Constitutional Amendment of the Public Expenditure Cap

Constitutional Amendment no. 95
National Congress of Brazil
Citation	PEC 241/2016
Territorial extent	Whole of Brazil
Passed by	Chamber of Deputies
Passed	25 October 2016
Passed by	Federal Senate
Passed	13 December 2016
Signed by	Senate President Renan Calheiros Chamber President Rodrigo Maia
Signed	15 December 2016
Effective	15 December 2016
Legislative history
First chamber: Chamber of Deputies
Bill title	Constitutional Amendment Bill no. 241 of 2016
Bill citation	PEC 241/2016
Introduced by	Executive Branch
Introduced	15 June 2016
First reading	15 June 2016
Second reading	6 October 2016
Voting summary	23 voted for 7 voted against
Third reading	25 October 2016
Voting summary	359 voted for 116 voted against 2 abstained 35 absent 1 present not voting
Second chamber: Federal Senate
Bill title	Constitutional Amendment Bill no. 55 of 2016
Bill citation	PEC 55/2016
Received from the Chamber of Deputies	26 October 2016
First reading	26 October 2016
Second reading	9 November 2016
Voting summary	61 voted for 14 voted against 5 absent 1 present not voting
Third reading	13 December 2016
Voting summary	53 voted for 16 voted against 11 absent 1 present not voting
Status: In force

Constitutional Amendment (Emenda Constitucional - EC) No. 95, also known as the Constitutional Amendment of the Public Expenditure Cap, changed the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 to institute the New Fiscal Regime or New Fiscal Framework ^[1] with failures. ^{[2] [3] [4]} It imposed a limit on the growth of the Brazilian government's expenses for 20 years, extending to all three branches of the government, in addition to the Public Prosecutor's Office and the Public Defender's Office. During the legislative process, the Constitutional Amendment Bill (Proposta de Emenda à Constituição - PEC) received several names: "PEC of Expenditure Cap", "PEC 241" in the Chamber of Deputies and "PEC 55" in the Federal Senate. Its opponents coined the epithet "PEC of Death". ^[5]

Public spending and investments were limited to the same amounts spent in the previous year, adjusted for inflation ^{[6] [7]} measured by the national Consumer Price Index (Índice Nacional de Preços ao Consumidor Amplo - IPCA). This was a proposed amendment to the Transitional Constitutional Provisions Act (Ato das Disposições Constitucionais Transitórias - ADCT), with validity set for the next 20 years, and from the tenth year on the President of the Republic may change this correction of public spending through a Supplementary Law. In the year 2017, there were no changes in the areas of Health and Education. ^[8] Both areas had a mandatory minimum spending limit corresponding to a percentage of the Union's Net Current Revenue (Receita Corrente Líquida - RCL) determined by the Federal Constitution. From 2018, the floors began to be adjusted by the value of the previous year adjusted by the IPCA between July of the previous year and June of the current year. ^{[9] [10] [11]} Critics of the measure claimed that the constitutional floors would fall over time if the revenue starts to grow more than inflation in the coming years. ^[12]

Context

Main article: 2014 Brazilian economic crisis

The PEC was presented in the context of the 2014 crisis. Its goal was to prevent the growth of the public debt/GDP ratio by containing public spending.

It was presented in the year 2016, the third consecutive year of primary deficit. In 2014, there was a deficit of 17.24 billion reais; in 2015, a fiscal deficit of 114.98 billion reais; and in 2016, a record deficit of 154 billion reais. ^[13] Even considering the PEC in effect, the estimate for 2017 was a deficit of 139 billion reais. ^{[14] [15]} The primary surplus has remained stable with 2.3% in the FHC government, 3.7% in the Lula government, and 3.7% in the Dilma government, despite the increase in debt. ^[16] Health received, before the approval of the PEC, 18% of the minimum annual tax revenue, being an area with little political lobbying. ^[17]

The then Minister of Finance, Henrique Meirelles, said that the public spending cap rule would ensure a major containment of spending increases. Since 1991, government spending has grown at rates above the average GDP. Federal public spending jumped from about 10.8% of GDP in 1991 to 19.5% in 2015. ^[18] This percentage was forecast to reach 20% in 2016. ^[14] Still according to Meirelles, without a social security reform, between 2016 and 2060, National Institute of Social Security ( Instituto Nacional do Seguro Social - INSS) spending would increase from 8 to 17.2% of GDP. ^[18] Before the approval of the PEC, the Temer government readjusted by up to 41.4% the remuneration of the civil servants of the Brazilian federal judiciary, who had been working for 10 years without inflationary replacement in their remuneration, noting that the last adjustment granted to this category had been the subject of Law No. 11.416 of the year 2006. This adjustment was divided into 6 installments ^[19] and up to 20.25% of the remuneration of the employees of the Chamber of Deputies. ^[20]

Legislative procedures

The PEC was processed in the Chamber of Deputies as PEC 241 ^[21] and, in the Federal Senate, as PEC 55. ^[22]

On October 10, 2016, it was approved in the first round in the Chamber of Deputies by 366 votes in favor, 111 against, and two abstentions. ^{[23] [24] [25]} On October 25, 2016, it was approved in the second round by 359 votes in favor, 116 against, and two abstentions. ^[26]

On November 29, 2016, it passed in a first round in the Senate by 61 votes to 14. ^[27] On December 13, 2016, it passed in a second round in the Senate by 53 votes to 16. ^{[28] [29]}

On December 15, 2016, the PEC was promulgated in the Brazilian National Congress. With the enactment, the PEC became part of the legal system as Constitutional Amendment No. 95. ^{[30] [31]}

The text of the PEC established that if the cap is exceeded, triggers could be activated to contain: mandatory spending - such as public servants' salary freezing; adjustment of the minimum wage above inflation; creation or increase of aids, advantages, bonuses, allowances, representation funds or benefits of any kind in favor of public servants or military; other increases in mandatory expenditures. In the original wording, the President of the Republic could send Congress a budget above the ceiling, and this would activate the triggers. However, the National Congress changed the text, forcing the government to send an Annual Appropriation Bill (Projeto de Lei Orçamentária Anual - PLOA) that does not exceed the ceiling, which makes it impossible to activate the triggers, because the branch or agencies could progressively reduce their non-mandatory expenses to accommodate the increase in mandatory spending, that is, until it eliminates the space for investments and costing, which would result, if the ceiling is not changed or extinguished, in the paralysis of the activity of the branch or agency, a situation that economists call shutdown. ^{[32] [33] [34]}

Modifications

Knowing that the measures to contain spending can be triggered, the government presented the "Emergency PEC", which activates the triggers in case the mandatory expenses exceed 95% of total primary expenses. The "Emergency PEC" was enacted in March 2021. ^[35] However, according to the Independent Fiscal Institution (a Senate agency), this percentage should only be reached in 2025, when the spending cap cannot be met. The activation of the triggers when the ratio between mandatory spending and total primary expenditure reaches this percentage is insufficient to prevent non-compliance with the spending cap. Moreover, it will not be able to prevent the cutting of discretionary (non-mandatory) spending that impairs the functioning of the administration and public services. ^{[36] [37]}

In December 2021, the National Congress enacted Constitutional Amendment No. 113, which changed the rule for updating the spending cap. With this, the ceiling was adjusted for inflation from January to December, which opened a space of 65 billion for the 2022 budget. The text of the amendment came from the "PEC of Precatórios", which would also institute a new regime for the payment of precatórios (court-ordered government debt), limiting the amounts to be disbursed annually. However, the parts referring to the judicial debts were questioned and returned to the Chamber of Deputies to be submitted for new analysis. ^[38]

Popular demonstrations

The Expenditure Cap Amendment has divided opinions and generated controversy among experts and activists linked to social movements. ^[39]

Favorable opinions

Antônio Delfim Netto, former Minister of Finance, said that the PEC represented a "sign of an anticipation of society's hope". ^[40] Still in Delfim's view, if something very close to the PEC 241 were not approved, Brazilian society would pay a high price. ^[40]

In the opinion of economist Ricardo Amorim, the PEC 241 and the welfare reform were important to reverse the economic crisis of 2014. For the specialist, it was essential to approve a reform that limits public spending and unify social security in a single system, so that the onerous privileges of the public sector are reduced. According to Ricardo, if then-President Michel Temer did not have the courage to implement the PEC, Dilma Rousseff's impeachment process would be a pyrrhic victory. ^[41]

For the former director of the Central Bank, Alexandre Schwartsman, one of the positive points of the amendment is to force a discussion among governors about the breakdown of spending. "It makes it mandatory to have a discussion about where to cut from here on out, and I believe there is no doubt that Social Security should be the priority," Schwartsman said. ^[42]

Marcos Mendes, one of the formulators of the proposal and former head of the special advisory office of the Ministry of Finance, said it was essential to rebuild budget realism by balancing revenues and expenses. In a public hearing in the Federal Senate, he argued that over the past few years, revenues have been systematically overestimated and expenses increased, which is why there have been billion-dollar spending contingencies. And he added that, with the advent of the PEC, the budget limits would be respected. ^[43]

For the former secretary of Economic Policy of the Ministry of Finance Marcos Lisboa, the PEC 241, although insufficient to get the country out of the crisis, was an indispensable starting point on the path towards balance in public accounts. ^[44]

In Edmar Bacha's opinion, the long duration of the PEC would have a great effect on future expectations about the country, generating positive results in the short term. "What the PEC does is create favorable expectations about the rebalancing of public accounts. This movement will greatly influence the decision to lower interest rates in Brazil", Bacha said. ^[39]

In a news article published by G1, most analysts consulted on the topic agreed that rejection of the proposal would worsen the economic scenario. ^[42]

Opposing opinions

Critics said the measure would be a threat to the National Education Plan. ^[45] Researchers at Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz) said that by 2036, health care will lose from 400 billion reais to more than 430 billion reais; and these researchers said that if the PT had been able to approve a spending freeze of this nature in 2003, health care would have lost about 135 billion reais. ^[46] The PEC would overload the courts and overburden public services in states and municipalities ^[47] and the Temer government was already thinking of passing another law to prevent lawsuits against the scrapping of health care. ^[48] A survey by the Budget and Financial Inspection Consultancy stated that education would lose 24 billion reais per year with the measure. ^{[49] [50]} and the Temer government was already thinking of passing another law to prevent lawsuits against the scrapping of health care. ^[51] A survey by the Budget and Financial Inspection Consultancy stated that education would lose 24 billion reais per year with the measure. ^[52]

In an act contested by opponents of the PEC, President Michel Temer prepared a dinner where between 50.9 thousand and 56.6 thousand reais were spent to invite people from the STF, the Chamber of Deputies, and the Federal Senate to diminish resistance to the measure ^[53] and stated that no social movement could participate in this debate. ^[54]

On October 7, 2016, the Public Prosecutor's Office issued an opinion stating that PEC 241 would be unconstitutional because it affronted the independence of the three branches. ^[55]

In the same month, economists published a study called "Austeridade e Retrocesso" (Austerity and Retrogression), in which they criticized PEC 241. ^{[56] [57]}

On December 9, 2016, Philip Alson, Rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), stated that the "PEC of Expediture Cap", would have a severe impact on the poorest and recommended a "proper public debate" on the PEC. ^[58]

In 2016, the physician and scientist Drauzio Varella spoke out against the approval of the measure stating that the measure would harm the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS). ^[59] The Brazilian Society of Political Economy stated in a note that the PEC would worsen the economic situation of the country, expanding the inequality of access to opportunities to the poorest population. ^{[56] [60]} The rector of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - UFRJ) also questioned the legal support of the PEC, stating that it was a violation of the Constitution. ^[61]

According to economist Paulo Kliass, the cut would favor the private sector that would control the ones who have access to basic services. ^[62]

The Federal Council of Economics (Conselho Federal de Economia - COFECON) released a note criticizing the PEC in October. ^[63] According to the council, the way it was discussed, the adjustment would fall on the neediest layers of society. The note also pointed out that public investments were derisory, less than 1% of GDP, and recalled the high expenses with interest on the public debt, which corresponded for about 9% of GDP per year. ^[64]

For Mauro Benevides Filho, the measure did not impose an effective control on expenses, since spendings on personnel and Social Security continued to grow, resulting in cuts in public investment. ^[65]

Among the critics of the proposal, economists Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira, ^{[66] [67]} Luiz Gonzaga Belluzzo, ^{[68] [69]} Maria da Conceição Tavares ^[70] and Leda Maria Paulani opinions deserve mention. ^[71]

Intersyndicate Department of Statistics and Socioeconomic Studies (Departamento Intersindical de Estatística e Estudos Socioeconômicos - DIEESE) released a technical note criticizing the proposal. According to the note, the population would be affected by a likely reduction in public services in the areas of health and education. ^[72]

In the Federal Senate, the PEC No. 54 of 2019 is being processed to repeal the EC No. 95. The Project had a popular origin, from a suggestion registered by a citizen of the Federal District in the e-Cidadania Portal. ^{[73] [74]}

Fiocruz stated that population expansion and the need to replace public health equipment would cause the population to turn to the private sector. ^{[46] [75]} The Brazilian Association of Health Economics released a note with other professionals in the field and institutions condemning the PEC ^{[76] [77]} and the National Health Council released a similar note. ^[78] The author of the research on the PEC resigned from her position at the Institute of Applied Economic Research (Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA) due to pressure from the organization upon criticism of the PEC in a research sponsored by the institution itself. ^{[79] [80]}

For former Finance Minister Nelson Barbosa, "the Temer government ceiling was poorly designed to meet its own objectives". According to him, the mechanisms that prohibit the creation of mandatory expenses in case of non-compliance with the ceiling are hardly triggered, due to a "manufacturing defect" in the PEC, and even if, in practice, most of these triggers were already in place, they'd have little effect on reducing spendings in situations of fiscal crisis. ^[81]

Protests against the PEC

Main article: 2016 student protests in Brazil

The first educational institution to be occupied was the Federal Institute of Rio Grande do Norte (Instituto Federal do Rio Grande do Norte - IFRN) in October, spreading to most Federal Centers for Technological Education (CentrosFederais de Educação Tecnológica - CEFET) in the country and other secondary education institutions, among the locations are Minas Gerais, Paraná, São Paulo where it gathered at least 10 thousand people, ^[82] Rio Grande do Norte, Goiás, Rio de Janeiro, Ceará, Rio Grande do Sul, Mato Grosso, Espírito Santo, and Bahia. ^[83] Five thousand people protested against the PEC in Curitiba in October, among them high school students. ^[84] Initially, the protests were against the Nonpartisan School (Escola sem Partido) project, the Temer government, the Alckmin government, and the Dilma government, ^[85] but they began to grow bigger. ^{[83] [84]}

In Ceará, the movement was supported by the Professors' Association of the Federal University of Ceará (Associação dos Docentes da Universidade Federal do Ceará - ADUFC), the Servers Union of the Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Ceará (Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Ceará - IFCE), the Professors Union of the Ceará State University (Universidade Estadual do Ceará - UECE), the Professors Union of the University for International Integration of the Afro-Brazilian Lusophony (Universidade da Integração Internacional da Lusofonia Afro-Brasileira - Unilab), the Workers Union of the Federal University of Ceará (Universidade Federal do Ceará - UFC), the Coletivo Graúna (of UFC professors) among other smaller organizations. ^[86] As a result of the protests, more than a thousand schools and almost 171 universities^{[ citation needed ]} were occupied around the country by the end of October in 21 states of the country. In November it reached 172 occupied universities ^[87] and the Episcopal Conference of Brazil (Conferência Nacional dos Bispos do Brasil - CNBB) released a note in October 2016 stating that the PEC was unjust and selective. ^[88] In November a self-convoked strike began at the Federal University of Santa Maria (Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - UFSM), Federal University of Minas Gerais (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG), among others. ^{[89] [90] [91] [92] [93]} There were also demonstrations in Brasilia during the voting of the PEC. In December of the same year, the occupation of the Federal University of Western Pará (Universidade Federal do Oeste do Pará - UFOPA) took place, executed mainly by indigenous and quilombola students. ^[94]

See also

• Politics portal
• Brazil portal
• Law portal

• Brazil labor reform (2017)
• Outsourcing law in Brazil

References

1. "Instituto de Economia - Unicamp - Quatro tetos e um funeral: o novo arcabouço/regra fiscal e o projeto social-liberal do ministro Haddad". www.eco.unicamp.br. Retrieved 2023-06-13.
2. Fiscal Rules at a Glance - Background Paper P.15.
3. "Novo Regime Fiscal". Ministério da Fazenda (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on October 10, 2016. Retrieved April 13, 2023.
4. "Teto dos gastos públicos cria condições para o Brasil crescer". Ministério da Fazenda (in Portuguese). June 15, 2016. Archived from the original on November 15, 2017. Retrieved November 15, 2017.
5. Fabiana, Reinholz (October 3, 2018). "Emenda 95, o enfraquecimento do pacto social". Brasil de Fato (in Portuguese). Retrieved March 17, 2020.
6. "O que é o teto de gastos, que o governo planeja furar?". Uol Economia (in Portuguese). October 24, 2021. Retrieved October 24, 2021.
7. Boris, Herrmann (November 11, 2016). "Schüler an die Macht". Süddeutsche Zeitung (in German). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
8. "Teto de gastos: O gradual ajuste para o crescimento do país". Ministério da Fazenda (in Portuguese). December 2018. Archived from the original on December 30, 2019. Retrieved June 16, 2020.
9. "PEC 241: tire dúvidas sobre a proposta que limita gastos públicos". G1 (in Portuguese). October 11, 2016. Retrieved November 2, 2016.
10. Fernanda, Calgaro (October 4, 2016). "Relatório da PEC dos gastos eleva piso para a saúde em 2017". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
11. "Promulgada Emenda Constitucional do Teto de Gastos Públicos". Senado Federal (in Portuguese). December 15, 2016. Retrieved January 13, 2022.
12. "PEC do teto protege gastos com saúde e educação, diz Tesouro". Exame (in Portuguese). October 27, 2016. Retrieved April 13, 2023.
13. "Governo fecha 2016 com déficit primário histórico de R$ 154,2 bilhões". Estadão (in Portuguese). January 30, 2017. Retrieved June 1, 2020.
14. "PEC 241 - um teto para os gastos públicos". G1 (in Portuguese). October 23, 2016. Retrieved November 11, 2016.
15. Taiar, Estevão (September 30, 2016). "Sem PEC dos gastos, dívida chegará a 100% do PIB em 2024, estima Temer". Valor Econômico (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 11, 2016.
16. "Evolução Recente da Carga Tributária Federal". Ministério do Planejamento, Orçamento e Gestão (in Portuguese). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 9, 2015. Retrieved April 13, 2023.
17. Bedinelli, Talita (October 18, 2016). "PEC 241: o que vai mudar na saúde dos brasileiros". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
18. Meirelles, Henrique (August 12, 2016). "O Desafio do Ajuste Fiscal Estrutural" (PDF). Ministério da Fazenda (in Portuguese). Archived from the original (PDF) on November 12, 2016. Retrieved November 11, 2016.
19. "Temer sanciona reajuste salarial de 41% para Judiciário e de 12% para MPF". Consultor Jurídico (in Portuguese). July 20, 2016. Retrieved April 13, 2023.
20. Gonçalves, Carolina (July 29, 2016). "Temer sanciona reajuste de salário de servidores da Câmara". Agência Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
21. Garcia, Gustavo (October 26, 2016). "Aprovada na Câmara, PEC 241 passa a tramitar no Senado como PEC 55". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
22. "Proposta de Emenda à Constituição nº 55 de 2016". Senado Federal (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
23. "PEC 241 aprovada em 1º turno: como votaram os deputados". CartaCapital (in Portuguese). October 10, 2016. Archived from the original on September 13, 2017. Retrieved November 12, 2016.
24. Benites, Afonso (October 11, 2016). "PEC 241, que limita gasto público, passa por teste crucial na Câmara". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 12, 2016.
25. "Câmara aprova em 1º turno congelamento de gastos federais por 20 anos". Uol Notícias (in Portuguese). October 10, 2016. Retrieved November 26, 2016.
26. "Saiba como votou cada deputado no segundo turno da PEC 241". G1 (in Portuguese). October 25, 2016. Retrieved November 12, 2016.
27. Garcia, Gustavo (November 29, 2016). "Senado conclui votação em 1º turno da PEC do teto de gastos". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 29, 2016.
28. Garcia, Gustavo; Caram, Bernardo (December 13, 2016). "PEC do teto de gastos é aprovada em 2º turno no Senado e será promulgada". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
29. "Como a PEC do Teto aprovada no Congresso pode afetar sua vida". Uol Notícias (in Portuguese). December 13, 2016. Retrieved December 13, 2016.
30. "PEC do teto de gastos é promulgada no Congresso". G1 (in Portuguese). December 15, 2016. Retrieved December 19, 2016.
31. Constitutional Amendmend 95 (in Portuguese). 55th Legislature of the National Congress. December 15, 2016.
32. "Governo muda teto para acionar gatilhos". Valor Econômico (in Portuguese). November 7, 2019. Retrieved December 21, 2019.
33. Oliveira, Ribamar (July 29, 2020). "Problema de redação impede acionamento de gatilhos do teto de gastos". Folha de Pernambuco (in Portuguese). Retrieved September 25, 2020.
34. Londres, Mariana (August 19, 2020). "O que são os gatilhos do teto e por que discussão é crucial". R7 (in Portuguese). Retrieved August 23, 2021.
35. "Congresso promulga emenda constitucional que garante volta do auxílio emergencial". Câmara dos Deputados (in Portuguese). March 15, 2021. Retrieved January 13, 2022.
36. Máximo, Wellton (March 22, 2021). "IFI: PEC Emergencial tem pouco efeito para controlar gastos públicos". Agência Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
37. Oliveira, Ribamar (March 18, 2021). "O enigma do novo gatilho de 95%". Valor Econômico (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 13, 2023.
38. "Promulgada Emenda que muda correção do teto de gastos; precatórios vão à Câmara". Senado Federal (in Portuguese). December 8, 2021. Retrieved January 13, 2022.
39. Mendonça, Heloísa (November 29, 2016). "Existem alternativas à PEC do Teto dos Gastos?". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved January 13, 2022.
40. "Aprovar a PEC 241 é urgente". Folha de S.Paulo (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 11, 2016.
41. Amorim, Ricardo (September 16, 2016). "A hora da verdade de Michel Temer". IstoÉ (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 11, 2016.
42. Alvarenga, Darlan (October 11, 2016). "PEC 241 é essencial, mas sozinha não garante ajuste, dizem analistas". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 11, 2016.
43. "PEC dos gastos reconstrói realismo orçamentário, diz assessor econômico da Fazenda". Ministério da Fazenda (in Portuguese). November 8, 2016. Archived from the original on November 15, 2016. Retrieved April 13, 2023.
44. "PEC do teto de gasto é indispensável, mas insuficiente para sairmos da crise". Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa (in Portuguese). October 20, 2016. Retrieved April 13, 2023.
45. Bedinelli, Talita (October 14, 2016). "PEC 241: especialistas veem ameaça ao Plano Nacional de Educação". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 26, 2016.
46. Vieira, Fabiola Sulpino; Sá e Benevides, Rodrigo Pucci de (2016). Os impactos do Novo Regime Fiscal para o financiamento do Sistema Único de Saúde e para a efetivação do direito à saúde no Brasil (PDF) (in Portuguese). Ipea.
47. Bedinelli, Talita (June 8, 2015). "PISO DA ENFERMAGEM: R$ 7 BILHÕES DE LEI DO GOVERNO NÃO COBREM OS GASTOS". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 26, 2016.
48. Bedinelli, Talita (July 24, 2016). "Governo atua para inibir ações a favor de pacientes do SUS e planos de saúde na Justiça". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
49. Tokarnia, Mariana (October 14, 2016). "Estudo prevê perda de R$ 24 bi anuais para educação com PEC 241; MEC contesta". Agência Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
50. Bedinelli, Talita (June 8, 2015). "Ajuste fiscal inibe investimentos na já sobrecarregada área de saúde". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 26, 2016.
51. Bedinelli, Talita (July 24, 2016). "Governo atua para inibir ações a favor de pacientes do SUS e planos de saúde na Justiça". El País (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
52. Tokarnia, Mariana (October 14, 2016). "Estudo prevê perda de R$ 24 bi anuais para educação com PEC 241; MEC contesta". Agência Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
53. Ribeiro, Marcelo (October 11, 2016). "Por PEC 241, jantar de Temer custou ao menos R$ 50 mil". Exame (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
54. Garcia, Gustavo (October 9, 2016). "Movimento corporativo contra PEC 'não pode ser admitido', diz Temer". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
55. Matoso, Filipe (October 7, 2016). "PGR diz em parecer que PEC do teto de gastos é inconstitucional". G1 (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 3, 2016.
56. "Economistas lançam documento com críticas à PEC dos gastos públicos". Valor Econômico (in Portuguese). October 10, 2016. Retrieved November 3, 2016.
57. "Documento desconstrói a PEC 241 e o discurso da austeridade". Brasil Debate (in Portuguese). October 21, 2016. Archived from the original on November 4, 2016. Retrieved November 3, 2016.
58. Tokarnia, Mariana (December 9, 2016). "Relator da ONU diz que PEC do Teto terá impacto "severo" nos mais pobres". Agência Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved December 9, 2016.
59. "Em vídeo, Drauzio Varella se posiciona contra a PEC dos gastos". Revista Fórum (in Portuguese). October 10, 2016. Archived from the original on November 6, 2016. Retrieved October 10, 2016.
60. Austeridade e retrocesso - finanças públicas e política fiscal no Brasil (PDF) (in Portuguese). Autonomia Literária. 2016. ISBN   9788599138878.
61. Guimarães, Cátia (July 5, 2016). "'Não é só uma lógica econômica, é um horizonte para a formação humana no Brasil'". Escola Politécnica de Saúde Joaquim Venâncio - EPSJV (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 14, 2023.
62. Kliass, Paulo (October 26, 2016). "A PEC 241 e a privatização". Carta Maior (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 2016-10-31. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
63. "COFECON diz não à PEC 241". Conselho Federal de Economia – COFECON (in Portuguese). 10 October 2016. Archived from the original on November 1, 2016. Retrieved November 1, 2016.
64. "Para Conselho Federal de Economia, PEC do teto de gastos amplia desigualdades". Época Negócios (in Portuguese). October 25, 2016. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
65. "'Teto dos gastos não está controlando despesas', diz Benevides, assessor de Ciro". Jornal Estado de Minas (in Portuguese). September 18, 2018. Retrieved January 13, 2022.
66. "Bresser-Pereira: Regra fiscal prevista pela PEC do gasto é 'absurda'". Valor Econômico (in Portuguese). 12 September 2016.
67. Máximo, Luciano; Lamucci, Sergio (September 12, 2016). "Bresser-Pereira: Regra fiscal prevista pela PEC do gasto é 'absurda'". Jornal do Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved September 21, 2017.
68. Bresser-Pereira, Luiz Carlos (September 16, 2016). "Bresser-Pereira: cortes atingem saúde e educação, mas não os Três Poderes". Folha de S.Paulo (in Portuguese). Retrieved September 21, 2017.
69. Bsatos, Pedro Paulo Zahlut; Belluzzi, Luiz Gonzaga (October 9, 2016). "Uma crítica aos pressupostos do ajuste econômico". Instituto Humanitas Unisinos - IHU (in Portuguese). Retrieved November 3, 2016.
70. ""Essa "PEC do Fim do Mundo" é uma insensatez. É uma coisa de hospício", afirma economista". Jornal do Brasil (in Portuguese). January 11, 2017. Retrieved April 14, 2023.
71. Belluzzo, Luiz Gonzaga de Mello; Bastos, Pedro Paulo Zahluth (2015). Austeridade para quem? - Balanço e perspectivas do governo Dilma Rousseff (PDF) (in Portuguese). São Paulo: Carta Maior. ISBN   9788599138793. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-04-14.
72. "DIEESE lança Nota Técnica sobre a PEC 241, do teto dos gastos públicos". Sindicato dos Metalúrgicos da Grande Curitiba - SMC (in Portuguese). October 10, 2016. Retrieved June 1, 2020.
73. "Proposta de Emenda à Constituição n° 54, de 2019". Senado Federal (in Portuguese). Retrieved October 15, 2019.
74. "Revogação imediata da EC-95 que congela os investimentos públicos por 20 anos". Senado Federal (in Portuguese). Retrieved October 15, 2019.
75. Júnia, Raquel (September 22, 2016). "PEC 241 ou o fim do SUS e da escola pública". Escola Politécnica de Saúde Joaquim Venâncio - EPSJV (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
76. "SUS perderá com aprovação da PEC 241 -Nota de Desagravo Público". Associação Brasileira de Economia da Saúde - ABrES (in Portuguese). October 14, 2016. Archived from the original on November 1, 2016. Retrieved October 31, 2016.
77. "Entidades assinam Nota de Desagravo". Associação Brasileira de Economia da Saúde - ABrES (in Portuguese). October 18, 2016. Archived from the original on November 1, 2016. Retrieved October 31, 2016.
78. Claudino, Viviane (October 7, 2016). "PEC 241 pode representar perda de R$ 434 bilhões ao SUS, avalia CNS". Conselho Nacional de Saúde - CNS (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
79. Senra, Ricardo (October 13, 2016). "Alvo de críticas internas, autora de artigo contra PEC dos gastos deixa Ipea". BBC News Brasil (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
80. Canale, Felippe (October 14, 2016). "Autora de artigo contra PEC 241 sofre censura e deixa cargo". Catraca Livre (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
81. Barbosa, Nelson (September 22, 2020). "Dez gatilhos e quase nenhuma munição". Blog do IBRE (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
82. Burzywoda, Laura (October 20, 2016). "Geplante Haushaltsbremse sorgt für erneute Proteste in Brasilien". amerika21 (in German). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
83. "Secundaristas: a potência das novas ocupações". Outras Palavras (in Portuguese). October 9, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
84. Ghisi, Ednubia; Carrano, Pedro (October 9, 2016). "Primavera secundarista leva 5 mil manifestantes às ruas de Curitiba". Brasil de Fato (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
85. "Anhaltender Protest von Schülern und Studenten". Entwicklungspolitik Online (in German). November 11, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
86. "Manifestantes voltam a protestar contra a PEC 241 em Fortaleza". G1 (in Portuguese). October 25, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
87. "Governo Temer enfrenta 172 universidades e mais de mil escolas ocupadas em todo o Brasil". Carta Campinas (in Portuguese). November 8, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
88. "CNBB lança nota afirmando que PEC 241 é "injusta e seletiva"". Brasil de Fato (in Portuguese). October 27, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
89. "Contra PEC 55 e reformas de Temer, estudantes ocupam prédios da UFSM". Instituto Humanitas Unisinos - IHU (in Portuguese). November 11, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
90. "Centrais sindicais realizam série de protestos em BH nesta sexta". O Tempo (in Portuguese). November 11, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
91. "Grupos protestam em 18 estados e no DF contra a PEC que limita gastos". G1 (in Portuguese). November 11, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
92. Xavier, Vitor Hugo (June 5, 2007). "Acompanhe o quadro da greve nacional das Universidades Federais". ASSUFRGS (in Portuguese). Retrieved April 17, 2023.
93. "Estudantes da UFSM decidem por greve e por manter ocupações". Diário de Santa Maria (in Portuguese). November 11, 2016. Archived from the original on November 15, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.
94. Almeida, Rogério (December 5, 2016). "Contra a PEC 55, povos ancestrais ocupam universidade na Amazônia". Carta Maior (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on December 20, 2016. Retrieved April 17, 2023.

Bibliography

• Nunes Filho, Pertrônio Portella (2016). A PEC do Teto dos Gastos Públicos é Necessária? - Estudo do Endividamento Federal após o Plano Real (in Portuguese). Brasília: Senado Federal. ISSN   1983-0645.

External links

• PEC No. 241/2016 at the Chamber of Deputies
• PEC No. 55/2016 at the Federal Senate