http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_640.html?rev=46005 <p>S. 640 would provide Congress a second look at wasteful spending by establishing enhanced rescission authority under fast-track procedures.</p> <h2 id="toc0"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>Second Look at Wasteful Spending Act of 2009 - Amends the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to authorize the President to transmit annually to Congress a maximum of four special messages that propose to rescind dollar amounts of discretionary budget authority, items of direct spending, and targeted tax benefits.</p> <p>Requires an analysis by: (1) the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) of an estimated savings in budget authority or outlays resulting from any such rescission; and (2) the Joint Committee on Taxation of an estimated savings resulting from repeal of targeted tax benefits.</p> <p>Requires any rescinded budget authority, items of direct spending, or targeted tax benefit to be dedicated only to deficit reduction, and not to be used as an offset for other spending increases or revenue reductions.</p> <p>Provides for adjustment of: (1) committee allocations resulting from such rescission; and (2) applicable limits, as appropriate, under this Act.</p> <p>Sets forth procedures for expedited congressional consideration of a proposed rescission.</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc1"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 3/19/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc2"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc3"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 46005@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 06 May 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_640.html?rev=42426 <p>S. 640 would provide Congress a second look at wasteful spending by establishing enhanced rescission authority under fast-track procedures.</p> <h2 id="toc4"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc5"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc6"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc7"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 42426@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_640.html?rev=42427 <p>S. 640 would provide Congress a second look at wasteful spending by establishing enhanced rescission authority under fast-track procedures.</p> <h2 id="toc8"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc9"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 3/19/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc10"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc11"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 42427@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_640.html 3/19/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget. 44992@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 19 Mar 2009 00:00:00 EDT