August 16, 2021 Components and Development Kevin P. McNellis In general, congressional reports may accompany appropriations measures reported by the House Analyst on Congress and and Senate Appropriations Committees or when the House and Senate resolve differences the Legislative Process between appropriations measures. Although the language contained in these reports is not considered binding in the same manner as the statutory language of appropriations acts, report language plays an essential role in the congressional consideration of appropriations measures and also affects how federal agencies obligate the funds provided by those measures. The House and Senate Appropriations Committees have developed specific components and committee practices related to report language that differ in important ways from how other committees draft and use congressional reports. In addition, chamber rules require the inclusion of specific types of information about the contents of appropriations measures in order to facilitate their congressional consideration. This CRS report provides an overview of the key components of appropriations report language and how that language is developed by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. In current practice, appropriations report language has a number of typical components. Much of the language is devoted to a “section-by-section” analysis of each of the appropriation bill’s accounts. It also includes a lengthy set of tables that provides a “comparative statement of new budget authority” between what is provided in the bill, the prior year’s appropriation, and the amounts requested in the President’s budget. The report language also typically includes a number of directives to the agencies funded in the bill. These directives can address the form of budget justifications, other reporting guidelines and committee initiatives, “program, project, or activity” (PPA) definitions, reprogramming and other notification guidelines, and specific programmatic requests. The Congressional Budget Act also requires that House and Senate Appropriations Committee reports for regular and supplemental appropriations measures include a statement comparing levels in the measure to the applicable Section 302(b) suballocations. House and Senate rules also mandate that committee reports for general appropriations measures provide lists of appropriations not authorized by law and the disclosure of congressionally directed spending (commonly referred to as “earmarks”). In addition, the House requires that rescissions and transfers, as well as language changing existing law, be listed in committee reports accomp anying general appropriations measures. Congressional Research Service link to page 4 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 15 link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 20 link to page 25 link to page 27 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 30 link to page 31 link to page 32 link to page 7 link to page 11 link to page 14 link to page 18 link to page 20 link to page 22 link to page 24 link to page 26 link to page 28 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 33 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Appropriations Report Language Components..................................................................... 3 Overview of Accounts, Funding Allocations, and Other Directives .................................... 3 Overview of Accounts (“Section-by-Section” Summaries) .......................................... 3 Funding Allocations.............................................................................................. 3 Other Directives ................................................................................................... 5 Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority........................................................... 6 Directives Related to Budget Preparation and Budget Execution ....................................... 9 Form of Budget Justifications................................................................................. 9 Other Reporting Guidelines and Committee Initiatives ............................................. 10 “Program, Project, or Activity” Definitions ............................................................ 10 Reprogramming Guidelines ................................................................................. 12 Comparison with the Budget Resolution ..................................................................... 14 Language Changing Existing Law .............................................................................. 15 Appropriations Not Authorized by Law....................................................................... 17 Rescissions and Transfers ......................................................................................... 22 Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending (“Earmarks”) ..................................... 24 Appropriations Report Language Development.................................................................. 26 Agency, Public, and Member Input............................................................................. 26 Committee and Initial Floor Consideration .................................................................. 27 Resolving Differences .............................................................................................. 28 Continuing Resolutions ............................................................................................ 29 Figures Figure 1. Detailed Funds Allocation ................................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority ................................................... 8 Figure 3. Specification of Programs, Projects, and Activities ................................................ 11 Figure 4. Comparison with the Budget Resolution.............................................................. 15 Figure 5. Changes in the Application of Existing Laws ....................................................... 17 Figure 6. Senate List of Appropriations Not Authorized by Law ........................................... 19 Figure 7. House List of Appropriations Not Authorized by Law ........................................... 21 Figure 8. Rescissions and Transfers.................................................................................. 23 Figure 9. Disclosure of Earmarks and Congressional y Directed Spending ............................. 25 Figure 10. Statement Declaring No Earmarks or Congressional y Directed Spending Items Included in Bill or Accompanying Report .............................................................. 26 Contacts Author Information ....................................................................................................... 30 Congressional Research Service Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Introduction Since the first Congress, the congressional appropriations process has involved the annual consideration of appropriations measures to fund the activities of most federal government agencies.¹ Over the years, this agencies and departments.1 The process has evolved over time so that it currently assumes the consideration of 12 regular appropriations billsbills to provide discretionary spending for the upcoming fiscal year.²2 If some or all al of the regular appropriations measures are not enacted prior tobefore the beginning of the upcoming fiscal year (October 1), one or more continuing resolutions (CRs) might be enacted to provide temporary appropriations until either regular appropriations are enacted or the fiscal year ends. Supplemental appropriations might also be enacted during the fiscal year to provide funds in addition to those in regular appropriations acts or CRs.³

The congressional process for considering these various Congress may also consider supplemental appropriations to provide additional funds in the current fiscal year, typical y to address pressing or unanticipated funding needs.3 Congress’s consideration of these types of appropriations measures has developed in the context of institutional considerations that are both internal and external. Internalresponse to a variety of internal and external institutional considerations. The principal internal considerations include the long-standing congressional rules and practices that encourage the separation of money and policy decisions ("appropriations" and "“appropriations” and “authorizations,"” respectively), as well as; the constraints of previously agreed -upon fiscal policies and goals, such as those associated with the budget resolution;4 and the relationship between the appropriations committees and their respective parent chambers. Additional external considerations, which largely derive from the relationship between Congress and the agencies funded through the annual appropriations process, include issues such as the level of flexibility that Congress grants to agencies in budget execution. One way that the congressional appropriations process has evolved to address these internal and external considerations has been in the form and content of report language that accompanies appropriations measures.

In general, report language is used by House and Senate committeesthe degree of administrative flexibility granted to agencies and congressional oversight of agencies’ use of appropriated funds. The form and content of the committee reports that accompany appropriations measures have also evolved in response to these internal and external institutional considerations. The House and Senate Appropriations Committees primarily use report language for two broad purposes. First, report language explains the provisions of a measure to the chamber or chambers that will subsequently consider it. Second, report language may also communicate legislative intent to the agencies that will carry out the measure once it becomes law. Although report language itself is not law and therefore not bindingan appropriations measure to Representatives and Senators who wil subsequently consider the accompanying measure. Second, report language is used to communicate with the federal agencies receiving the appropriations by providing supplementary information and an explanation of the measure’s legislative intent, which often includes a range of directives to the agency. Although report language itself does not meet the bicameralism and presentment requirements of Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution—and therefore does not bind agencies in the same manner as statutory appropriations language—agencies wil usual y comply with a report’s directives. One congressional scholar observed that “manner as language in the statute, agencies usually seek to comply with any directives contained therein. As one congressional scholar has observed, "the criticisms and suggestions carried in the reports accompanying each bill bil are expected to influence the subsequent behavior of the agency. Committee reports are not the law, but it is expected that they be regarded almost as seriously."⁴ For this reason, congressional interest in the mechanics of 1 An appropriation is a type of budget authority that provides the legal authority for agencies to incur financial obligations and to make payments from the T reasury for specific purposes. For a further explanation of these terms, see U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), A Glossary of Term s Used in the Federal Budget Process, GAO-05-734SP, September 2005, pp. 20-23, 70, https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-05-734sp.pdf. 2 T he congressional budget process distinguishes between discretionary spending, which is controlled through appropriations acts, and direct (or mandatory) spending, which is controlled through permanent law. For further information on this distinction, see CRS Report R46240, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process. T he annual appropriations process is also used to provide appropriations necessary to finance certain direct spending programs that lack a funding source in the authorizing statute. Such “appropriated mandatory” or “appropriated entitlement” spending is discussed in CRS Report RS20129, Entitlem ents and Appropriated Entitlem ents in the Federal Budget Process. 3 For a general overview of the annual appropriations process, see CRS Report R42388, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction. 4 Examples of such constraints include those associated with budget resolutions, other statutory spending limits, and previously enacted legislation. Congressional Research Service 1 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Committee reports are not the law, but it is expected that they be regarded almost as seriously.”5 Additional y, Congress can incorporate certain provisions of the appropriations committee reports into the text of appropriations measures via statutory references. That is, the text of an appropriations measure may explicitly reference specific provisions of a committee report accompanying an appropriations measure.6 In such cases, agencies would likely treat the incorporated report language as being equivalent to the statutory provision of the appropriations bil that is enacted into law. For these reasons, congressional interest in the appropriations process is not limited to the procedures and practices for consideringconsideration of appropriations measures but also encompasses the includes the development of report language that accompanies those measures.

Typically Typical y, report language may be used to supplement the legislative text of a measure at either of two differentan appropriations measure during two stages of the legislative process. First, written reports may accompany the version of a bil reported by the House or Senate Appropriations Committee to its respective version of the bill that is reported by a committee to its parent chamber. The House has required that written reports accompany bills reported from committee since 1880.⁵bil s reported by al committees, first implementing such a requirement in 1880.7 While Senate rules do not require written reports, measures reported from committee are usuallyby committees are usual y accompanied by or otherwise associated with them. Second, when resolving differences between the House and Senate, a joint explanatory statement (JES), which accompanies a conference report prior to final action by each chamber, is also a form of report language. The JES may be used to reconcile areas of disagreement disagreements between the House and Senate committee reports fromwritten at earlier stages of the legislative process or to process and wil typical y also provide additional information about the agreement. For measures not reported from committee that receive congressional consideration, including when differences are resolved through an amendment exchange, explanatory text from the committee of jurisdictionappropriations committees is sometimes entered into the Congressional Record and may be regarded similarly as similar to report language for certain purposes.⁶8 In addition, in some cases, report language in the JES mayor explanatory statement may in some cases be enacted by reference in the appropriations law that it accompanies, giving it statutory effect.

This CRS This report provides an overview of appropriations report language. It generallygeneral y does not, however, explain thosethe report language components and related practices that are more broadly applicable to all types of legislation,⁷ including the House and Senate rules that require congressionally directed spending items, or "earmarks," to be disclosed in committee reports.⁸applicable to all types of legislation, with the exception of House and Senate rules requiring the disclosure of congressional y directed spending items, commonly known as “earmarks.”9 The first section of this CRS report explains how appropriations report language is developed. The second section discusses report explains the origins, purposes, and forms of the major report language components that are particular to appropriations measures, with illustrativeil ustrative examples. The third section summarizes appropriations report language issues related to congressional influence over agency budgetary decisionmaking, as well as the institutional dynamics within Congress itself.

Appropriations Report Language Development

Agency, Public, and Member Input

Committee and Initial Floor Consideration

Resolving Differences

Continuing Resolutions

Appropriations Report Language Components

Overview of Accounts and Other Directives

second section summarizes how appropriations report language is developed. 5 Richard Fenno, The Power of the Purse: Appropriations Politics in Congress (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1966), p. 18. 6 For an example of this type of statut ory incorporation by reference, see p. 651 of the FY2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-260). 7 Charles W. Johnson, John V. Sullivan, and T homas J. Wickham Jr., House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents, and Procedures of the House, 115th Cong., 1st sess. (Washington: GPO, 2017), ch. 11, §28. T he current requirement for committees to file reports is codified in House Rule XIII, clause 2. 8 For further information about resolving differences using a conference committee or amendment exchange, see CRS Report 98-696, Resolving Legislative Differences in Congress: Conference Com m ittees and Am endm ents Between the Houses. 9 For general information on the required components of House and Senate committee reports, see CRS Report 98-169, House Com m ittee Reports: Required Contents (available to congressional clients upon request); and CRS Report 98-305, Senate Com m ittee Reports: Required Contents. Congressional Research Service 2 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Appropriations Report Language Components The components of report language that are specific to appropriations measures have evolved in the context of both internal and external congressional needs. In many cases, the components and related practices were developed by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees to better enable their oversight of federal agencies. Other components came about as a result of chamber rules requiring the inclusion of certain information to aid the congressional consideration of appropriations measures. In response to these various needs, certain categories of report language are used each fiscal year in many or al of the appropriations committee reports and, in some cases, the JES (or other explanatory text) that resolves differences between House and Senate committee reports. This section describes the origin, purposes, and current forms of these report language components and provides il ustrative examples of each. Overview of Accounts, Funding Allocations, and Other Directives Overview of Accounts (“Section-by-Section” Summaries) The bulk of the House and Senate reports accompanying regular appropriations bil s provide an overview of each account in the bil .10 This practice derives from the more general practice that congressional reports accompanying legislation summarize each section or title of the measure. These descriptions are often referred to as “section-by-section” (or “title-by-title”) summaries. Because appropriations bil s are organized by unnumbered headings, with each heading general y corresponding to an account, section-by-section summaries of appropriations bil s are organized by account and also include short descriptions of other provisions included in the bil that are not part of the appropriations accounts.11 Such provisions may include “administrative provisions” that are specific to particular accounts or agencies, as wel as “general provisions” that are more broadly applicable to al funds in the bil (or a specified title of the bil ). The account-by-account summary provides an explanation of the purpose of each of the bil ’s accounts and describes the programs and activities that the bil funds. These descriptions are typical y framed as a justification of the funding levels proposed for that account, as compared to those provided the previous fiscal year and proposed in the President’s budget request. These committee explanations and justifications of recommended funding levels provide helpful context for Members as they evaluate the measure and any potential floor amendments. Funding Allocations In many instances, additional directives to agencies in report language also include more detail on the al ocation of funds than what is provided in the bil itself. For example, the FY2020 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bil reported by the House Appropriations Committee (H.R. 2740) contained the “Maternal and Child Health” account within the Department of Health and Human Service’s Health Resources and Services 10 T he basic unit of appropriations bills is the account, which generally includes sim ilar programs, projects, or other related budgetary items—for example, salaries and employee expenses or research and development activities. Larger agencies typically receive appropriations to multiple accounts, although smaller agencies may receive all o f their funding through a single account. 11 Some reports also include policy or program highlights that address multiple accounts prior to the account -by-account summary. See, for example, H.Rept. 116-447, pp. 2-5; H.Rept. 116-448, pp. 4-8; S.Rept. 115-289, pp. 8-20; and S.Rept. 115-283, pp. 4-7. Congressional Research Service 3 link to page 7 link to page 18 link to page 18 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Administration. The bil provided a lump-sum appropriation of $972,751,000 with no further al ocation of the funds in the statute (except for a limitation12 and a set aside13 within that total). The accompanying committee report shown in Figure 1 recommended that part of the account’s overal appropriation be divided into the following specific al ocations for certain purposes: Figure 1. Detailed Funds Allocation H.Rept. 116-62 accompanying the FY2020 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bil , as reported by the House Appropriations Committee (H.R. 2740) Source: H.Rept. 116-62, p. 47. These types of funding and other directives are general y not legal y binding on agencies in the same way as the statutory text of appropriations acts, because committee reports do not meet the requirements of bicameralism and presentment under Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution.14 Nevertheless, agencies treat these directives seriously, and the appropriations committees expect that agencies wil general y comply with report directives.15 This high degree of compliance is driven, in part, by the agencies’ desire to maintain good relationships with the appropriations committees, as wel as the committees’ ability to subsequently adopt more restrictive statutory directives and funding adjustments in future appropriations bil s. The following statement in the report accompanying the FY2021 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies regular 12 For more information about appropriations limitations, see the discussion on pp. 15-16 in the “Language Changing Existing Law” below. 13 Set aside is generally a term used within the appropriations committees for provisions in appropriations bills that designate specific amounts within the account’s overall lump-sum appropriation to be used for certain purposes. 14 T he exception to this general rule is when directives are incorporated by reference into the statutory text of an appropriations act. In such cases, an agency would likely treat the incorporated directives as binding. For more information, see CRS Report, Regular Appropriations Acts: Selected Statutory Interpretation Issues. 15 Although there is no systematic quantification available about how often agencies comply with report directives, a recent analysis of the Food and Drug Administration found that the agency complied with the majority of the appropriations committees’ report directives. See Laura E. Dolbow, “Agency Adherence to Legislative History,” Adm inistrative Law Review, vol. 70, no. 3 (Summer 2018), pp. 569 -628. Past analysis of the appropriations process has also found strong anecdotal evidence that agencies sought to comply with report directives. See Fenno, The Power of the Purse, pp. 291-293; and Michael W. Krist, Governm ent Without Passing Laws: Congress’ Nonstatutory Techniques for Appropriations Control (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969), pp. 64 -82. In the event that an agency wishes to deviate from the directives in report language as to the allocation of funds, it might seek to alter that allocation through a “ reprogramming.” T his topic is discussed further in the section of this report, “Reprogramming Guidelines.” Congressional Research Service 4 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development appropriations bil highlights how the appropriations committees might respond to an uncooperative agency: In the absence of comity and respect for the prerogatives of the Appropriations Committees and the Congress in general, the Committee may opt to include specific program limitations and details in legislation and remove language providing the flexibility to reallocate funds. Under these circumstances, programs, projects, and activities become absolutes and the Executive Branch shall lose the ability to propose changes in the use of appropriated funds except through legislative action.16 Other Directives The appropriations committees also use the section-by-section summaries to provide additional directives to the agencies. These directives are not enacted into law (unless they are explicitly referenced in the statutory text of an appropriations act). They are primarily used to explain the committees’ intent for how a particular appropriation should be used during the upcoming fiscal year and to make other administrative requests of the instructed agencies. Most committee reports typical y include a large number of directives, ranging from general suggestions and warnings to precise instructions and exhortations. Despite their number and variety, the appropriations committees have developed a general phraseology to differentiate more suggestive report directives from directives that provide precise and prescriptive instructions to an agency.17 As one budget process scholar noted: [Appropriations committee] report language is carefully crafted and sometimes negotiated with the affected agency. The reports frequently use words such as assumes, notes, requests, expects, directs, and requires. These words are not synonymous—each has its own nuance and intent. However, even the most permissive words offer guida nce that agencies do not lightly disregard.18 The following il ustrative examples show how this phraseology has been used in recent appropriations committee reports. Al of the examples are taken from the House Appropriations Committee’s report (H.Rept. 116-446) that accompanied the FY2021 Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food and Drug Administration regular appropriations bil reported by the committee. In cases where the appropriations committees wish to indicate a higher degree of administrative flexibility to an agency, report directives wil typical y use words such as supports, encourages, urges, or may. For example, the report language corresponding to the National Institute of Food 16 H.Rept. 116-455, p. 11. 17 A survey of congressional staff found that attorneys from the House and Senate Offices of Legislative Counsel participate in the drafting of appropriations committee report language, which is not the typical practice of ot her House and Senate committees. T he authors of the survey noted: Whereas almost all of the Legislative Counsels whom we interviewed told us that they do not draft legislative history—that is, they draft only the text to be enacted—the one exception, we were told, is the appropriations context. The Legislative Counsels assigned to appropriations legislation do draft the legislative history—a clear recognition of the text-like importance of legislative history in this unique context (p. 980). For more information, see Abbe R. Gluck and Lisa Schultz Bressman, “ Statutory Interpretation from the Inside -An Empirical Study of Congressional Drafting, Delegation, Drafting, and the Canons: Part I,” Stanford Law Review, vol. 65, no. 5 (January 2013), pp. 979-982. 18 Allen Schick, The Federal Budget: Politics, Policy, Process, 3rd ed. (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2007), p. 271. Congressional Research Service 5 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development and Agriculture (NIFA) “Research and Education Activities” account included the following directive: Interagency Research Programs.—The Committee recognizes the important contributions of the Dual Purpose with Dual Benefit program jointly managed by NIFA and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The Committee urges continued partnership between NIFA, NIH and other relevant federal research agencies to develop the next generation interagency program using agriculturally important large animal species. The Committee supports continuation of cooperative programs to further strengthen ties between human medicine, veterinary medicine, and animal sciences.19 The appropriations committees often make requests of an agency to take a more specific action. Such report directives typical y use words such as directs, instructs, and shall. The following directive was included in the report’s summary of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “Salaries and Expenses” account: Rare Cancer Therapeutics.—The Committee includes an additional $2,500,000 to address gaps in the system, streamline resources, accelerate the development of rare cancer therapies and advance the field of cancer research overall, mirroring the efforts of the National Cancer Institute’s Developmental Therapeutics Program. FDA is directed to build lines of communications and processes between these two agencies in order to expedite review of rare cancer therapies. Further, the Committee directs FDA to provide a briefing on what FDA has done to achieve the goals listed above, not later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act.20 Although the committees have developed relatively consistent phraseology to provide direction to agencies funded through the annual appropriations process, the interpretation of these directives ultimately depends on the specific context of a particular directive and the relationships between the appropriations committees and the instructed agency. These particular contextual differences notwithstanding, however, the general expectation of appropriations committees is that agencies wil pay careful attention to al of the directives included in the appropriations committees’ reports.21 Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority

Tables in appropriations reports that summarize the appropriations in the billbil , the budgetary effects of other provisions, and certain additional allocationsal ocations in the report have been in use for at least the past century.²⁵22 These tables assist with the congressional evaluation of the amounts in the bill, as well bil , as wel as some of the additional allocationsfunding al ocations of those amounts in the report.²⁶23 In current practice, the specific categories of information displayed and compared in the summary table depend on the chamber and stage of legislative action but may include amounts for:

• 19 H.Rept. 116-446, p. 28. 20 H.Rept. 116-446, p. 93. 21 For a discussion of how report directives influence how agencies implement their budgets, see CRS Report RL33151, Com m ittee Controls of Agency Decisions, p. 24. 22 For some early examples of these tables, see H.Rept. 59-1106, pp. 1-3; H.Rept. 59-927, pp. 3-4; H.Rept. 59-2171, pp. 11-26; and S.Rept. 59-1782, pp. 2-3. In current practice, these tables are variously titled “ Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority,” “Comparative Statement of Budget Authority,” or “Comparative Statement of New (Obligational) Budget Authority.” 23 In some cases, the table might also list budgetary resources that are made available to the agency outside the annual appropriations process to provide additional context. See, for example, the amounts for “fee accounts” listed for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection in S.Rept. 113-198, p. 178. Congressional Research Service 6 link to page 11 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development  the prior fiscal year,  the prior fiscal year,
• the President'’s budget request (or "“budget estimate"),
• the other chamber ("allowance"), and
• ”), and  the committee’s recommendation.

The JES will Additional y, the JES wil list the final funding levels for the relevant accounts and other activities that were agreed to when differences between the House and Senate were resolved on the measure.

The example in Figure 2 below is from the Senate Appropriations Committee report accompanying the FY2017 Department of Defense appropriations bil (S.Rept. 114-263, p. 250). It includes al accompanying the FY2015 Military Construction-Veterans Affairs appropriations bill (S.Rept. 113-174, p. 109). It includes all of the categories of information listed above.

General Congressional Research Service 7 Figure 2. Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority S.Rept. 114-263 accompanying the FY2017 Department of Defense Appropriations Bil , as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee (S. 3000) Source: S.Rept. 114-263, p. 250. CRS-8 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Directives Related to Budget Preparation and Budget Execution

In addition to the instructions that are included in the account summaries, general directives that apply to budget preparation and budget execution are often also included in appropriations report language. Such directives, which typically In addition to the directives discussed above, appropriations reports may also contain additional instructions related to budget preparation and budget execution. Such directives, which typical y relate to many or all of the accounts in the billbil , are usuallyusual y located in the first pages of the report and. The most common forms of these directives may specify the form of budget justifications for future fiscal years, other reporting guidelines and committee initiatives, " “program, project, or activity" (PPA) activity” definitions, and reprogramming guidelines.

Form of Budget Justifications

Congressional Agencies’ congressional budget justifications supplement the President'’s budget request with additional information for the appropriations committees. Agencies provide this information to the committees soon after the President'’s budget request has been submitted.²⁷ The description of budgetary accounts in these budget justifications, such as the types of agency activities conducted with funds in the account, is much more detailed than the budget submission.²⁸24 The budget justifications’ descriptions of budgetary accounts are much more detailed than the President’s budget submission and provides the appropriations committees with detailed information about how agencies are using the funds within each account.25 This additional information helps the appropriations committees better evaluate the budgetary resources that have been requested for the upcoming fiscal year.

The form of thean agency’s budget justifications and the information contained therein is generally general y the result of consultations between the agency and the appropriations committees.²⁹26 Instructions from the appropriations committees as to the content of budget justifications for future fiscal years are years, however, are also often included in report language. These instructions may includespecify to agencies the level of detail that should be provided for each account, as well wel as specific directions for certain programs or activities.³⁰27 In some instances, the agencies funded in the bill bil may be told how to address certain informational deficiencies in the future, such as by providing more detail about grants or staffing changes.³¹28 An agency might also be more generallygeneral y directed to coordinate the content of certain analytical materials with the committee in advance of the submission.³²29 For example, the following directives were included in the example, the Senate committee report that accompanied the FY2020 Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bil reported by the Committee (S.Rept. 116-109): [T]he Committee directs that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2021 budget request by agencies funded under this act contain the customary level of detailed data and explanatory statements to support the appropriations requests at the level of detail contained in the funding table included at the end of the report. Among other items, agencies shall provide a detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the agency’s financial plan from prior year enactment, and detailed data on all programs and comprehensive information on any office or agency restructurings. At a minimum, 24 Agency budget justifications are also typically made available on agency websites. For information on recent budget justifications, see CRS Report R43470, Selected Agency Budget Justifications for FY2022 . 25 For further information on budget justifications generally, see CRS Report RS20268, Agency Justification of the President’s Budget. 26 T he Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has generally instructed agencies to consult with the committees ahead of modifications to the form of the budget justifications. See OMB Circular A-11, Preparation, Subm ission, and Execution of the Budget, July 2016, §§22.6 and 240.4. 27 See, for example, H.Rept. 116-100, p. 77. 28 See, for example, H.Rept. 116-453, pp. 56, 95; and H.Rept. 116-446, p. 6. 29 See, for example, H.Rept. 116-452, pp. 3-4. Congressional Research Service 9 link to page 14 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development each agency must also provide adequate justification for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and materials that compare programs, projects, and activities that are proposed for fiscal year 2021 to the fiscal year 2020 enacted level.30 the FY2015 State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill included the following directives (S.Rept. 113-195):

Other Reporting Guidelines and Committee Initiatives

Other Reporting Guidelines and Committee Initiatives Although reporting requirements that are for specific accounts are primarily located in the relevant account summaries, language elsewhere in committee reports may provide general guidance about the timing or form of agency reports to be provided. For example, the Senate House Appropriations Committee report that accompanied the FY2015 Agriculture appropriations bill included the followingFY2020 Financial Services and General Government appropriations bil included the fol owing instructions related to agency reports (H.Rept. 116-456):31 The Committee stresses that all reports are required to be completed in compliance with the timeframe outlined for each respective directive. Furthermore, the Committee expects that the specifications and conditions associated with funding appropriated by this Act shal be accomplished in the manner as directed in the report.32 “Program, Project, or Activity” instructions related to agency reports (S.Rept. 113-164):³³

The Committee has, throughout this report, requested agencies to provide studies and reports on various issues. The Committee utilizes these reports to evaluate program performance and make decisions on future appropriations. The Committee directs that all studies and reports be provided to the Committee as electronic documents in an agreed upon format within 120 days after the date of enactment, unless an alternative submission schedule is specifically stated in the report request. (p. 6)

"Program, Project, or Activity" Definitions

A PPA is an element in a budget account.³⁴ As was previously mentioned, budget accounts generally Definitions A “program, project, or activity” (PPA) is an element in a budget account.33 For annual y appropriated accounts, these budget accounts general y correspond to the paragraph headings in appropriations acts. Such accounts generallygeneral y provide a lump sum for the purposes of the account and may also "“set aside"” specific amounts within that lump sum for certain purposes. In addition to those statutory set-asides, it has been the practice for a number of decades that specific elements in these budget accounts, including PPAs, have been identified in report language (and also in the congressional budget justifications that correspond to that act).³⁵34 For example, the House Appropriations Committee report accompanying the FY2015 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill identified four PPAs in the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Automation Modernization account, which funds information technology support for CBP personnel (H.Rept. 113-481, p. 43):³⁶

As with other funding allocations in report language, the PPAs that are identified for each account allow FY2021 Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food and Drug Administration appropriations bil (H.R. 7610) shown in Figure 3 identified several PPAs in NIFA’s “Integrated Activities” account (H.Rept. 116-446, p. 33):35 30 S.Rept. 116-109, p. 5. 31 See also H.Rept. 116-444, pp. 5-6. 32 H.Rept. 116-456, p. 7. 33 GAO, Glossary of Terms, p. 80. 34 OMB Circular A-11, §22.6. 35 T hese PPAs had also been identified in the National Institute of Food and Agriculture’s congressional budget justification, p. 21-23, available at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/19nifa2021notes.pdf. Congressional Research Service 10 link to page 15 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Figure 3. Specification of Programs, Projects, and Activities FY2021 Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food & Drug Administration regular appropriations bil , as reported by the House Appropriations Committee (H.R. 7610) Source: H.Rept. 116-446, p. 33. As with other funding al ocations in report language, the PPAs identified for each account al ow Congress to provide direction as to the amounts to be expended for particular activities in which Congress to provide direction as to the amounts to be expended for particular activities in which the agency is engaged. The PPAs are also significant for "“reprogramming,"” which is discussed further in the report section entitled "“Reprogramming Guidelines."

The PPAs that are identified for each account are also significant for the sequestration.” The PPAs identified for each account also become the basis for the administration of the budget budget enforcement mechanism underknown as “sequestration.” This mechanism was established by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (BBEDCA; P.L. 99-177)) and can result in the cancel ation of budgetary resources. If such a sequestration is required for a fiscal year, budgetary resources for affected accounts must be reduced on a largely across-the-board percentage basis. The BBEDCA, as amended, further requires that these reductions must be be proportionately implemented by the agencies, within each affected account, at the PPA level.³⁷

level of its PPAs.36 Starting in FY1987, the first full fiscal year after the sequestration mechanism was in effect for discretionary spending, some House Appropriations Committee reports included PPA definitions for the purposes of the BBEDCA.³⁸37 PPA definitions have continued to be included in appropriations reports during the periods since FY1987, during which that sequestration could potentiallypotential y affect discretionary spending.³⁹38 Such report language might be used to clarify what a PPA is for the purposes of the BBEDCA or impose a different definition of PPA than would otherwise be in effect. For example, the SenateHouse Appropriations Committee report accompanying the FY2014 Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill FY2021 36 BBEDCA, §256(k) (2 U.S.C. §906). 37 For early examples of this report language, see H.Rept. 99-669, p. 8; H.Rept. 99-686, p. 127; and H.Rept. 99-675, p. 71. 38 Congress modified and extended the BBEDCA’s sequestration procedures several times during the 1980s and 1990s. As a result of these modifications, sequestration procedures were in place that could affect the amount of discretionary appropriations available to agencies from FY1988 to FY2002. For more information about these procedures, see CRS Report R41901, Statutory Budget Controls in Effect Between 1985 and 2002 . More recently, the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) further amended the sequestration procedures established by the BBEDCA, as amended. One of the act’s modifications provided for the sequestration of discretionary funding if such funding exceeded statutory spending limits. T hese statutory limits were modified several times by subsequent legislation. For more information, see CRS Report R44874, The Budget Control Act: Frequently Asked Questions; and CRS Report R42972, Sequestration as a Budget Enforcem ent Process: Frequently Asked Questions. Congressional Research Service 11 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bil provided the following instructions (H.Rept. 116-452): provided the following instructions (S.Rept. 113-80):

During fiscal year 20142021, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177), ), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained in the accompanying bill, the terms '‘‘program, project, and activity' [PPA]’’ (PPA) shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is contained in item for which a dollar amount is contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations) orand accompanying reports of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. (p. 5)

This definition shall apply to al programs for which new budget (obligational) authority is provided, as well as to discretionary grants and discretionary grant allocations made through either bill or report language.39 This language directed that only the items identified in the listed sources, which do not include additional items identified in the FY2014FY2021 budget justification (if any), should be considered to be a PPA for the purposes of any BBEDCA sequestration of discretionary spending in FY2014.⁴⁰

FY2021.40 Reprogramming Guidelines

Agencies are generallygeneral y required to carry out the terms of appropriations lawsacts as enacted, including the statutory allocational ocation of funds therein. As previously discussed, bothBoth report language and the congressional budget justifications further allocate funds below the account levelal ocate funds within annual y appropriated accounts into PPAs. In general, when funds are moved between PPAs inwithin the same account, this is referred to as "reprogramming."⁴¹a “reprogramming” of funds.41 Agencies are generallygeneral y permitted to reprogram funds, subject to restrictions in law. This is in contrast to a "transfer"—“transfer”—that is, moving funds between accounts— which requires a statutory authorization in order to occur.⁴²

42 The level of statutory detail regarding the purposes and amounts for funds in annual appropriations acts has changed considerably over two centuries.⁴³time.43 Prior to the early 20^th20th century, the statutory language for appropriations accounts tended to include numerous line items specifying particular purposes and amounts therein. Over the next few decadesDuring World War II, the appropriations committees determined that certain agencies required more budgetary flexibility to respond to pressing demands of the war.44 Consequently,determined that the activities in which the government was engaged, such as World War II, required that certain agencies be given more budgetary flexibility.⁴⁴ In addition, as authorization acts began to contain more detailed statutory instructions to agencies, and appropriations acts began to provide more general lump sums for those authorized purposes, with detailed allocations generallylump-sum appropriations with detailed funding al ocations general y being provided through nonstatutory means such as report language.⁴⁵ As agencies were transitioned to45 As Congress provided accounts with larger lump-sum appropriations, an understanding was reached that the Appropriations Committee rather than more numerous and detailed line-item appropriations, an understanding was reached that the 39 H.Rept. 116-452, p. 1. 40 For other recent examples of PPA definitions in Appropriations Committee reports, see H.Rept. 116-84, p. 15; S.Rept. 116-111, p. 5; and S.Rept. 116-103, p. 6. 41 For further information with regard to reprogramming, see CRS Report R43098, Transfer and Reprogramming of Appropriations: An Overview of Authorities, Lim itations, and Procedures. 42 See GAO, Office of the General Counsel, Principles of Federal Appropriations Law (3rd ed., 2004), vol. 1, 2-24 and 2-30. 43 For a detailed discussion of this evolution, see CRS Report R43862, Changes in the Purposes and Frequency of Authorizations of Appropriations. 44 Stephen Horn, Unused Power: The Work of the Senate Committee on Appropriations (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1970), pp. 192-198. Additionally, see Louis Fisher, Presidential Spending Power (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1975), pp. 59-74. 45 Allen Schick, Legislation, Appropriations, and Budgets: The Development of Spending Decision -Making in Congress, Congressional Research Service, May 1984, p. 31 (available to congressional clients upon request) . Congressional Research Service 12 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development appropriations committee would be consulted when agencies reprogrammed the amounts for would be consulted when agencies reprogrammed the amounts for items in those accounts that had not been specified in law.⁴⁶

46 In current practice, statutory restrictions on reprogramming are usually carriedusual y located in the general or administrative provisions of appropriations acts. These restrictions often prohibit reprogramming that meets certain criteria or that is above a certain spending threshold unless certain requirements related to congressional notification have been met. For example, the FY2015require that agencies notify the appropriations committees before reprogramming amounts above a certain spending threshold. For example, the FY2021 State-Foreign Operations Appropriations Act prohibits reprogramming that:

Section 7015 further provides that such reprogramming would be allowable if the appropriations committees are notified 15 days in advance(Division K of P.L. 116-260) prohibits reprogramming that:  augments or changes existing programs, projects, or activities;  relocates an existing office or employees;  reduces by 10 funding for any existing program, project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent as approved by Congress; or  results from any general savings, including savings from a reduction in personnel, that would result in a change in existing PPAs approved by Congress.47 Section 7015(b) of the act further provides that such reprogramming are al owable if the appropriations committees are notified 15 days in advance of an obligation. Once appropriations are enacted for a fiscal year, agencies typically submit a "spending" or "operating"typical y submit a “spending” or “operating” plan to the appropriations committees to establish a baseline for the application of reprogramming and transfer authorities for that fiscal year.⁴⁸

48 In addition to the requirements in appropriations acts, guidance on the specific reprogramming procedures that agencies are to followare to be followed is often provided in report language. Such guidance could include include:  the level of detail that triggers notification requirements or special procedures for certain accounts.⁴⁹ The,49  the form of notification and approval,  the information that the committee requires from the agency in order to evaluate the reprogramming request, and  a final deadline for all al such requests during the fiscal year might also be addressed.⁵⁰ .50 For example, the Senate Appropriations Committee’s report that accompanied the FY2015committee’s FY2016 State-Foreign Operations bill bil included the following instructions that supplemented the statutory guidance discussed above (S.Rept. 113-195):

114-79): The Committee directs the Department of State and other agencies funded by thisthe act to notify the Committee of reprogrammings of funds as required by sectionsections 7015 and 7019 of theof this act at the most detailed level of either the CBJ, the act, or the report accompanying this actaccompanying report, and the Committee expects to be notified of any significant departure from the CBJ or of any 46 Fisher, Presidential Spending Power, pp. 76-77, 81-84. 47 P.L. 116-260, Division K, T itle VII, §7015(b). 48 See, for example, H.R. 7668 (116th Cong.), Section 608, for a statutory requirement for an operation plan and additional specifications as to the contents. Such requirements and specifications may also be provided by report language. See H.Rept. 116-452, pp. 2-3; H.Rept. 116-444, pp. 5-6; and H.Rept. 116-111, pp. 5-6. 49 See, for example, H.Rept. 116-452, pp. 2-3; and H.Rept. 116-445, pp. 10-11. 50 See, for example, H.Rept. 116-101, pp. 5-6; and H.Rept. 116-122, pp. 5-7. Congressional Research Service 13 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development commitment that will require significant funding in future years. The Committee directs that staffing levels and future year impacts of reprogrammings be included with such notifications. (p. 10)

Additional 51 Additional guidance in report language, such as the example above, could be provided annually annual y or on a standing basis.⁵¹

52 Comparison with the Budget Resolution

The level of budget authority provided in appropriations measures is procedurally limited by the budget resolution, which is subject to enforcement in the When the House and Senate agree to a budget resolution, that resolution creates enforceable limits on the level of budget authority provided in appropriations measures considered by the House and Senate.53House and Senate.⁵² Through the budget resolution, the Appropriations Committee in each chamber receives a appropriations committees receive a procedural limit on the total amount of discretionary budget authority for the upcoming fiscal year, which is referred to as a 302(a) allocation.⁵³ The Appropriations Committees subsequently divide this allocation among their 12 subcommittees. These are referred to as 302(b) suballocations.⁵⁴ The 302(b) suballocational ocation.54 Each appropriations committee further divides this al ocation among its 12 subcommittees, which are referred to as the subcommittees’ 302(b) subal ocations.55 The 302(b) subal ocation for a subcommittee restricts the amount of budget authority available for the agencies, projects, and activities under its jurisdiction, effectively acting as a procedural cap on the amount of spending in each of the 12 regular appropriations bills. Enforcement of the 302(a) allocation and 302(b) suballocations occurs through Budget Act points of order.⁵⁵

bil s. The 302(a) al ocation and 302(b) subal ocations can be enforced through Congressional Budget Act points of order raised during floor consideration of the appropriations bil s.56 The Budget Act was intended to provide a framework forwhereby Congress tocould evaluate the future effects of past budgetary decisions that had already been made, as well , as wel as those that were currently under consideration. To support this end, the Budget Act also required the inclusion of certain information in reports accompanying any legislation "“providing new budget authority or tax expenditures"” that would be relevant to making such budgetary decisionmaking.⁵⁶decisions.57 In addition to these general requirements, for regular and supplemental appropriations measures (but not CRs), the Budget Act mandates that committee reports accompanying regular and supplemental appropriations measures include a statement comparing the funding levels in the measure to the applicable 302(b) subal ocations.58302(b) suballocations.⁵⁷ This statement must also be included in a conference report, if available in a timely manner, and is to be provided after consultation with the Congressional Budget Office.⁵⁸

The information required by the Budget Act is usually Office.59 51 S.Rept. 114-79, p. 11. 52 See, for example, H.Rept. 116-448, p. 11, which notes that the standing guidance with regard to reprogramming that was previously provided in the explanatory statement corresponding to Division D of P.L. 116-94 continues to be in effect. 53 As provided under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344; 88 Stat. 297; 2 U.S.C. §§601-688). 54 Congressional Budget Act, §302(a) (2 U.S.C. §633). 55 Congressional Budget Act, §302(b) (2 U.S.C. §633). 56 Primarily, these allocations are enforced through points of order under the Congressional Budget Act , Sections 302(f) and 311. Enforcement of the statutory spending caps may occur through points of order that are raised during House or Senate floor consideration under the Congressional Budget Act, Section 314(f). For further information with regard to points of order in the congressional budget process, see CRS Report 97-865, Points of Order in the Congressional Budget Process. 57 For example, whenever a committee reports a measure providing new budget authority or tax expenditures, the committee must include in the accompanying report certain budgetary information, including an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) of the five-year outlay projections associated with the budget authority in the bill, if such an estimate is “ timely submit ted before such report is filed” (Congressional Budget Act, §308(a)(1)(B) [2 U.S.C. §639]). 58 Congressional Budget Act, §308(a)(1)(A) (2 U.S.C. §639). 59 T he House reiterated this Budget Act requirement in Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2). Congressional Research Service 14 link to page 18 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development The information required by the Budget Act is usual y provided in a separate section of House and Senate appropriations reports, as illustrated il ustrated in Figure 4 by the excerpt below from the House report accompanying the FY2015 Military Construction-Veterans Affairs appropriations bill:

FY2019 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bil : Figure 4. Comparison with the Budget Resolution H.Rept. 115-948 accompanying the FY2019 Department of Homeland Security, as reported by the House Appropriations Committee (H.R. 6776) Source: H.Rept. 115-948, p. 139. Language Changing Existing Law Language Changing Existing Law

Both the House and the Senate have internal rules and long-standing practices that promote the separation of money and policy decisions. These rules and practices are derived from the principle that the debates and decisions about the activities of the federal government should be distinct from the debates and decisions about the level at which those activities are funded. As a result of those rules and long-standing practices, Congress differentiates between the authorization process—where government entities, activities, or programs are established—and the appropriations process—where those entities, activities, and programs are to be funded.

The rules of the House and Senate typically prohibit legislative has created distinct processes for authorizing—which establishes government entities, activities, or programs in law—and appropriating—which provides funding for authorized entities, activities, and programs. One aspect of Congress’s separation of the authorization and appropriation processes is that the rules of the House and Senate typical y prohibit legislative provisions from being included in appropriations measures. These rules were formallyformal y established in both chambers in the mid-19^th 19th century to address concern that the inclusion of extraneous legislative matters was leading to delays in the appropriations process.⁵⁹60 As currently provided in House Rule XXI, clause 2, the House prohibits legislative including legislative provisions in general appropriations billsbil s and amendments thereto.⁶⁰ 60 For an overview of the development of the House’s rules against including legislative provisions in appropriations measures during the 19th century, see Asher C. Hinds, Hinds’ Precedents of the House of Representatives of the United States (Washington: GPO, 1907-1908), vol. 4, §3578. For a discussion of the Senate’s rules, see Schick, Legislation, Appropriations, and Budgets, pp. 14-19 (available to congressional clients upon request). Congressional Research Service 15 link to page 20 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development thereto.61 Senate Rule XVI Senate Rule XVI prohibits amendments to general appropriations measures that propose legislative legislative language not contained in existing law, except under certain circumstances.⁶¹ Proper "limitations," however, which restrict or prohibit the use of funds for certain purposes without being legislative, are allowable under House and Senate Rules.⁶²

Beginning 62 This restriction, however, does not apply to proper “limitation” provisions. These provisions negatively restrict either the purpose, amount, or availability of appropriated funds without changing existing or creating new law. Because they affect only how an agency uses appropriated funds, limitation provisions are distinct from other forms of legislative provisions and are al owed under House and Senate rules. Nevertheless, these provisions can limit the ability of agencies to spend funds for specified purposes.63 Beginning in the 1930s, a number of the House Appropriations subcommittees began to include either lists of legislation and limitations in appropriations measures (or statements to the effect that the measure containscontained no new legislative provisions or limitations) in their accompanying committee reports.⁶³64 However, the form and level of detail in those lists was highly variable. In order to To provide the House with more consistent information about the legislation that the committeeHouse Appropriations Committee was including in general appropriations measures, the House added a requirement in 1974 that the Appropriations Committee reports include "“a concise statement describing the effect of any provision of the accompanying bill bil that directly or indirectly changes the application of existing law."⁶⁴”65 This requirement, which encompasses legislative language, is currently codified in House Rule XIII, clause 3(f)(1)(A).⁶⁵66 An example of thissuch a list is provided byin the report accompanying the FY2015 Agriculture appropriations bill excerpted below:

FY2021 Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bil excerpted below in Figure 5. 61 In the House, general appropriations bills are the annual appropriations acts (or any combination thereof) and any supplemental appropriations acts that cover mo re than one agency. CRs are not considered to be general appropriations bills. See Johnson, Sullivan, and Wickham, House Practice, ch. 4, §3. 62 In the Senate, general appropriations bills are the annual appropriations acts (or any combination thereof) and any supplemental or continuing appropriations acts that cover more than one agency or purpose. See Floyd M. Riddick and Alan S. Frumin, Riddick’s Senate Procedure: Precedents and Practices, 101st Cong., 2nd sess., S.Doc. 101-28 (Washington: GPO, 1992), pp. 159. 63 For further information about these general principles, including what constitutes legislative provisions in appropriations bills, see CRS Report R41634, Lim itations in Appropriations Measures: An Overview of Procedural Issues. 64 For early examples of these lists, see H.Rept. 73-1195, pp. 17-21; H.Rept. 73-335, p. 15; and H.Rept. 73-449, pp. 27-28. 65 H.Res. 988, 93rd Cong. For further information on the purpose of this requirement, see House debate, Congressional Record, vol. 120, part 26 (October 8, 1974), pp. 34416 -34419. 66 In addition to the requirement for a summary of changes in existing law, House Rule XIII, clause 3(e)(1)—sometimes referred to as the “Ramseyer Rule”—requires that all committee reports include a comparative print of language in the bill “ proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part thereof.” Any legislative language that would repeal or amend existing law would also be included in that comparative display. Congressional Research Service 16 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Figure 5. Changes in the Application of Existing Laws H.Rept. 116-452 , accompanying the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development appropriations, as reported by the House Appropriations Committee (H.R. 7616) Source: H.Rept. 116-452, p. 163. In the Senate, there is no similar rule that requires the Senate Appropriations Committee to include in committee reports a list or description of legislative provisions in the appropriations measures or committee amendments thereto reported from the committee. However, Senate Rule XXVI, paragraph 12, sometimes referred to as the "“Cordon Rule,"” requires that the committee report include a comparative print of language "“repealing or amending any statute." Any legislative or part thereof.” Any legislative language that would directly repeal or amend existing law would be included in that comparative display in the Senate Appropriations Committee’s report. Appropriations Not Authorized by Law Thecomparative display.

Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

As previously mentioned, the rules of the House and Senate distinguish between authorizations and appropriations. These rules also require that an agency, program, or activity be authorized by law prior to when appropriations are provided. The authorization for subsequent appropriations may be explicit (i.e., "“there is hereby authorized to be appropriated"”) or implied by the statutory authority that creates and governs the entity.⁶⁶67 An appropriation is said to be "unauthorized"“unauthorized” when such an authorization (explicit or implicit) has never been enacted or, if previously enacted, has terminated or expired.68 67 In the absence of an explicit authorization of appropriations, it is generally understood that statutory authority to administer a program or engage in an activity, sometimes referred to as “ organic” or “ enabling” legislation, also provides implicit authorization to appropriate for such program or activity (GAO, Principles of Federal Appropriations Law, 2-54 to 2-55). 68 For a summary of congressional practices related to the form of authorizations and their effect on the occurrence and frequency of unauthorized appropriations, see CRS Report R43862, Changes in the Purposes and Frequency of Congressional Research Service 17 link to page 22 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Congressional concerns about

Congressional concern related to the advisability of providing appropriations not authorized by law isare long- standing.⁶⁷ 69 Like the prohibitions on legislative language discussed above, language, the formal rules inof the House and Senate that restricthave placed restrictions on the consideration of appropriations not authorized by law have been in effect for more than a century150 years—dating back to 1837 in the House and 1850 in the Senate.⁶⁸70 House Rule XXI, clause 2, prohibits appropriations not previously authorized by law in general appropriations measures and amendments thereto. In contrast, the prohibition on unauthorized appropriations in Senate Rule XVI, paragraph 21, applies in a comparatively more narrow set of circumstances and, most significantly, to amendments offered by individual Senators during consideration of general appropriations measures.⁶⁹

Notwithstanding these congressional measures.71 Despite these rules, appropriations not authorized by law have been provided for certain purposes for more than a century, althoughand with increasing frequency over the past several decades. In response to concerns that insufficient information about such appropriations was availablelacking during their congressional consideration, both the House and Senate adopted rules requiring that committee reports for general appropriations measures identify the unauthorized appropriations contained therein.⁷⁰72 In the Senate, these requirements were initiallyinitial y adopted in 1970 and are currently in Senate Rule XVI, paragraph 7.⁷¹73 This rule provides that the Senate Appropriations Committee report must "identify each recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation which amendment containing an appropriation that “is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session."” Even when the committeeSenate Appropriations Committee reports an original Senate bill bil and not an amendment to a House bill, it usually includes the-passed appropriations bil , the committee’s report usual y includes a list of unauthorized appropriations that the committee has included in the billbil . An example of this Senate list is provided by the report accompanying the FY2015 Transportation-Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill excerpted below:

FY2018 Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bil excerpted in Figure 6 below: Authorizations of Appropriations. 69 For a summary of congressional practices related to the form of authorizations and their effect on the occurrence and frequency of unauthorized appropriations, see CRS Report R43862, Changes in the Purposes and Frequency of Authorizations of Appropriations. 70 Schick, Legislation, Appropriations, and Budgets, pp. 16-17. 71 For further information on congressional rules that restrict appropriations not authorized by law, see CRS Report R42098, Authorization of Appropriations: Procedural and Legal Issues. 72 See footnotes 54 and 55 for an explanation of what constitutes a general appropriations bill under the rules of the House and Senate. 73 S.Res. 413, 91st Cong. For an explanation of the specific context that led to the adoption of this rule, see Congressional Record, vol. 116, part 25 (September 25, 1970), p. 33785. Congressional Research Service 18 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development Figure 6. Senate List of Appropriations Not Authorized by Law S.Rept. 115-139 accompanying the FY2018 Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bil (S. 1662) Source: S.Rept. 115-139, p. 130. Congressional Research Service 19 link to page 24 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development In the House, prior to the adoption of a formal rule, the lists of legislation and limitations in committee reports that were discussed in the section above occasionally included“Language Changing Existing Law” section above would occasional y include information about unauthorized appropriations.⁷²74 In 1995, at the beginning of the 104^th104th Congress, the House amended its rules to explicitly require that House Appropriations Committee reports accompanying regular appropriations billsbil s include a separate list of appropriations not currently authorized by law.⁷³75 Six years later, at the beginning of the 107^th 107th Congress, this rule was expanded to require more detailed information, including:⁷⁴

• 76  the last year for which such appropriations were authorized,
•  the level of appropriations authorized for that year,
•  the actual level of appropriations for that year, and
•  the level of appropriations in the bill.

bil . This requirement is currently codified in House Rule XIII, clause 3(f)(1)(B).

The House'’s rationale for this list also relates to issues that can arise between the authorizing and appropriations committees with regard to unauthorized appropriations and legislative provisions when such provisionswhen legislative provisions or unauthorized appropriations are included in appropriations bills by the House Appropriations Committeebil s. For the past few decades, special rules have been used to waive points of order against unauthorized appropriations and legislative provisions that are in the committee version of the bill.⁷⁵bil .77 However, if the authorizing committee of jurisdiction objects to any of those provisions, the Rules Committee will wil often choose to leave them unprotected by the waiver in the special rule. A recent example of the House Appropriations Committee’s list of Appropriations Not Authorized by Law is provided by the report accompanying the FY2018 Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bil (H.Rept. 115-231, pp. 103-109), which is excerpted in Figure 7 below: 74 See, for example, H.Rept. 93-1132, pp. 41-42; H.Rept. 99-747, pp. 100-115; and H.Rept. 103-190, pp. 168-171. 75 H.Res. 6, 104th Cong. T he requirements in this rule do not apply to classified intelligence or national security PPAs. 76 H.Res. 5, 107th Cong. 77 For further information, see CRS Report R42933, Regular Appropriations Bills: Terms of Initial Consideration and Am endm ent in the House, FY1996-FY2015. Congressional Research Service 20 Figure 7. House List of Appropriations Not Authorized by Law H.Rept. 115-231 accompanying the FY2018 Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bil , as reported by the House Appropriations Committee (H.R. 3267). Source: H.Rept. 115-231, p. 104. CRS-21 Appropriations Report Language: Overview of Components and Development waiver in the special rule. The House has recognized this practice as the "Armey Protocol"⁷⁶ since the 104^th Congress. The requirement for this list that was also adopted at that time may serve a purpose related to that protocol: providing relevant information to the authorization committees—and also the Rules Committee—as to the unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions in the measure.

Rescissions and Transfers

Rescissions and Transfers A rescission is a provision of law that cancels previously enacted budget authority. Such provisions are used to cancel funds for programs or projects that are no longer priorities. Rescissions of unexpired budget authority carried in appropriations acts may also serve to offset increases in funding elsewhere in the bil the bill relative to the applicable 302(a) and 302(b) allocations, as well as the statutory discretionary spending limits.⁷⁷

As previously mentioned, a transfer occursal ocations and meet statutory limits on discretionary spending.78 Transfers occur when funds are moved between accounts. Transfers and require explicit statutory authority in order to be allowable. Such transfer authority may be provided in authorizing laws or in annual appropriations acts and may be permissive—allowing a transfer up to a certain amount or percentage—or mandate that the transfer occur.

In general, the House Appropriations Committee does not have jurisdiction over legislative language.⁷⁸ Because rescissions and transfers change existing law, they are considered to be legislative.⁷⁹ However, to provide greater flexibility in the appropriations process, the jurisdiction of the House Appropriations Committeeoccur. Such transfer authority—that is, the provision in law that authorizes an agency to transfer funds (usual y up to a certain amount or percentage of an appropriation)—may be provided in authorizing laws or in annual appropriations acts. Transfer provisions may also mandate that a transfer occur in a specified amount or at a minimum (“no less than”) budgetary level. Rescissions and transfer authority are considered to be legislative because they change existing law.79 Although the House Appropriations Committee does not general y have jurisdiction over legislative language,80 its jurisdiction was expanded by the Committee Reform Amendments of was expanded by the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 to include transfers and rescissions of funds previously provided in appropriations acts.⁸⁰ At the same time, in order to This expansion was intended to provide more flexibility to the committee.81 To provide greater transparency to Congress as to the extent to which rescissions and transfers were being proposed by the House Appropriations Committee, the House adopted a new rule requiring that appropriations bil s and joint resolutions a new House rule was adopted to require that general appropriations bills have separate headings for "Rescissions" and "“Rescissions” and “Transfers of Unexpended Balances."⁸¹ In addition, committee reports accompanying those bills must”82 That rule also requires that the committee reports accompanying those bil s have a separate section that lists all suchal such proposed rescissions and transfers. This requirement isThese requirements are currently codified in House Rule XIII, clause 3(f)(2).

For example, in the report accompanying the FY2015FY2021 Department of Homeland Securitythe Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations billbil , the following lists were included:

Issues for Congress

Congressional Influence over Budgetary Decisionmaking

The Congressional Budget Process Context for Appropriations Decisionmaking