Pete Domenici: “Since I was part of the history of this, I wanted to recall it and let everybody know what we are debating here. Again…”

“Since I was part of the history of this, I wanted to recall it and let everybody know what we are debating here. Again, this point of order was established in the 2000 budget resolution, and then it was made permanent in the 2001 budget resolution. It was designed to specifically address what was said over and over at that point to be a misuse of the ``emergency'' designation that had become a popular mechanism for getting around the spending limits established in both law and in our budget resolution. So in the 2001 budget resolution, we established a very clear set of priorities designating domestic spending as an ``emergency.'' All those criteria had to be met to allow the spending or tax cuts to be placed outside the budget blueprint. Again, let me read those criteria because that is what we are debating. They were the following five criteria that had to be met: one, the provision must be necessary, essential, and vital; two, the provision must come about suddenly and quickly; three, the provision must be urgent, pressing, and compelling; four, the provision must have been unforeseen, unanticipated, unpredictable; and five, the provision must not be permanent.”