Marlin Stutzman (R-IN)
Emergency Spending Accountability Act
A Republican bill with 8 Republican cosponsors · See all 8 cosponsors
Last activity — Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2661)
Introduced, nothing more yet
Formally proposed, and not yet handed to a committee.
Nearly every bill is sent to a committee within days. Introduction alone is not a sign of support, of momentum, or of any likelihood of passing — any member may introduce any bill.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
What this bill would do
The Emergency Spending Accountability Act requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to offset emergency spending through sequestration. This process involves reducing total budgetary resources to equal one-fifth of the total emergency spending amount. The sequestration applies to either discretionary or direct spending accounts depending on the nature of the spending. Certain programs, such as Social Security, National Defense, and Veterans Affairs, are exempt from these reductions. Additionally, the bill requires detailed justifications for any measures that include emergency spending.
Yes· 3 of 11
- Scored +7
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
By requiring offsets and detailed justifications, the bill enforces stricter fiscal discipline regarding emergency spending.
- Scored +6
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The mandate for sequestration specifically seeks to reduce total budgetary resources by one-fifth of emergency spending levels.
- Scored +6
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill increases transparency by requiring detailed justifications for emergency spending in congressional reports.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster?
The bill could negatively impact disaster relief if such spending is categorized as emergency spending and not explicitly exempted.
- Scored -3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Non-exempt social programs could face budget reductions, potentially impacting low-income households.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Accountability for Spending: The bill requires a detailed justification for why emergency spending is necessary, including why it meets the definitions of "emergency" and "unanticipated" (Section 2, subsection d).
-
Protection for Essential Programs: Certain critical programs are exempt from the required budget reductions, ensuring their stability (Section 2, subsection c):
- Social Security and Railroad Retirement: Benefits payable under the old-age, survivors, and disability insurance program and the Railroad Retirement Act of 1937 are protected (Section 2, subsection c, paragraph 1).
- National Defense: Accounts within budget function 050 are exempt (Section 2, subsection c, paragraph 2).
- Veterans Affairs: All programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs are exempt (Section 2, subsection c, paragraph 3).
- Medicare: The Medicare program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act is protected from sequestration (Section 2, subsection c, paragraph 4).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Reductions in Non-Exempt Programs: The bill mandates a sequestration that reduces budgetary resources at a uniform rate across all non-exempt programs and activities (Section 2, subsection b). This could result in cuts to various discretionary or direct spending accounts that are not explicitly listed as exempt (Section 2, subsection b, paragraph 1).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — By requiring offsets and detailed justifications, the bill enforces stricter fiscal discipline regarding emergency spending. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The mandate for sequestration specifically seeks to reduce total budgetary resources by one-fifth of emergency spending levels. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill targets the reduction of total budgetary resources to offset emergency spending, which aims to curb deficit growth.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees benefit from the protection of Social Security and Medicare from budget cuts. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors are protected through the exemption of Social Security and Medicare from sequestration. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill ensures that all Department of Veterans Affairs programs are exempt from sequestration. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Non-exempt social programs could face budget reductions, potentially impacting low-income households.
- Healthcare
- Does this help veterans get medical care? — Veterans Affairs programs are exempt from the sequestration-driven budget reductions. Does this put more money into Medicare, the health coverage for people over 65? — Medicare is explicitly exempted from the sequestration cuts, protecting its funding levels.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill increases transparency by requiring detailed justifications for emergency spending in congressional reports.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — The bill could negatively impact disaster relief if such spending is categorized as emergency spending and not explicitly exempted.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — All programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs are exempt from the sequestration cuts.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this strengthen Social Security? — Social Security and Railroad Retirement benefits are explicitly exempt from the required sequestration reductions.
- 6/12/2025
- Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2661)
- 6/6/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/5/2025
- Referred to the Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 7 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Paul GosarRepublican · Arizona
Glenn GrothmanRepublican · Wisconsin
Lance GoodenRepublican · Texas
Ralph NormanRepublican · South Carolina
Scott PerryRepublican · Pennsylvania
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Jefferson ShreveRepublican · Indiana