but not
activated. The FY1999 budget resolution passed by the House (H.Con.Res. 284,
105th Congress), for example, included reconciliation directives to nine House
committees; the Senate-passed budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 86) did not contain
reconciliation directives. Ultimately, the House and Senate did not reach final
agreement on the FY1999 budget resolution and reconciliation procedures were not
used that year.
From 1980 into the 1990s, reconciliation was used to reduce the deficit through
reductions in mandatory spending, revenue increases, or a combination of the two.
In recent years, however, reconciliation was used to reduce revenues and, in a few
instances, to increase spending levels in particular areas.6 In 2006, reconciliation was
used to reduce mandatory spending and revenues, yielding a net increase in the
deficit.7 In the first session of the 110th Congress, the House and Senate both adopted
rules prohibiting the use of reconciliation in a manner that would increase the deficit


6 CRS Report RS22098, Deficit Impact of Reconciliation Legislation Enacted in 1990, 1993,

1997, and 2006, by Robert Keith.


7 CRS Report RL33132, Budget Reconciliation Legislation in 2005-2006 Under the FY2006
Budget Resolution, by Robert Keith.

or reduce the surplus (the House rule is found in Clause 7 of Rule XXI and the Senate
rule is found in Section 202 of the FY2008 budget resolution, S.Con.Res. 21).
With regard to spending reductions, the reconciliation process for the most part
has applied to mandatory spending programs and not discretionary spending
programs (which are subject to other budget enforcement procedures).8 In some
years, the reconciliation process has been used to increase the statutory debt limit
(which usually is addressed through different procedures); in 2000, efforts were made
in the reconciliation process to reduce the debt held by the public.9
Timing of Legislative Action
Time of Year That Reconciliation Is Scheduled to Occur. As
originally framed, the 1974 Congressional Budget Act required the adoption of two
budget resolutions each year. By May 15 of each year, the House and Senate were
scheduled to complete action on a budget resolution setting advisory targets; by
September 15, just before the beginning of the fiscal year on October 1, the two
chambers were scheduled to adopt a budget resolution setting binding limits. It was
contemplated that reconciliation would be used in conjunction with the second
budget resolution, as a device to make any “last minute” changes in pending
legislation or current law necessary to bring the budget resolution policies to fruition.
The 1974 act prescribed a 10-day period to accomplish reconciliation, requiring that
the process be concluded by September 25.
After several years’ experience with the congressional budget process,
congressional leaders realized that reconciliation could not be used to make major
changes in revenue and direct spending laws and still fit within such a compressed
time frame and occur so late in the session. Therefore, when the House and Senate
first employed reconciliation in 1980, it was initiated in the first budget resolution,
adopted in the late spring. The following year, reconciliation again was used in
connection with the first budget resolution. Shortly thereafter, the House and Senate
abandoned altogether the practice of adopting a second budget resolution.
These changes in congressional practice were formally incorporated into the
1974 Congressional Budget Act several years later under amendments made by the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Title II of P.L. 99-

177). The changes, which first took effect for FY1987 and still remain in effect,


require the annual adoption of only one budget resolution and authorize the inclusion
of reconciliation instructions in it. The deadline for the adoption of the budget
resolution was advanced by one month to April 15. Under the revised timetable, two
months are allowed for reconciliation; a deadline of June 15 was established for the


8 CRS Report RS22277, Savings in Mandatory Outlays in Selected Reconciliation Acts, by
Robert Keith.
9 For more information on this topic, see CRS Report RL30714, Congressional Action on
Revenue and Debt Reconciliation Measures in 2000, by Robert Keith, and CRS Report
RS21519, Legislative Procedures for Adjusting the Public Debt Limit: A Brief Overview,
by Bill Heniff Jr.

completion of action on any required reconciliation legislation.10 To enforce this
deadline in the House, a prohibition against the consideration of a July adjournment
resolution if reconciliation is not completed was placed in Section 310(f) of the 1974
act; the Senate has no comparable provision.
Overall Record of Experience. The record of experience with
reconciliation legislation over the period covering 1980 to the present indicates
considerable variation in the time needed to process such measures, from the date the
reconciliation instructions take effect (upon final adoption of the budget resolution)
until the resultant reconciliation legislation is approved or vetoed by the President.
As Figure 1 shows, the processing interval for the 19 enacted and 3 vetoed
reconciliation measures ranged from a low of 27 days (for the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990) to a high of 384 days (for the Tax Increase Prevention
and Reconciliation Act of 2006). On average, completing the process took nearly
five months (142 days), well beyond the two months contemplated by the timetable
in the 1974 Congressional Budget Act.
With regard to the use of reconciliation by congressional session, Congress has
not ostensibly favored one session over the other. As Table 2 shows, action on 11
such measures was completed during the first session, and on 11 such measures
during the second session. It should be noted, however, that four of the measures
(the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1983, the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, and the Tax Increase
Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005), enacted between February and May of
the second session, were carry-over business from the prior session. Consequently,
congressional action on 15 of the 22 reconciliation measures was concentrated in the
first session.
Congress and the President have shown the ability to initiate the reconciliation
process and conclude it reasonably early in the same session; in the case of eight bills
(for seven different years), reconciliation measures were enacted or vetoed before the
end of August. On the other hand, the reconciliation process can be lengthy and
drawn out; in four instances, reconciliation measures were not enacted or vetoed until
December, and in four other instances carried over until the following year.
Adoption of Reconciliation Instructions. During the period covering
from 1980 to the present, Congress adopted 19 budget resolutions containing
reconciliation instructions (see Table 3). The House and Senate adopted four of
these budget resolutions (for FY1994, FY2000, FY2001, and FY2004) on time, but
the others were adopted behind schedule. As Table 3 shows, most of the budget
resolutions that contained reconciliation instructions were adopted in April, May, or
June, but one was adopted as late as August and another in October. During years
when reconciliation was used, budget resolutions were adopted, on average, about

50 days after the prescribed deadline.


10 An explicit requirement that Congress complete action on any necessary reconciliation
measure was established in Section 310(f) of the 1974 Congressional Budget Act by Section
201(b) (at 99 Stat. 1040) of the 1985 Balanced Budget Act. Section 13210(2) of the Budget
Enforcement Act of 1990 (Title XIII of P.L. 101-508) deleted this requirement from Section
310(f), but left unchanged the reference to the deadline in the general timetable set forth in
Section 300.

Figure 1. Number of Days Needed to Process Reconciliation Acts


ORA of 1980
OBRA of 1981
TEFRA of 1982
OBRA of 1982
OBRA of 1983
COBRA of 1985
OBRA of 1986
OBRA of 1987
OBRA of 1989
OBRA of 1990
OBRA of 1993
BBA of 1995
PRWORA of 1996
BBA of 1997
TRA of 1997
TRRA of 1999
MTRRA of 2000
EGTRRA of 2001
JGTRRA of 2003
DRA of 2005
TIPRA of 2005
CCRAA of 2007
0100200300400
Number of Days
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
Notes: the “number of days” refers to the interval from adoption of the budget resolution
to the enactment or veto of the reconciliation act.
ORA=Omnibus Reconciliation Act;
OBRA=Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act;
TEFRA=Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act;
COBRA=Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act;
PRWORA=Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act;
BBA=Balanced Budget Act;
TRA=Taxpayer Relief Act;
TRRA=Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act;
MTRRA=Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act;
EGTRRA=Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act;
JGTRRA=Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act;
DRA=Deficit Reduction Act;
TIPRA=Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act; and
CCRAA=College Cost Reduction and Access Act.

Table 2. Dates of Enactment or Veto of
Reconciliation Measures by Session of Congress
CongressFirst SessionSecond Session
96th — 12-05-80
97 th 08-13-81 09-03-82
09-08-82

98th — 04-18-84*


99th — 04-07-86*


10-21-86

100th12-22-87 —


101st 12-19-89 11-05-90

102nd — —


103rd08-10-93 —


104th 12-06-95 08-22-96
(vetoed)

105th08-05-97 —


08-05-97
106th 09-23-99 08-05-00
(vetoed) (vetoed)

107th06-07-01 —


108th05-28-03 —


109th — 02-08-06*


05-17-06*


110th09-27-07 —


Total
Number of1111
Measures
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
Note: An asterisk (*) denotes a measure that carried over from the prior year.



Table 3. Adoption of Reconciliation Instructions
in Budget Resolutions for FY1981-FY2009
FiscalBudgetDateNumber ofDays AfterInitial Deadline for
YearResolutionAdoptedDeadlineaCommittee Submissions
1981H.Con.Res. 30706-12-8058June 20
1982H.Con.Res. 11505-21-8136June 12

1983S.Con.Res. 9206-23-8269August 1 (House)


July 20 (Senate)
1984H.Con.Res. 9106-23-8369July 22
1986S.Con.Res. 3208-01-85108September 27
1987S.Con.Res. 12006-27-8673July 25
1988H.Con.Res. 9306-24-8770July 28
1990H.Con.Res. 10605-18-8933July 15
1991H.Con.Res. 31010-09-90177October 15

1994H.Con.Res. 6404-01-930May 14 (House)


June 18 (Senate)
1996H.Con.Res. 6706-29-9575September 22

1997H.Con.Res. 17806-13-9659June 13/21 (House/Senate)


July 18/24 (House/Senate)
Sept. 6/18 (House/Senate)
1998H.Con.Res. 8406-05-9751June 13
June 14/20 (House/Senate)

2000H.Con.Res. 6804-14-990July 16 (House)


July 23 (Senate)

2001H.Con.Res. 29004-13-000July 14 (first bill)


September 13 (second bill)
2002H.Con.Res. 8305-10-0125May 18
2004H.Con.Res. 9504-11-030May 8

2006H.Con.Res. 9504-28-0613September 16 (first bill)


September 23 (second bill)
September 30 (third bill)
2008S.Con.Res. 2105-17-0732September 10
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
a. Beginning with FY1987, the deadline for the adoption of the budget resolution was
changed to April 15; prior to that fiscal year, the deadline was May 15.



Timely adoption of the budget resolution can facilitate timely enactment of
reconciliation legislation, just as tardy adoption of the budget resolution can delay
completion of the reconciliation process. For example, the FY2002 budget resolution
was adopted only 25 days after the deadline and the reconciliation process for that
year was completed in another 28 days (compared to the average of 142 days).
Conversely, the FY1986 budget resolution was adopted 108 days after the deadline
and the reconciliation process took another 249 days to complete.
Nonetheless, timely or tardy adoption of a budget resolution does not necessarily
ensure that the reconciliation process will proceed quickly or slowly. For example,
in two of the years that the budget resolution was adopted on time (FY1994 and
FY2000), 131 days and 161 days, respectively, were needed to complete action on
reconciliation legislation. In 2005, the FY2006 budget resolution was adopted only
13 days behind schedule, but the second of two reconciliation measures generated
thereunder was not enacted into law until 384 days later.
Another factor that can affect how quickly or slowly reconciliation legislation
is processed is the amount of time given to committees to prepare their reconciliation
recommendations. As Table 3 indicates, the initial deadline for committee
submissions, included in the budget resolution, ranged from about one week to five
months after adoption of the budget resolution; the longer deadlines were used
largely to accommodate the August recess. In some cases, the submission deadline
was extended one or more times. Over the whole period, committees generally have
complied with submission deadlines.
House and Senate Action on Omnibus Reconciliation Legislation.
As indicated previously, the House and Senate together completed action on 22
different budget reconciliation bills during the period covering from 1980 to the
present; 19 of them were enacted into law and three were vetoed. (The text of one
or more other measures considered separately sometimes was incorporated later into
an omnibus budget reconciliation bill.) On occasion, one chamber has considered
reconciliation legislation that was not considered by the other chamber. During the
second session of the 106th Congress, for example, the House and Senate passed the
Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2000, but it was vetoed by President
Clinton. The House passed five other reconciliation measures during the session, but
the Senate did not act on any of them.11
Table 4 provides information on the dates of initial consideration by the House
and Senate of these 22 measures, as well as the dates that the two chambers acted on
the relevant conference reports. As the table shows, the Senate devoted more than
twice as many days (75 days) to initial consideration of these measures than did the
House (31 days). Initial Senate consideration of these measures ranged from two to
eight days, while House consideration took one or two days, except in 1989 (when
the House considered the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 for six days).


11 For more information on these measures, see CRS Report RL30714, Congressional Action
on Revenue and Debt Reconciliation Measures in 2000, by Robert Keith (out of print, and
available from the author), ibid.

CRS-11
Table 4. Dates of House and Senate Action on Reconciliation Legislation (Fiscal Years 1981-2009)
calReconciliation ActBillHouse ActionSenate Action
r Numbers Ini t i a l Conf e rence I ni t i al Conf erence
Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980H.R. 776509-04-8012-03-8006-30-8012-03-80
S. 288507-23-80
S. 293909-17-80
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981H.R. 398206-25-8107-31-8106-22-8108-13-81
iki/CRS-RL30458S. 137706-26-8106-23-8106-24-81
g/w
s.or 06-25-81
leak 07-13-81
://wikiTax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982H.R. 496112-15-8108-19-8207-19-8208-19-82
http 07-20-8207-21-82
07-22-82
07-23-82
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982H.R. 695508-10-8208-17-8208-04-8208-18-82
S. 277408-18-8208-05-82
08-11-82
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1983H.R. 416910-25-83 — 11-16-83 —


S. 206211-18-83
04-05-84

calReconciliation ActBillHouse ActionSenate Action
r Numbers Ini t i a l Conf e rence I ni t i al Conf erence
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985H.R. 350010-24-8512-05-8510-15-8512-19-85
H.R. 312810-31-8512-19-8510-16-8512-20-85
S. 173012-20-8510-22-8503-14-86
03-06-86 10-23-85 03-18-86
03-18-86 10-24-85
03-20-86 11-12-85
11-13-85
11-14-85
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986H.R. 530009-24-8610-17-8609-19-8610-17-86
S. 270609-20-86
09-25-86
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987H.R. 354510-29-8712-21-8712-09-8712-22-87
iki/CRS-RL30458S. 192012-10-87
g/w
s.orOmnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989H.R. 329909-26-8911-21-8910-12-8911-21-89
leakS. 175009-27-8910-13-89
09-28-89
://wiki 10-03-89
http 10-04-89
10-05-89
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990H.R. 583510-16-9010-26-9010-17-9010-27-90
S. 320910-18-90
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993H.R. 226405-27-9308-05-9306-23-9308-06-93
S. 113406-24-93
Balanced Budget Act of 1995H.R. 249110-25-9511-17-9510-25-9511-17-95


S. 135710-26-9511-20-9510-26-95
10-27-95
10-28-95

calReconciliation ActBillHouse ActionSenate Action
r Numbers Ini t i a l Conf e rence I ni t i al Conf erence
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity ReconciliationH.R. 373407-18-9607-31-9607-18-9608-01-96
Act of 1996S. 195607-19-96
07-22-96
07-23-96
Balanced Budget Act of 1997H.R. 201506-25-9707-30-9706-23-9707-31-97
S. 94706-24-97
06-25-97
Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997H.R. 201406-26-9707-31-9706-25-9707-31-97
S. 94906-26-97
06-27-97
Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act of 1999H.R. 248807-22-9908-05-9907-28-9908-05-99
iki/CRS-RL30458S. 142907-29-99
g/w 07-30-99
s.oraMarriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2000H.R. 481007-12-0007-20-0007-14-0007-20-00
leak
S. 283907-17-0007-21-00
://wiki 07-18-00
httpEconomic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001H.R. 183605-16-0105-26-0105-17-0105-26-01
05-21-01
05-22-01
05-23-01
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003H.R. 205-09-0305-22-0305-14-0305-23-03
S. 105405-15-03
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005H.R. 424111-17-0512-19-0510-31-0512-19-05
S. 193211-18-0502-01-0611-01-0512-20-05
11-02-05 12-21-05
11-03-05
Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005H.R. 429712-08-0505-10-0611-17-0505-11-06


S. 202011-18-05

calReconciliation ActBillHouse ActionSenate Action
r Numbers Ini t i a l Conf e rence I ni t i al Conf erence
College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007H.R. 266907-11-0709-07-0707-18-0709-06-07
07-19-07 09-07-07
07-20-07
: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
e other reconciliation measures for FY2001 were passed by the House, but the Senate did not act on any of them. For more information on these measures, see
Congressional Action on Revenue and Debt Reconciliation Measures in 2000, by Robert Keith.


iki/CRS-RL30458
g/w
s.or
leak
://wiki
http

Of the 142 days needed, on average, to develop, consider, and enact into law (or
veto) a reconciliation bill, more than half were required to secure initial passage in
the House and Senate. The remaining days were taken up by conference meetings,
adoption of the conference report, enrollment of the legislation, and consideration
and approval by the President.
The interval between adoption of the budget resolution and enactment into law
(or veto) took more than the average of 142 days for nine of the reconciliation laws.
Although the timing of action on these measures is explained by many factors, the
following were some of the major controversies associated with each:
!Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980 — child nutrition programs,
cost-of-living adjustments for federal retirees, mortgage subsidy
bonds, and the crude oil windfall profits tax;
!Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1983 — aggregate levels
of spending reductions and revenue increases;
!Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 —
trade policy, Superfund cleanup tax, and tobacco price supports;
!Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 — the “fairness
doctrine” for broadcasters, Rural Electrification Administration loan
prepayments, a nuclear waste disposal site, and corporate tax
changes;
!Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 — reduction of the
capital gains tax and repeal of the 1988 Medicare Catastrophic
Coverage Act;
!Balanced Budget Act of 1995 — Medicare, Medicaid, student
loans, nutrition programs, and the Earned Income Tax Credit; and
!Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act of 1999 — aggregate level of
revenue reductions and triggering of a sequester in direct spending
programs.
!Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 — Medicaid, pension reform, oil
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
In addition, the general inclusion of “extraneous matter” sometimes complicated
and delayed action on these measures, especially after the Senate adopted in 1985 a
strict rule, known as the “Byrd rule,” to curb the practice of including such matter.12


12 For more information on this topic, see CRS Report RL30862, The Budget Reconciliation
Process: The Senate’s “Byrd Rule,” by Robert Keith.