{
  "id": "R40986",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R40986",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 354816,
      "date": "2009-12-14",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T02:08:55.862356",
      "title": "Proposals for a Commission to Address the Federal Government\u2019s Long-Term Fiscal Situation",
      "summary": "In the 111th Congress, Members have introduced several proposals to establish a commission that would make potentially far-reaching recommendations on how to address the federal government\u2019s long-term fiscal situation. Generally speaking, the measures would include Members of Congress as some or most of a commission\u2019s membership, provide for a majority of commission members to be appointed by congressional leaders, have varying degrees of partisan balance in membership, and require supermajority votes of commission members to approve recommendations. Each of the bills also would provide special legislative procedures to encourage expedited consideration of a commission\u2019s recommendations. \nThis report provides a comparative analysis of four fiscal commission proposals introduced in the 111th Congress that would address some, or all, aspects of the federal government\u2019s long-term fiscal situation. The four proposals are S. 2853 (the \u201cBipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action Act of 2009,\u201d sponsored by Senator Kent Conrad ); S. 1056 (the \u201cSAFE Commission Act,\u201d sponsored by Senator George Voinovich); H.R. 1557 (the \u201cSAFE Commission Act,\u201d sponsored by Representative Jim Cooper); and S. 276 (the \u201cSocial Security and Medicare Solvency Commission Act,\u201d sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein). The report also discusses potential issues for Congress that may inform assessments whether the use of a commission, coupled with expedited consideration of a commission\u2019s proposals, may be appropriate for addressing the federal government\u2019s long-term fiscal situation; and, if a commission proposal were considered, how a commission proposal might be structured.\nThe report begins with brief summaries of the proposals. To provide context, the report next discusses legislative precursors to the proposals that are the subject of this report. Thereafter, the report includes analysis of potential issues for Congress, including a discussion of advantages and disadvantages of using a commission, potential implications of expedited legislative procedures, and matters related to the structure of proposed commissions. \nFinally, Appendix A provides a more detailed side-by-side comparison of provisions of each bill. Appendix B discusses the long-term fiscal situation of the federal government and three major entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid). At the end of the report, a table provides a list of CRS subject matter experts who are available to answer questions related to many aspects of these legislative proposals.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R40986",
          "sha1": "555df97ec8d3d0d09d00616fe5eab68d4a943a0c",
          "filename": "files/20091214_R40986_555df97ec8d3d0d09d00616fe5eab68d4a943a0c.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R40986",
          "sha1": "1c63cc19545efc8bac83940bde7ab15f6737c342",
          "filename": "files/20091214_R40986_1c63cc19545efc8bac83940bde7ab15f6737c342.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Domestic Social Policy",
    "Economic Policy",
    "Health Policy",
    "Intelligence and National Security",
    "Legislative Process",
    "National Defense"
  ]
}