The motion to instruct does four very important things: It asks the House to agree to the Senate discretionary levels as set by an amendment offered by Senator Domenici in the Senate and agreed to by a 3-to-1 vote in the Senate. This is to insure that we do not head to another Government shutdown in a long, dragged-out fight over appropriation bills. It is also about making sure that we adequately fund our programs for education, environmental and safety protection, research and development, and vital programs such as in agriculture. We also instruct the House to agree to three Senate sense of the Senate or sense of the Congress resolutions. Budget resolutions are about numbers, but it is ultimately also about policy. The Senate, through a sense of Congress, said that we should not be making changes in laws as they relate to spousal impoverishment and nursing home standards in Medicaid. I can think of no more fundamental policy that we should sustain in the Congress than those two basic priorities as we make modifications in Medicare, in Medicaid. And we also say, and accept, a resolution from the Senate saying, that when we deal with changes in Medicare, we should not change the protections for seniors as it relates to balanced billing.
Martin Sabo: “The motion to instruct does four very important things: It asks the House to agree to the Senate discretionary levels as…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a motion to instruct regarding budget resolutions and protections for seniors in Medicare and Medicaid.
Share
More from Martin Sabo
Yes, I do. The CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
our amendment increases the funding for the fire grant program by $50 million, $25 million for the SAFER program, and $25 million for the regular grant program. With the $25 million added to the SAFER program, it would be funded at $75…
in the supplemental bill that we just passed, there was $36 million that had been appropriated for the northern border which the Department was not spending, and with the cooperation of the chairman, we inserted specific language telling…
I have read the chemical bill language, and I do not understand whether that language preempts the ability of a State to adopt more stringent requirements than the Federal standards.





