{
  "id": "RL31137",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL31137",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 101105,
      "date": "2001-09-27",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:20:48.887941",
      "title": "Sequestration Procedures Under the 1985 Balanced Budget Act",
      "summary": "The sequestration process, which involves automatic, largely across-the-board spending\nreductions\nmade toward the beginning of the fiscal year, was established under the Balanced Budget and\nEmergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 as a means of enforcing deficit targets. The Budget\nEnforcement Act of 1990 amended the 1985 act to supersede the deficit targets with two new\nenforcement mechanisms--limits on discretionary spending ( i.e. , spending controlled\nthrough the\nannual appropriations process) and a \"pay-as-you go\" (PAYGO) requirement applicable to\nlegislation affecting direct spending ( i.e. , spending controlled outside of the annual\nappropriations\nprocess) and revenues. The discretionary spending limits and PAYGO requirement have been\nrevised and extended (affecting legislation enacted through FY2002) in recent years by such\nmeasures as the Budget Enforcement Act of 1997, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century\n(TEA-21), and the Interior Appropriations Act for FY2001.\n  As a general rule, the enforcement procedures for the discretionary spending limits, on the one\nhand, and the PAYGO requirement, on the other, are separated by a \"firewall.\" Violations of the\ndiscretionary spending limits are remedied by reductions only in discretionary programs; PAYGO\nviolations are corrected by reductions solely in direct spending programs. Further, savings made on\none side of the firewall generally cannot be used to the advantage of programs on the other side.\n  The current sequestration procedures are automatic and are triggered by a report from the OMB\ndirector. For sequestration purposes generally, there is only one triggering report issued each year\n(just after the end of the congressional session), but a \"within-session sequester\" may occur in the\nfollowing session ( e.g. , if the enactment of one or more supplemental appropriations\nmeasures\ncauses a breach in the limits). Spending for many programs is exempt from sequestration and\nreductions in certain programs are limited under \"special rules.\"\n  During the 16 years that sequestration has been in effect (prior to the FY2002 budget cycle),\nsequesters have been triggered five times. The first three sequesters occurred during the 5-year\nperiod when deficit targets were in effect, covering FY1986-1990. During the remaining 11 years,\nsequestration has applied to the enforcement of the discretionary spending limits and PAYGO\nrequirement. Two sequesters under the discretionary spending limits occurred for FY1991 and no\nPAYGO sequester has ever occurred. Initial outlay savings associated with the three deficit target\nsequesters ranged from $11.7 billion to $20.0 billion, but some of these savings were reduced or\nrescinded later.\n  During the 2000 session, Congress and the President enacted provisions to prevent a sequester\nunder the discretionary spending limits for FY2000 and a PAYGO sequester for FY2001. The\nFY2000 sequester would have necessitated a reduction in outlays for discretionary spending of $6.8\nbillion; the FY2001 sequester would have required a cut in direct spending outlays of $10.5 billion.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31137",
          "sha1": "4d84ae6f98bb79e86ab25fde30367655148c91f4",
          "filename": "files/20010927_RL31137_4d84ae6f98bb79e86ab25fde30367655148c91f4.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20010927_RL31137_4d84ae6f98bb79e86ab25fde30367655148c91f4.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Appropriations",
    "Economic Policy"
  ]
}