The difference is the old version of pay-go applied it as a backstop to a budget resolution. So if a proposal spent more than the budget permitted and added to the deficit, a pay-go point of order was possible. Likewise, if a proposal to cut taxes more than the amount of the revenue the budget assumed would come in, pay-go would apply. This year Congress is struggling because a rigid notion of pay-go has hamstrung the committees--meaning every committee of the Congress that processes revenue or spending policies. The rubber has hit the road with pay-go here, more so at the end of the session than throughout the rest of 2007, and it has been a somewhat bumpy road for all of us. Of course, I think this road is even going to get bumpier as time goes on between now and Christmas.
Chuck Grassley: “The difference is the old version of pay-go applied it as a backstop to a budget resolution. So if a proposal spent more…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of the pay-go policy on Congress during a debate on the farm bill.
Share
More from Chuck Grassley
I think that we learned through the thousands of pages that I’ve released to the public that Jack Smith was a tool of the Biden administration to put Trump in prison.
Contrary to your misguided statement, the major embarrassment of the hearing was Democrats falling over themselves defending unlawful and unconstitutional actions by Jack Smith.
Jack Smith should apologize for taking the bank records of 42 Iowans & 4,782 Americans.
For the simple reason that the alternative, of a Democrat from Iowa in the United States Senate, is for Chuck Schumer to lead the United States Senate, and you know how disastrous that would be.





