Memo on Points of Order Against Reconciliation Bill
Below please see a release from Sen. Gregg’s staff on the Budget Committee regarding Byrd rule points of order in the reconciliation bill…
MEMO
To: Budget, Economic, Health and Education Reporters
From: Senate Budget Committee Communications Office (minority)
Re: Byrd Rule Points of Order Against the Reconciliation Bill
Date: March 25, 2010
Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Judd Gregg (R-NH) will raise a 313(b)(1)(A) point of order against two provisions in the education title of the reconciliation bill (H.R. 4872) because they do not have a budgetary impact and are therefore extraneous. The Senate Parliamentarian agrees that this point of order lies against the provisions in the bill.
The 313(b)(1)(A) point of order is under the “Byrd Rule” Section 313 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under the Byrd Rule, any Senator may raise a point of order against (and if sustained, strike) extraneous matter that is included as part of the reconciliation bill. A provision is considered extraneous if it falls under 313(b)(1)(A): It does not produce a change in outlays or revenues. Byrd Rule card: http://budget.senate.gov/republican/analysis/2005/byrdrulecard.pdf
Both provisions are in the part of the bill that increases mandatory spending for Pell grants, under Section 2101 in Title II – Education and Health, which deals with the HELP Committee’s reconciliation instructions in the FY 2010 Budget Resolution.
One provision would tie future appropriations action on Pell grants to future changes in the level of mandatory Pell grant funding. While that provision might mean something in a future Congress, it has no effect on the level of mandatory spending on Pell grants in this bill. And even though the provision is struck from the bill, mandatory Pell spending in this bill remains unchanged.
The other provision would eliminate the (ratable reduction) requirement that the Secretary of Education reduce mandatory Pell grants across the board if there is insufficient funding. But the Secretary is not expected to use this authority in the next three months. And the bill eliminates the need for the ratable reduction requirement for future years. Getting rid of the ratable reduction requirement would not affect anything. Since this provision has no budgetary effect, it is extraneous and is subject to the Byrd rule.
CBO has determined that these provisions have no budgetary impact, and removing these provisions would not change the score of the reconciliation bill.
Waiving the Byrd Rule point of order requires 60 votes. If the point of order is not waived, the provision is stripped from the bill. If the Senate does not pass the exact same version of the reconciliation bill as was passed by the House on March 21, the Senate-passed version must go back to the House for another vote.