Order Code RL30204
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Appropriations for FY2000: VA, HUD,
and Independent Agencies
Updated June 17, 1999
Dennis W. Snook, Coordinator
Specialist in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Appropriations are one part of a complex federal budget process that includes budget
resolutions, appropriations (regular, supplemental, and continuing) bills, rescissions, and
budget reconciliation bills. The process begins with the President’s budget request and is
bounded by the rules of the House and Senate, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act of 1974 (as amended), the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, and current program
authorizations.
This report is a guide to one of the 13 regular appropriations bills that Congress considers
each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate
Subcommittees on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies Appropriations. It summarizes the
current legislative status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related
legislative activity. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and
related CRS products.
This report is updated as soon as possible after major legislative developments, especially
following legislative action in the committees and on the floor of the House or Senate.
NOTE: A Web version of this document with
active links is available to congressional staff at
[http://www.loc.gov/crs/products/apppage.html].

---

Appropriations for FY2000:
VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies
Summary
The President’s FY2000 budget, according to projections of the House
Committee on Appropriations, requested $99.6 billion for the Departments of
Veterans Affairs (VA) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and several
independent entities, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National Science Foundation (NSF),
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Corporation for
National and Community Service (CNS). Of the requested amounts, $4.2 billion are
advance FY2001 appropriations for HUD programs, and $2.5 billion are for FEMA
disaster relief contingency funding; other appropriations for FY2000 total $92.9
billion.
As the House and Senate Appropriations Committees specified discretionary
spending limits, known as “302(b)” allocations, it became apparent that it will be
difficult to reach agreement on the relative shares of the allocation to be given to the
various programs under the jurisdiction of the subcommittees responsible for VA-
HUD appropriations.
The Administration’s FY2000 Budget. For FY2000, the Administration’s
request for VA would require $42.5 billion, including $17.3 billion for VA medical
care programs, plus an additional $608 million from funds collected from insurance
plans with joint coverage of veterans treated in VA facilities, and from veterans with
cost-sharing obligations. The Administration proposes further steps be taken in
consolidating HUD’s large housing subsidy programs, and proposes spending
approximating current levels. EPA spending would be about 5% less under the
President’s budget. NASA funding would continue to support space flight and work
on the space station, but funding limitations and an aging NASA work force are
increasing concerns about mission safety. In spite of continued resistance in
Congress, the Administration again proposes expansion of CNS’s AmeriCorps.
FY1999 Appropriations. President Clinton signed P.L. 105-276 on October
21, 1998, completing action on the FY1999 VA-HUD appropriations bill, H.R. 4194.
According to data included with the conference report (H.Rept. 105-769), Congress
provided $93.4 billion for these agencies for FY1999; the Administration had
requested $93.7 billion. (Subsequent additional funds of $110 million for various
programs covered by the VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies bill were included in
the bill providing appropriations for Transportation and related agencies, P.L. 105-
277, and current estimates indicate that various supplementals, rescissions, accounting
changes, and actuarial updates, will bring final FY1999 appropriations to $92.7
billion). Appropriations for the VA-HUD agencies had been $88.4 billion in FY1998.
The final bill for FY1999 also included the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility
Act, a sweeping reform of federal public housing programs.

---

Key Policy Staff
Name
Area of Expertise
CRS Division
Tel.
Keith Bea
Emergency Management
G&F
7-8672
Richard Bourdon
Housing
DSP
7-7806
Eugene Boyd
Community Development
G&F
7-8689
Bruce Foote
Housing
DSP
7-7805
Martin Lee
Environmental Policy
RSI
7-7260
Ann Lordeman
National and Community Service
DSP
7-2323
Christine Matthews
National Science Foundation
RSI
7-7055
Bruce Mulock
Consumer Affairs
G&F
7-7775
Pauline Smale
Banking
G&F
7-7832
Dick Rowberg
National Aeronautics and Space Admin.
RSI
7-7040
Dennis Snook
Veterans Affairs
DSP
7-7314
Susan Vanhorenbeck
Housing
DSP
7-7808
Division abbreviations: DSP=Domestic Social Policy; G&F=Government and Finance; RSI=Resources, Science and Industry.

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Total Appropriations for FY1999 for VA,
HUD, and Independent Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Key Policy Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Department of Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
VA Cash Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Medical Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
VA Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Program Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Capital Asset Fund (proposed legislation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Department of Housing and Urban Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Housing Certificate Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Public Housing Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Lead-based Paint Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Housing for the Elderly and Disabled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Homeless Assistance Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Housing for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
The HOME Investment Partnership Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Native American Block Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Rural Housing and Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Fair Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Community Development Block Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
The Federal Housing Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Environmental Protection Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Federal Emergency Management Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
National Aeronautics and Space Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
National Science Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Other Independent Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
American Battle Monuments Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Community Development Financial Institution Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Consumer Information Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Corporation for National and Community Service (CNS) . . . . . . . . . 24
Council on Environmental Quality; Office of Environmental Quality . 24
Court of Veterans Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
National Credit Union Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NRC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Office of Science and Technology Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Selective Service System (SSS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Selected World Wide Web Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

---

List of Tables
Table 1. Status of VA, HUD and Independent Agencies Appropriations,
FY2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Table 2. Summary Table: VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 3. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations, FY1995 to FY1999 . . 3
Table 4. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2000 . . . . . . . . . 5
Table 5. Department of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations,
FY1995 to FY1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Table 6. Appropriations: Housing and Urban Development, FY2000 . . . . . . . 14
Table 7. Environmental Protection Agency Appropriations, FY1995 to
FY1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Table 8. Appropriations: Environmental Protection Agency, FY2000 . . . . . . . 17
Table 9. Appropriations: Federal Emergency Management Agency, FY2000 . 18
Table 10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Appropriations,
FY1995 to FY1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 11. Appropriations: National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
FY2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 12. National Science Foundation Appropriations, FY1995 to FY1999 . . 22
Table 13. Appropriations: National Science Foundation, FY2000 . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 14. Appropriations: Other Independent Agencies, FY2000 . . . . . . . . . . 25

---

Appropriations for FY2000: VA, HUD, and
Independent Agencies
Most Recent Developments
Discretionary Spending Allocations. Total discretionary spending is currently
governed by limitations spelled out in the 1997 balanced-budget law (P.L. 105-33),
and appropriations committees must allocate those limited discretionary funds
among the 13 subcommittees. These “302(b)” allocations foretell a difficult
appropriations round for the VA-HUD bill, as the House 302(b) allocation is $66.2
billion, and the Senate, $62.3 billion (some accounting differences lessen this
apparent $4 billion range between the two houses). The President’s request called
for $69.6 billion in discretionary spending, compared to the FY1999 level of $70.4
billion (both the latter figures are according to House estimates),and substantial
cuts to existing program levels would be required to meet these targets for FY2000.
FY2000 Budget Requests. The President submitted his request for a total of
$99.6 billion in FY2000 VA-HUD appropriations, comprised of $23.3 billion in
regular FY2000 appropriations for mandatory spending (for VA entitlements), a total
of $69.6 billion in discretionary funds for other programs, and $6.7 billion in
advance or emergency funding ($4.2 billion in advance FY2001 appropriations for
HUD’s Housing Certificate Fund, and $2.5 billion in contingency emergency
appropriations for FEMA’s disaster relief programs). According to the House
Appropriations Committee, the total in FY2000 appropriations requested by the
Administration for VA-HUD programs would be $92.9 billion.
Congressional Budget Resolution for FY2000 (H. Con. Resolution 68). On
April 14, 1999, Congress adopted its version of the basic federal budget guideline
for FY2000. Among assumptions in the adopted version was one that called for
increasing appropriations for VA medical programs by $1.7 billion more than the
Administration had requested. The House version of the Resolution had called for
a $1.1 billion increase; the Senate, $3.0 billion.
Status
Table 1. Status of VA, HUD and Independent Agencies Appropriations,
FY2000
Subcommittee
Conference report
markup
approval
House
Passed Senate Passed Conference
House Senate
report
House
report
Senate
report
House
Senate
Public Law
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

---

CRS-2
Total Appropriations for FY1999 for VA,
HUD, and Independent Agencies
Introduction. The appropriations for VA, HUD, and NASA comprised 86% of
the total appropriations for VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies in the FY1999
appropriations bill. The FY2000 request for appropriations would approximate this
distribution: VA would receive approximately 43% of the total appropriation, HUD
would receive 28%, and NASA would receive 14%.
Table 2. Summary Table: VA, HUD, and
Independent Agencies Appropriations
(budget authority in billions of $)

FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Department or Agency
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Veterans Affairs
42.625
42.538
—
—
—
Housing and Urban
Development
24.659
28.048
—
—
—
Environmental Protection
Agency
7.590
7.207
—
—
—
Federal Emergency
Management Agency
1.740
3.402
—
—
—
National Aeronautics; Space
Administration
13.665
13.578
—
—
—
National Science Foundation
3.671
3.921
—
—
—
Other Independent Agencies
0.763
0.909
—
—
—
Total Appropriations
—
—
—
(rounded, may not add)
94.713
99.603
Total, after adjustments:*
92.737
92.913
—
—
—
(Mandatory)
22.313
23.338
—
—
—
(Discretionary)
70.424
69.574
—
—
—
*Adjustments may include various supplementals, rescissions, prior year outlays, advance
appropriations, accounting changes, and reestimates for actuarial gains and losses.

Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.

---

CRS-3
Key Policy Issues
Department of Veterans Affairs
The Administration’s FY2000 budget requested $42.54 billion for VA programs,
estimated by the House Appropriations Subcommittee for VA, HUD, and
Independent Agencies, to be $87 million less than enacted for FY1999.
Congress approved $42.63 billion in appropriations for VA for FY1999, up from
$40.98 billion for FY1998 (after incorporating supplemental appropriations, and
various reestimates of mandatory spending for that year). The Administration had
requested $42.15 billion for FY1999; the Senate approved $42.52 billion; the House,
$42.65 billion. The Administration recommended a slight decrease in medical care
funding — the House and Senate called for increases, and conferees settled on $278
million more than provided in FY1998. Both houses approved almost identical
amounts for new construction projects, an amount about $80 million more than
requested — conferees accepted the levels in the bills passing the two chambers. The
final bill also added to the Administration’s request for grants to states to help fund
veterans’ facility projects at the state level.
For additional information on VA programs, see CRS Report RL30099,
Veterans Issues in the 106th Congress, by Dennis Snook.
Table 3. Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations,
FY1995 to FY1999
(budget authority in billions of current $)
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
$37.48
$38.37
$40.09
$40.98
$42.63
Source: CRS Report 98-204; House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
VA Cash Benefits. Spending for VA cash benefit programs is mandatory, and
amounts requested by the budget are based on projected caseloads. Definitions of
eligibility and benefit levels are in law. For FY2000, the subcommittee projects that
$23.3 billion will be required for these entitlements, mostly service-connected
compensation, means-tested pensions, and Montgomery GI-Bill education payments.
For the most part, declining caseloads for pensions and education benefits have been
decreasing program obligations from year-to-year. For FY2000, however, this lower
trend for education programs is largely offset because P.L. 105-178 increased
Montgomery GI-Bill benefits by 20%. For FY1999, Congress appropriated $23.4
billion for VA entitlement programs. VA appropriations for FY1998 included $22.1
billion for VA cash benefits.
Medical Care. The Administration requested $17.3 billion for VA medical
programs for FY2000, the same amount as had been appropriated for FY1999. In
addition, the Administration assumed that $608 million more medical care funding
would be provided in FY2000 from the Medical Care Cost Recovery (MCCF) fund,

---

CRS-4
which collects payments from insurance companies with joint coverage of veterans
receiving care in VA facilities, and from veterans obligated for cost-sharing of their
VA medical care (MCCF collections for FY1999 are estimated to be $583 million).
Congress appropriated $17.057 billion in funds for VA medical care for FY1998.
FY2000 Congressional Budget Resolution. The House approved an amendment
to its version of the FY2000 budget resolution that called for an increase of $1.1
billion over the amount that the Administration requested for medical care; the Senate
approved an amendment calling for $3 billion more for those programs. Final passage
of the Budget Resolution contained language calling for $1.7 billion more in medical
care funding.
For additional information on VA medical care, see CRS Report 97-786,
Veterans Medical Care: Major Changes Underway, by Dennis Snook.
VA Construction. The Administration requested $235 million for new
construction projects, comprised of $60 million for major construction (projects with
an estimated cost above $4 million) and $175 million for minor construction. Most
of the larger project funds would be used to improve existing facilities: $13 million
for a surgical suite to be added to the Kansas City facility, and $17.5 million for spinal
cord injury treatment and rehabilitation capabilities at the Tampa, Florida hospital.
Many of the minor construction projects would continue VA’s overall strategy of
expanding outpatient access, although $50 million would fund needed rehabilitation
and improvements for inpatient services in several VA hospitals.
For FY1999, Congress provided $317 million in new construction project
funding. For FY1998, Congress appropriated $353 million for new construction, and
redirected to outpatient access projects, $32.1 million that had been previously
authorized and appropriated for a new hospital in California.
Program Administration. The Administration requested $912 million to fund
the General Operating Expenses (GOE) account for administering VA benefit
programs during FY2000, and $61 million for administering the medical programs.
Congress provided $856 million for GOE, and $63 million for medical care
administration, for FY1999. For FY1998, Congress appropriated $786 million for
GOE, and $60 million for medical administration.
VA employment estimates. The Administration projects overall VA employment
will average 197,909 in FY2000, down from an estimated average of 205,413 in
FY1999, and 207,066 in FY1998. Most of the decline is in medical staff: VA
estimates 176,000 medical care staff positions for FY2000, down from an estimated
182,000 in FY1999, and 185,000 in FY1998. Medical care staff positions will have
declined by 14% from a high of 204,000 at the end of FY1993, if these estimates
hold.
Capital Asset Fund (proposed legislation). The Administration included a
legislative proposal in its FY2000 budget, for the creation of a 5-year pilot Capital
Asset Fund (CAF) that would allow VA to “sell, transfer, or exchange excess and
underutilized properties,” collecting the proceeds in this asset fund for use in the
disposal or conversion to other uses of superfluous assets, primarily hospital facilities.

---

CRS-5
Ten percent of the CAF proceeds would be transferred to HUD to be used for
homeless assistance programs. VA estimates that the CAF would receive $18 million
annually from 2001 through 2004, and requested $10 million in start-up funds for
FY2000.
Table 4. Appropriations: Department of Veterans Affairs, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)

FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Comp., pension, burial
21.857
21.568
—
—
—
Insurance/indemnities
0.046
0.029
—
—
—
Housing programs
0.300
0.282
—
—
—
Readjustment benefits
1.175
1.469
—
—
—
Subtotal: Mandatory
23.379
23.348
—
—
—
Medical carea
17.306
17.306
—
—
—
Med.-prosthetic research
0.316
0.316
—
—
—
Construction, major
0.142
0.060
—
—
—
Construction, minor
0.175
0.175
—
—
—
Grants for state facilities
0.090
0.040
—
—
—
State veteran cemeteries
0.010
0.011
—
—
—
Nat’l Cemetery Admin.
0.092
0.097
—
—
—
General operating exp.
0.856
0.912
—
—
—
Admin. expenses
(housing program)
0.160
0.158
—
—
—
Inspector General
0.036
0.043
—
—
—
Medical Administration
0.063
0.061
—
—
—
Capital asset fund
—-
0.010
—
—
—
Subtotal: Discretionary
19.246
19.190
—
—
—
Subtotal: (Veterans Affairs)
42.625
42.538
—
—
—
Note: Rounding may cause discrepancies in subtotals.
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
a Medical Care Collections Fund (MCCF) receipts are added to the Medical Care account; $583
million in additional funds from this source are estimated for FY1999; $608 million for FY2000.

---

CRS-6
Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Administration requested $28.05 billion for the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) in FY2000. This amount is estimated by the House
Appropriations Subcommittee for VA-HUD and Independent Agencies to be $3.39
billion more than the appropriation of $24.66 billion for HUD for FY1999.
For FY1999, President Clinton requested $24.8 billion for HUD; the House
approved $26.1 billion, and the Senate approved $24.1 billion. The House and Senate
differed in amounts appropriated for components of the Housing Certificate Fund, and
in their treatment of Federal Housing Authority (FHA) administrative expenses, as
well as in various earmarks and program subcategories. In conference, more funding
than was approved by either the House or the Senate for the Housing Certificate Fund
was adopted, in part because of reforms in federal housing programs contained in
Title V of the legislation. For FY1999, $10.3 billion was provided for the Housing
Certificate Fund, reduced by $1.65 billion in rescissions.
For additional information on housing issues, see CRS Report RS20045,
Housing Issues in the 106 Congress
th
, by Richard Bourdon.
Table 5. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Appropriations, FY1995 to FY1999
(budget authority in billions of current $; net after rescissions)
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
$20.09
$19.13
$16.30
$21.44
$24.66
Source: CRS Report 98-204; House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
Housing Certificate Fund. The Administration is requesting $11.5 billion in
new budget authority for the Housing Certificate Fund in FY2000. This includes $4.2
billion in advanced appropriations for use beginning in October 2000. With $2.2
billion in recaptured funds and carryovers from previous years, and $183 million
transferred from the Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing Account, if the
Administration’s funding request were granted, when added to the recaptured funds
and carryover funds, $13.9 billion would be available for the Housing Certificate Fund
in FY2000.
The largest portion of the Administration’s request for new funding is for
Section 8 contract renewals,
1
$6.4 billion in FY2000 and $4.2 billion to be used after
October 1, 2000. Of the remainder, $347 million would be set aside for incremental
vouchers for Section 8 families and the homeless; $144 million for welfare-to-work
vouchers; $156 million for tenant protection assistance; $209 million for contract
Section 8 of the Housing
1
Act of 1937 (as amended), provides subsidies for rental housing
for low-income families.

---

CRS-7
administration; $6 million for administrative fees, and $20 million for regional
opportunity counseling.
Expiring Rental Contracts. The Administration proposes $10.64 billion for the
renewal of all Section 8 contracts due to expire in FY2000, assuming the cooperation
of the project owners. For FY1999, Congress approved $9.6 billion for Section 8
contract renewals. HUD has identified approximately $2.4 billion in recaptured and
carryover monies from FY1999, including $183 million transferred from the Annual
Contributions for Assisted Housing Account, which could also be used to renew
Section 8 contracts in FY2000, bringing the total available for renewals to $13 billion.
HUD estimates that this amount is sufficient to renew expiring contracts for
2,383,687 units. However, the 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act
2
(P.L. 106-31) rescinded $350 million of the Section 8 reserve fund. Congress said
that it would restore these funds to HUD when needed for the FY2000 Section 8
contract renewals.
HUD would continue to renew these contracts through the “mark-to-market”
restructuring program established in the VA-HUD 1998 Appropriations Act, and
estimates that millions of dollars will be saved that otherwise would be expended on
contracts inflated beyond market rates. Final regulations for this restructuring are
expected to be issued by HUD in July 1999.
For more information on expiring contracts and the restructuring program,
please see the following CRS reports: Report 97-264, The Problem of Section 8
Expiring Contracts, by Susan Vanhorenbeck, and Report 97-1002, HUD Multifamily
Reform: Section 8 Restructuring, by Susan Vanhorenbeck.
Section 8 Contract Amendments. The need for Section 8 contract amendments
resulted because funding was insufficient to maintain projects built through long-term
project-based contracts (usually written for terms up to 40 years) in the 1970's and
1980's. The current practice of providing contracts for a 1-year term should eliminate
the need for amendments to these contracts. However, some older contracts remain
and in many cases, managers cannot maintain their housing inventory without
additional funds provided through amendments to existing contracts.
The Administration has not requested any additional funding for Section 8
amendments in FY2000, contending that recaptured Section 8 funds from previous
years will be sufficient to fund any necessary amendments to Section 8 contracts in
FY2000. In FY1999, the Administration requested $1.3 billion in funding for Section
8 amendments. Congress disagreed with this request, and no funding was provided
for amendments to contracts in FY1999.
Section 8 Tenant-Protection Assistance. The Administration anticipates that not
all owners of Section 8 assisted housing may be willing to renew their contracts. The
Housing Certificate Fund would provide assistance to affected families when a
contract renewal does not take place. The Administration requests $134 million for
2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Congressional Justifications for
2000 Estimates. p. P-2.

---

CRS-8
housing tenants’ protection in FY2000, which would be used to subsidize tenants
displaced through opt-outs, termination of contracts, or property dispositions. The
Administration estimates that this amount would aid approximately 27,000 families.
Another $22 million was requested for Multifamily Enforcement, which provides
protection for tenants facing additional costs of revised policies in multifamily
housing. This funding is used for enhanced vouchers, relocation assistance, and
similar support, bringing the total FY2000 request for tenant protection in FY2000
to $156 million. In FY1999, $434 million was appropriated for this purpose.
Section 8 Vouchers. The Administration is requesting a total of $491 million to
fund 85,000 incremental vouchers in FY2000, including $243 million for 42,000
Section 8 vouchers to help those renters in “worst case” need, such as those whose
rent is more than 50% of their incomes, or who are living in substandard housing;
$144 million for 25,000 Section 8 vouchers to help families make the transition from
welfare-to-work; and $104 million for 18,000 Section 8 vouchers to help homeless
persons making the transition from continuum of care facilities to permanent housing.
In FY1999, $283 million was provided for 50,000 housing vouchers. All of these
were used for the welfare-to-work initiative.
Contract Administration. The Administration is requesting $209 million to
provide the services of contract administrators who would assume many of the duties
HUD staff have performed in the past. These would include conducting annual
physical inspections of properties, reviewing financial statements, conducting
management and occupancy reviews, releasing replacement reserves, and other duties.
In recent years, HUD staff has been reduced in number, and the Administration would
like to reserve the remaining HUD staff for duties which it believes only a government
agency can perform.
The Administration is also asking for $6 million for an anticipated administrative
fee increase for the Section 8 program. This increase was approved in the Quality
Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998.
Regional Opportunity Counseling. The President requested $20 million for the
Regional Opportunity Counseling (ROC) program in FY2000. The program, which
seeks to expand the housing opportunities of low-income families living in high
poverty neighborhoods, funds special counseling conducted by public housing
agencies in partnership with local non-profit agencies. In FY1999, $10 million was
provided for Regional Counseling.
Public Housing Programs. The Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act
of 1998 consolidated all public housing capital programs (except HOPE VI) into one
Public Housing Capital Fund. The Act also directs HUD to develop a new formula
to allocate resources of the Public Housing Operating Fund for FY2000. In the event
that a new formula for that Fund has not been completed in time, FY2000 funds
would be distributed using the existing formula. For FY2000, the Administration
requested $3.003 billion for the Public Housing Operating Fund; $2.55 billion for the
Public Housing Capital Fund; $310 million for Drug Elimination Grants; and $625
million for the HOPE VI program.

---

CRS-9
The FY1999 appropriations provided $2.818 billion for the Public Housing
Operating Fund; $3 billion for Public Housing Capital Fund; $310 million for the Drug
Elimination Grant program; and $625 million for the HOPE VI program.
Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act. During House floor action on
the FY1999 VA-HUD appropriations bill, an amendment was adopted that attached
the essential language of the Housing Opportunity and Responsibility Act, a sweeping
reform of federal housing assistance programs that had passed both chambers but had
not been reported from a conference committee. Conferees on the VA-HUD
appropriations bill deliberated issues in the two versions of the housing reform
language, and with participation of the Administration, completed work on this major
authorization of federal housing programs.
Under the new law, well-run public housing agencies will have more freedom to
operate; poorly run agencies will be held more accountable; more working families
with higher incomes will live in public housing that is now largely occupied by the
poorest of the poor; and some residents will be required to perform 8 hours a month
of community service. In both public housing and Section 8 programs, it will be
easier to evict tenants who commit crimes and cause problems. A home rule flexible
grant demonstration program will allow some local governments (rather than public
housing agencies) to receive federal housing funds to develop creative approaches for
providing affordable housing. A new Section 8 housing voucher program will be
more landlord-friendly and more market-driven. Most provisions in the new law
become effective October 1, 1999.
For further information on this significant change in federal housing policy, see
CRS Report 98-860, Housing the Poor: Federal Housing Programs for Low-Income
Families, by Morton J. Schussheim; and CRS Report 98-868, Public Housing and
Section 8 Reforms: The Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998, by
Richard Bourdon.
Lead-based Paint Reduction. The Administration requested $80 million for
the Lead-based Paint Reduction program for FY2000, the same amount that was
appropriated for the program in FY1999. In FY1997 and 1998, this program was
funded as a set-aside of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fund, and
earlier, it was funded under the Annual Contribution for Assisted Housing Account.
The FY2000 budget proposal requests that all lead hazard balances from these
accounts be transferred to the Lead Hazard Account.
Housing for the Elderly and Disabled. The President requested $660 million
for housing assistance for the elderly in FY2000. The Administration has proposed
combining new and existing HUD programs to help subsidize a full range of housing
options for the elderly. Of the $660 million requested for FY2000, $510 million
would be used for the Section 202 Supportive Housing program; $100 million for a
new initiative which would provide capital grants to convert projects to assisted living
facilities; and $50 million to expand the service coordinator program and provide
renewal money for congregate housing services. In FY1999, $660 million was
appropriated for housing for the elderly under the Section 202 Supportive Housing
program.

---

CRS-10
The budget request also proposes $87 million in new mandatory spending to be
used for 15,000 vouchers for the elderly. If funded, these vouchers would be given
to states to subsidize units developed under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
program.3
The Administration requested $194 million for housing for the disabled (Section
811) in FY2000. This is the same amount as appropriated for the program in
FY1999. In order to provide flexibility and choice in housing the disabled, no less
than 25% and no more than 50% of the funding may be used to provide the disabled
with tenant-based vouchers. A total of $854 million was requested for housing for
the elderly and disabled in FY2000.
For more information on housing for the elderly, see CRS Report RS20160,
Housing for the Elderly: Legislation in the 106 Congress
th
, by Susan Vanhorenbeck.
Homeless Assistance Grants. The President’s budget requests $1.129 billion
for homeless assistance. Of this total, $1.020 billion is for competitive Homeless
Assistance Grants, an increase of $45 million or 4.4% over that enacted for FY1999.
There is also $104 million recommended for 18,000 additional Section 8 vouchers for
the homeless. These new vouchers would serve both disabled and nondisable
4
d
homeless families or individuals who are ready to make the transition from temporary
to permanent housing after counseling. The homeless assistance budget also proposes
to use up to 1% of appropriated funds for technical assistance to help grantees
overcome a variety of problems, and for a management information system to
automate and integrate homeless assistance programs with other community and
economic development programs. In addition, HUD would merge all of the balances
from separate homeless assistance program accounts (of past years) into one
Homeless Assistance Grants account to more efficiently utilize recaptured funds and
streamline the Department.
HUD estimates that with this proposed budget, there will be 150,000 transitional
beds funded by the end of 2000 in addition to 80,000 permanent beds, all linked to
supportive services.
Housing for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). The President requested $240
million for HOPWA in FY2000, $15 million more than provided for the program in
FY1999. HOPWA provides grants to states, localities and nonprofit organizations
to meet the housing need of individuals with HIV/AIDS and their families. The
Administration contends the funding increase is necessary to support the program in
several jurisdictions that become newly eligible in FY2000 for assistance under the
program formula. It estimates that $240 million would support approximately 43,990
housing units.
3 For further information on low-income housing tax credits, see CRS Report RS20045,
Housing Issues in the 106th Congress, by Richard Bourdon.
4 The $104 million for the 18,000 incremental vouchers is shown under the Housing
Certificates Fund and is included in the totals for all vouchers.

---

CRS-11
The HOME Investment Partnership Program. The HOME program makes
funds available to participating jurisdictions to increase the supply of housing and
homeownership for low-income families. According to the Administration, the
HOME program is key to addressing the shortages of affordable rental housing and
homeownership in America’s cities and rural areas.5 The President’s budget requests
$1.61 billion for the HOME program in FY2000, a $10 million increase over the level
enacted for FY1999.
The proposal includes $1.57 billion for HOME grants, $20 million for housing
counseling, and $25 million for a proposed Regional Affordable Housing Initiative
(RAHI). The RAHI pilot program would address critical housing needs in targeted
regions. The program would promote the creation and implementation of regional,
as opposed to jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction, affordable housing strategies.
The budget request also includes set asides of $3 million for insular areas, $7
million for management information systems, and $22 million for technical assistance.
Native American Block Grants. Under the Native American Block Grant,
eligible Indian tribes or their Tribally Designated Housing Entities receive funds which
can be used for a variety of activities that would increase their supply of affordable
housing. The President requests $620 million for the Native American Housing Block
Grant for FY2000, the same as funded for FY1999. The Administration also requests
$6 million in credit subsidies to support $5.2 million in loan guarantees.
Rural Housing and Economic Development. The FY1999 HUD
Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-276) established within HUD an Office of Rural
Housing and Economic Development to support housing and economic development
in rural areas. The Administration is requesting $20 for FY2000, a $5 million
decrease from the level enacted for FY1999.
For more information on rural housing issues, see CRS Report 98-915, Rural
Housing Programs: FY1999 Appropriations and Amendments, by Bruce E. Foote.
Fair Housing. For FY2000, the Administration requests $20 million for the Fair
Housing Assistance Program, an increase of $3.5 million over the FY1999
appropriation. The increase would be used to fund a Fair Housing Partnership
between state and local government fair housing agencies and private fair housing
groups. The Partnership would focus on underserved populations to ensure full
protection of the Fair Housing Act to those who face language, cultural, or other
barriers.

The Administration proposes $27 million in FY2000 for the Fair Housing
Initiatives Program, an increase of $3.5 million over the FY1999 appropriation. The
increase would be paired with the Fair Housing Partnership mentioned above, and
would be used to increase homeownership among under-served groups.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
5
Congressional Justifications for
2000 Estimates. p. G-2.

---

CRS-12
Community Development Block Grant. The Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) program is the largest source of federal assistance to state and local
governments for housing rehabilitation, economic development, and neighborhood
revitalization. P.L. 105-276 appropriates $4.750 billion in CDBG assistance for
FY1999. For FY2000, the Administration requests $4.775 billion for CDBG. The
Administration’s FY2000 CDBG budget request includes $425 million for set-aside
activities, $101 million less than the $526 million appropriated for FY1999. These
proposed set-asides would provide funding for Indian tribes, empowerment zone
related technical assistance, Economic Development Initiative projects,
homeownership zones, and the Youthbuild program.
The Administration’s budget request for FY2000 also includes $350 million in
CDBG-related assistance, including funding for urban and regional empowerment
zones, brownfield development, the redevelopment of abandoned buildings, and
support of so-called “smart growth” initiatives under the Administration’s Regional
Connections proposal.
Regional Connections. This is a new initiative of the Clinton Administration
designed to promote comprehensive and coordinated regional development strategies.
The Administration is requesting $50 million in Regional Connections grants to be
awarded to state and local governments. The Administration unsuccessfully sought
$100 million in funding for this proposal in its FY1999 budget submission.
Brownfield Redevelopment. For FY2000, the Administration is proposing $50
million in support of brownfield redevelopment, for an increase of $25 million over
FY1999. These are environmentally contaminated sites in urban and rural
communities that the Administration seeks to return to useful economic life through
a process of environmental remediation and reuse. Funds are to be used to support
Section 108 loan guarantees to help pay for cleanup activities and to assist in
financing job-generating economic development projects.
Regional Empowerment Zones. This is a new Administration proposal and part
of its “New Markets Initiative” intended to promote economic activities in distressed
urban and rural communities. The Regional Empowerment Zone proposal is intended
to increase youth employment opportunities by linking urban empowerment zone
strategies to broader metropolitan area employment opportunities. The
Administration is requesting $50 million for this proposal.
Urban Empowerment Zones. Current estimates by the House Appropriations
Committee show that for FY1999, appropriations for urban empowerment zones will
total $45 million. This assistance was provided under an omnibus appropriation
measure, P.L. 105-277. The Administration’s FY2000 budget request, as estimated
by the House Committee, does not include funding for empowerment zones and
enterprise communities. Empowerment zones enable tax credits to eligible private
businesses and to state and local governments to be used to encourage economic
activity in selected communities.
America’s Private Investment Companies. Another component of the
Administration’s “New Markets Initiative,” the America’s Private Investment
Companies (APIC) proposal is intended to increase the flow of private equity capital

---

CRS-13
investment into distressed urban and rural communities. The Administration
estimates that this credit subsidy could leverage $1 billion in private capital. The
Administration is requesting $37 million in APIC subsidy for FY2000.
Redevelopment of Abandoned Buildings. This is a component of the
Administration’s “New Markets Initiative” designed to increase economic activity in
distressed urban and rural areas. The Administration is requesting $50 million to
assist communities raze abandoned blighted buildings and redevelop the sites for
commercial or residential use.
Section 108 Loan Guarantee Subsidy. The Administration is requesting $30
million in subsidies to support a loan guarantee commitment of $1.3 billion for
FY2000. CDBG Section 108 loan guarantees allow selected local and state
governments to borrow up to five times their annual CDBG allocation to finance large
scale economic development projects. For FY1999, $30 million in subsidies were
authorized to support $1.3 billion in loan guarantee commitments.
Youthbuild. The Youthbuild program, which provides supervised education and
job training to teenaged residents in public housing, was funded as a $42.5 million
CDBG set-aside program in FY1999. This includes $2.5 million for capacity building
activities. For FY2000, the Administration requests $75 million in CDBG funds be
set-aside for Youthbuild activities.
The Federal Housing Administration. The Administration requests $120
billion in insurance commitments for the Mutual Mortgage Insurance fund of the
Federal Housing Administration (FHA) during FY2000. This is a $20 billion increase
over the FY1999 level. A higher level of FHA loan activity is expected because of the
increase in the FHA loan limit enacted in the FY1999 HUD Appropriations Act. In
certain parts of the country, eligible borrowers may obtain FHA-insured loans for up
to $208,800 to purchase one-family homes, and the loans may be as high as $256,500
in Honolulu. The increased commitment limit is intended to avoid the need for
supplemental appropriations if the demand for FHA insurance exceeds the projected
level.
The Administration requests a direct loan limitation of $50 million, and proposes
that $30 million would be used to facilitate the sale of multifamily housing projects.
The other $20 million would be used by non-profit and government agencies to make
HUD-owned single family properties available for resale to purchasers with income
at or below 115% of the median income of the area.
The FY2000 Budget requests $18.1 billion in loan commitments for the General
and Special Risk Insurance funds of FHA. This is the same level as enacted in
FY1999. These funds support specialized mortgage finance needs such as hospitals,
assisted living and nursing homes, apartment buildings, and home rehabilitation.
For more information on FHA mortgage limits, see CRS Report 98-421, Raising
the FHA Mortgage Limit: Issues and Options, by Bruce E. Foote.

---

CRS-14
Table 6. Appropriations: Housing and Urban Development, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)
FY2000
Admin. House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Housing certificate fund (HCF)
10.327
7.322
—
—
—
(By transfer)
0
(0.183)
—
—
—
Advance approp. FY2001
0
4.200
—
—
—
Subtotal: HCF funding
10.327
11.522
—
—
—
Housing set-asides:a
—
—
—
Expiring Section 8 contracts
(9.600)
(10.640)
—
—
—
Sect. 8 tenant protection
(0.434)
(0.156)
—
—
—
Region. opportunity counsel.
(0.010)
(0.020)
—
—
—
Welfare-to-work hsng. vouch.
(0.283)
(0.144)
—
—
—
Contract administration
0
(0.209)
—
—
—
Incremental vouchers
0
(0.347)
—
—
—
Administrative fee change
0
(0.006)
—
—
—
Subtotal: HCF set-asides
(10.327)
(11.522)
—
—
—
Sect. 8 rescissions
-1.650
0
—
—
—
Public housing capital fund
3.000
2.555
—
—
—
Pub. housing operating fund
2.818
3.003
—
—
—
Drug elimination grants
0.310
0.310
—
—
—
Distressed pub. hous. (HOPE)
0.625
0.625
—
—
—
Indian hsng. block grants
0.620
0.620
—
—
—
Indian hsng. loan guar.
0.006
0.006
—
—
—
Rural Hsng.; Econ. Develop.
0.025
0.020
—
—
—
Housing for persons with AIDS
0.225b
0.240
—
—
—
Community Devel. Blk. Grant
4.750
4.775
—
—
—
(CDBG emergency funding)
0.250
0
—
—
—
Homeless Assistance Grants
0.975
1.025c
—
—
—
HOME Invest. Partnerships
1.600
1.610
—
—
—
Brownfields Initiative
0.025
0.050
—
—
—
Regional connections
0
0.050
—
—
—
Emp’rment Zones; Enterprizesd
0.045
0
—
—
—
Regional emp’rment zones
0
0.050
—
—
—
Sec.108 loan guar.; subsidy
0.030
0.030
—
—
—
America priv. invest.; subsidy
0
0.037
—
—
—
Redevelopment of aband. bldg.
0
0.050
—
—
—
Subtotal: Pub., Indian Housing
(23.981)
(22.378)
—
—
—
(net, excl. advance approp.)

---

CRS-15
FY2000
Admin. House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Office of lead hazard control
0.080
0.080
—
—
—
Housing, elderly and disabled
0.854
0.854
—
—
—
Federal Housing Admin. (net)e
-0.033
0.635
—
—
—
Research and technology
0.048
0.050
—
—
—
GNMA (net)e
-0.361
-0.407
—
—
—
Fair housing activities
0.040
0.047
—
—
—
Inspector General
0.050
0.038
—
—
—
Salaries and expenses
0.456
0.502
—
—
—
Y2K convers’n (emerg. funds)
0.012
0
—
—
—
Admin. provisions (net)d
-0.468
-0.329
—
—
—
Subtotal for HUD for
(24.659)
(23.848)
—
—
—
Current Year and FY2000
Appropriations
(26.297)
(23.848)
—
—
—
Rescission
(-1.650)
(0.0)
—
—
—
Emergency appropriations
(0.012)
(0.0)
—
—
—
Advance appropriations
(0.0)
(4.200)
—
—
—
Subtotal (HUD)
24.659
28.048
—
—
—
(rounded, may not add)
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
Includes $4.2 billion funded and expected to be spent in FY2001.
a
b Includes additional $10 million provided by P.L. 105-277.
Includes $5 million for homeless assistance demonstration project.
c
d Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities were funded by P.L. 105-277 for FY1999.
Net, interagency transfers and offsetting receipts against appropriations of the current year.
e
Environmental Protection Agency
The President’s FY2000 request for the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) is $7.2 billion in spending authority or 5% less than the $7.6 billion
appropriated for FY1999. The FY1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act, P.L. 105-277,
added $30 million to the EPA budget for FY1999; the FY1999 Emergency
Supplemental, P.L. 106-31, decreased EPA’s FY1999 funds by $10 million. Three
prime issues are the adequacy of funds to capitalize wastewater and drinking water
needs; increased funding and EPA’s authority to conduct climate change activities;
and the Agency’s progress in cleaning up toxic waste sites under the Superfund
program.
The Administration proposed FY2000 levels in the State and Tribal Assistance
Grants would provide one-third less for capitalizing state and local wastewater needs,
thereby prompting considerable controversy during hearings before EPA’s
appropriators this year. Two factors drive this interest: the program’s widespread

---

CRS-16
popularity among all states and many localities, and major remaining capital needs.
EPA estimates these remaining needs to be in the $100 billion to $200 billion range;
the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies judges the needs to be roughly
$300 billion.
The current controversy does not extend to the other major activity capitalizing
state drinking water funds, which would increase under the proposal from $775
million to $825 million. Funding for special Mexican Border water quality and
drinking water projects would double to $100 million, and grants for state
administration of environmental programs would rise 6% to $825 million, under the
proposal. The budget also proposes a new $200 million Clean Air Partnership
program to fund innovative state and local activities aimed at reducing air pollutants.
Table 7. Environmental Protection Agency Appropriations,
FY1995 to FY1999
(budget authority in billions of current $)
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
$6.7
$6.5
$6.8
$7.4
$7.6
Source: CRS Report 98-204; House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
EPA’s climate change activities continue to be controversial. The
Administration supports the yet-to-be ratified Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse
gases as an international response to global warming. Congress approved no
additional research funds for FY1999, denied most of the requested increase of
roughly $80 million for climate change activities, and included bill language
prohibiting EPA from spending funds on activities that would implement the Protocol.
At about the same time, the Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277), added $10
million to the existing appropriation for global climate activities; on May 21, 1999,
the FY1999 Emergency Supplemental (P.L. 106-31) rescinded $10 million for that
same account.

Climate change programs are funded through the Science and Technology, and
the Environmental Compliance accounts. The Administration’s FY2000 request of
$239 million for EPA’s climate change activities would be a 90% increase if adopted.
About 30% of this amount is for science and technology activities, and the remaining
70% is for activities to encourage voluntary reduction of greenhouse gases. Some
Members assert that EPA does not have the legal authority to conduct activities to
reduce carbon emissions, a primary cause of such gases. CRS’ Climate Change
Briefing Book [http://www.congress.gov/brbk/html/ebgcctop.html] discusses many
aspects of the climate change issue.
Another issue is administration of the Superfund program, aimed at cleaning up
toxic waste sites. Unlike the last three years, the FY2000 budget does not seek a
major increase in the program; the $1.5 billion requested is the same as appropriated
in FY1999. In addition to the current appropriation, P.L. 105-276 authorized an
additional $650 million if Superfund is reauthorized by August 1, 1999.

---

CRS-17
Committee oversight of the Superfund focuses on improving the efficiency of the
program’s administration and the progress EPA is making in cleaning up all major
hazardous waste sites. The General Accounting Office (GAO) continues to place this
program on its list of troubled federal programs and there are ongoing efforts in both
the House and Senate to legislatively reform this program.
For more detailed information on the Superfund, see: CRS Issue Brief IB10011,
Superfund Reauthorization Issues in the 106th Congress, by Mark Reisch.
Table 8. Appropriations: Environmental Protection Agency, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)

FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Science and Technology
(including transfers from
0.700a
0.680
—
—
—
Superfund)
Environmental programs,
1.848
2.046
—
—
—
compliance (management)
Office of Inspector General
0.043
0.040
—
—
—
Buildings and facilities
0.057
0.063
—
—
—
Superfund (net, after
1.448
1.452
—
—
—
transfers)
Leaking Underground
0.073
0.072
—
—
—
Storage Tank Trust Fund
Oil spill response
0.015
0.016
—
—
—
State and tribal assistance
3.407b
2.838
—
—
—
grants
Subtotal (EPA)
7.590
7.207
—
—
—
(rounded, may not add)
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
Also includes $10 million added for FY1999 by P.L. 105-277.
a
b Also includes $20 million added for FY1999 by P.L. 105-277.
For information on wastewater treatment issues, see CRS Report 98-323,
Wastewater Treatment: Overview and Background, by Claudia Copeland; for clean
air issues, see CRS Issue Brief IB10004, Clean Air Act Issues in the 106 Congress,
th
by James McCarthy. For additional detail on clean air issues, see: CRS Report 97-8,
Air Quality: EPA’s Proposed New Ozone and Particulate Matter Standards, by John
Blodgett and James McCarthy. For more detailed information on EPA and its budget,
see: CRS Issue Brief IB10038, Environmental Protection Agency: Analysis of Key
FY2000 Budget Issues, by Martin Lee.

---

CRS-18
Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) helps states and localities
prepare for and cope with disasters that overwhelm their own capabilities. FEMA
administers policies related to emergency management and planning, disaster relief,
fire prevention, earthquake hazard reduction, emergency broadcasting services, flood
insurance, mitigation programs, and dam safety.
Table 9. Appropriations: Federal Emergency Management
Agency, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)
FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Disaster relief
0.308
0.300
—
—
—
Emergency funding
0.906
2.480
—
—
—
Pre-disaster mitigation
0
0.030
—
—
—
Disaster loan subsidy
0.002
0.002
—
—
—
Salaries and expenses
0.171
0.190
—
—
—
Inspector General
0.005
0.008
—
—
—
Emergency management,
planning assistance
0.241
0.251
—
—
—
Emergency food, shelter
0.100
0.125
—
—
—
Flood map modernize.
0
0.005
—
—
—
Flood mitigation fund
0
0.012
—
—
—
Radiological emerg.
preparedness (net)
0
-0.001
—
—
—
Emergency funds for Y2K
conversion
0.007
0
—
—
—
Subtotal (FEMA)
*
1.740
3.402
—
—
—
(rounded, may not add)
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
Disaster relief is authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act. The Act authorizes the President to declare major
disasters or emergencies (the latter provide considerably less federal assistance than
the former), sets out eligibility criteria, and specifies types of assistance that may be
authorized. Funding varies from year-to-year by the severity and frequency of
declared catastrophes. In recent years, billions have been appropriated to help
communities recover from tornados, hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, and other
incidents. For further information on FEMA appropriations, see: CRS Report

---

CRS-19
RS20094, FEMA Funding Overview: Current and Historical Data for the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, by Keith Bea.
Members of Congress have voiced general support for the Administration’s
emphasis in recent years on disaster mitigation, but disagree on specifics. Instead of
agreeing to the request for separate funding for the Project Impact mitigation efforts,
for FY1999, House and Senate panels set aside roughly half the amount requested in
the existing account that funds state and local emergency preparedness activities
(“emergency management, planning and assistance,” or EMPA). Also, the House
subcommittee has raised concerns about the process used by FEMA to identify
mitigation priorities. The Senate Appropriations Committee report noted concern
with the administration of existing mitigation authority, and has requested that the
General Accounting Office review federal and non-federal mitigation activities.
Another difference between the Administration and Congress on FEMA funding
concerns disaster relief. As in previous years, the Administration has requested that
contingency funding be made available for future disasters; for FY2000, $2.5 billion
has been requested for this emergency funding. Congress historically has rejected this
approach, providing a smaller initial appropriation than requested for meeting
unknown emergencies, preferring instead to consider supplemental disaster relief
funding as needed.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
For FY2000, the Administration is requesting $13.578 billion for NASA
compared to an appropriation of $13.665 billion for FY1999. This request includes
$8.17 billion for research and development, among which are the specific allocations
of $2.483 billion for the International Space Station (ISS), $2.197 billion for Space
Science, $1.459 billion for Earth Science, and $1.006 billion for Aero-Space
Technology. In FY1999, Congress appropriated $2.270 billion for the ISS, $2.119
billion for Space Science, $1.414 billion for Earth Science, and $1.338 billion for
Aero-Space Technology. Also for FY2000, NASA is requesting $2.986 billion for
Space Shuttle operations, compared to $3.028 billion approved in FY1999, and
$2.181 billion for Research and Program Management compared to $2.121 billion
approved in FY1999.
NASA projects eight Space Shuttle flights in FY2000 including seven for the
ISS. The reliability of Russian commitments to the ISS is a critical issue for FY2000,
as it could affect ISS construction costs. Assuming successful launch of the Russian
Service Module before the end of 1999, NASA expects 10 ISS missions in FY2000,
to continue construction and outfitting of the ISS, and to install the first ISS crew.
Continued consolidation of Space Shuttle contract operations under the Space Flight
Operations Contract is also expected in FY2000.
The request for additional ISS funding during FY2000 assumes some of the
additional costs would be offset by savings in the Aero-Space Technology programs.
The Office of Aero-Space Technology plans to terminate two major aeronautics
research programs in FY2000, high speed research and advanced subsonic engine
technology. In addition, with the end of NASA’s share of contract costs, funding for

---

CRS-20
the X-33 project, a joint effort with Lockheed Martin to develop technology for a
reusable launch vehicle, will decline.
Table 10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Appropriations, FY1995 to FY1999
(budget authority in billions of current $)
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
$14.00
$13.88
$13.71
$13.65
$13.67
Source: CRS Report 98-204; House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
The Office of Space Science will develop small Mars exploration missions,
including the use of robotic aircraft. Two major missions and an upgrade of the
Hubble Space Telescope are also expected in FY2000, along with four launches in the
Explorer program. The next two satellites in Earth Science’s Earth Observing System
(EOS) program are scheduled to be launched in FY2000, assuming successful launch
of the Terra (formerly the EOS AM-1) mission in FY1999.
Table 11. Appropriations: National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)
FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Human space flight
5.480
5.638
—
—
—
Science, aeronaut., tech.
5.654
5.425
—
—
—
Mission support
2.511
2.494
—
—
—
Inspector General
0.020
0.021
—
—
—
Subtotal (NASA)
13.665
13.578
—
—
—
(rounded, may not add)
-
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
The aging of the NASA work force, coupled with budget constraints, makes the
overall safety of Space Shuttle operations a growing NASA concern. In all science
areas, analysts claim that NASA’s “better, faster, cheaper” policy for mission
spacecraft threatens the reliability of such missions. In addition, because a vehicle for
the crew’s return will be needed when habitation of the ISS begins, there is growing
concern about the slow pace of development of that vehicle. Other issues include the
consequences for the EOS program of reducing the capability of the EOS data
information system, uncertainties about development of a reusable launch vehicle to
replace the Space Shuttle, and effects of delays in cost-savings from the Combined
Space Operations Contract.

---

CRS-21
The House has approved a NASA authorization bill (H.R. 1654) that would
authorize $13.626 billion for FY2000, specifying $2.482 billion for the ISS, $3.173
billion for Launch Vehicles and Payload Operations, $5.453 billion for Science,
Aeronautics, and Technology, and $2.495 billion for Mission Support. The Senate
Commerce Committee approved a NASA authorization bill (S. 342) that would
authorize $13.378 billion for FY2000, specifying $2.283 billion for the ISS, $3.155
billion for Launch Vehicles and Payload Operations, $5.425 billion for Science,
Aeronautics, and Technology, and $2.495 billion for Mission Support.
For a more detailed discussion of NASA and its FY2000 request, see: CRS
Report RL30154, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s FY2000
Budget: Description and Analysis, by Richard Rowberg. For more discussion on the
ISS, see: CRS Issue Brief 93017, Space Stations, by Marcia S. Smith.
National Science Foundation
The FY2000 request for the National Science Foundation (NSF) is $3.9 billion,
a 6.8% increase over FY1999's estimated spending of $3.7 billion. The FY2000
request is part of the Administration’s commitment to basic research, and $3 billion
of the request is for Research and Related Activities (R&RA), an increase of 6.9%
($234 million) over the FY1999 estimate of $2.8 billion. The R&RA includes an
activity created in FY1999 — Integrative Activities (IA). IA’s request of $161
million would provide support for cross-disciplinary research, major research
instrumentation, intellectual infrastructure, and the Science and Technology Policy
Institute (which supercedes the Critical Technologies Institute). The request also
includes funding for examining “biocomplexity” in the environment ($50 million), and
new and comprehensive approaches to education and work force development ($475
million).
The President designated NSF as the lead agency for 6 federal agencies involved
in information technology. NSF’s FY2000 request provides $146 million for the
Information for the Twenty-First Century (IT ) initiative. The investment wil
2
l
support research in areas such as software systems, high-end computing, and terra-
scale computing systems. In addition, IT builds on the NSF’s current investments
2
in Knowledge and Distributive Intelligence (KDI) and other information
technology-related activities. The KDI also supports the Next Generation Internet,
a multi-agency effort. The integration of research and education is a key theme of
NSF’s efforts in the area of Educating for the Future, which includes such programs
as Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry, the Integrative Graduate
Education and Research Training program, Faculty Early Career Development
program, and Research Experiences for Undergraduates.

---

CRS-22
Table 12. National Science Foundation Appropriations,
FY1995 to FY1999
(budget authority in billions of current $)
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
$3.23
$3.22
$3.27
$3.43
$3.67
Source: CRS Report 98-204; House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.
The FY2000 request for the Education and Human Resources Directorate
(EHR) is $678 million. Major programs receiving funding include precollege, ($358
million); undergraduate ($115 million); and graduate ($81.9 million) support
programs. Precollege support includes funds for two new activities, the internet-
based National Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Digital
Library (NSDL) and the NSF Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education. Major
programs at the undergraduate level are Advanced Technological Education, Louis
Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation, Minority Institution, and Course,
Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement. The request assumes an overall decrease
in graduate level support for programs supporting Graduate Research Fellowship,
Graduate Research Traineeship, Minority Graduate Education, and Postdoctoral
Fellowships in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education.
Funding for the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research would
continue at current levels ($48.4 million).
Table 13. Appropriations: National Science Foundation, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)
FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Program
FY1999
request
bill
bill
Final
Research, related
2.770
3.004
—
—
—
activities
Education, human
0.662
0.678
—
—
—
resources
Major research
0.090
0.085
—
—
—
equipment
Salaries and expenses
0.144
0.149
—
—
—
Office of Inspector
0.005
0.005
—
—
—
General
Subtotal (NSF)
(rounded, may not
3.671
3.921
—
—
—
add)
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.

---

CRS-23
For additional information on NSF, see: CRS Report 95-897, National Science
Foundation, Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences — A Fact
Sheet; and, CRS Report 95-307, U.S. National Science Foundation: An Overview,
both by Christine M. Matthews.
Other Independent Agencies
In addition to funding for VA, HUD, EPA, FEMA, NASA and NSF, several
other smaller “sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and
offices” will receive their funding through the bill providing appropriations for VA,
HUD, and Independent Agencies for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1999.
American Battle Monuments Commission. This Commission is responsible
for the construction and maintenance of memorials honoring Armed Forces battle
achievements since 1917. The Administration requested $26 million for FY2000, an
amount only a few thousand dollars above the amounts appropriated for FY1999.
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board. The Administration
requested $8 million for the Board for FY2000, which originated in the FY1998 bill,
with $4 million appropriated to meet start-up operations costs. Congress
appropriated $7 million for FY1999.
Community Development Financial Institution Fund. The Administration’s
FY2000 budget requested $125 million for CDFI, the same amount requested by the
Administration’s last 2 budgets. Congress appropriated $80 million in the FY1999
VA-HUD bill (P.L. 105-276) for CDFI, and added $15 million more in the
Transportation appropriations act (P.L. 105-277).
The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI) was created
by P.L. 103-325. The CDFI is an Administration initiative to provide credit and
investment capital to distressed urban and rural areas. The program also provides
training and technical assistance to qualifying financial institutions. The program has
survived despite attempts to eliminate it.
P.L. 104-19 modified the original Act by giving the Department of the Treasury
the authority to manage the CDFI program, although the CDFI continues to be
funded through the VA/HUD bill. After attempts to end funds for the CDFI were
defeated, Congress appropriated $80 million for FY1998, but included a requirement
that GAO audit the CDFI to “review” its effectiveness.
For further information on CDFI, see: CRS Report 97-819, Community
Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund, by Pauline Smale.
Consumer Information Center. The Administration requested $2.622 million
for the Center for FY2000. The Center, administered through the General Services
Administration (GSA), helps federal agencies distribute consumer information and
promotes public awareness of existing federal publications. Congress appropriated
$2.619 million for the Center for FY1999; $300,000 of which was for functions of the
Office of Consumer Affairs, an entity previously administered through the Department

---

CRS-24
of Health and Human Services. That federal entity received no appropriations for
FY1999.
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). This Commission is an
independent regulatory agency charged with protecting the public from unreasonable
product risk and to research and develop uniform safety standards for consumer
products. The Administration requested $51 million for FY2000, up $3.5 million over
FY1999 appropriations. Congress included language in its FY1999 appropriation for
CPSC, that requires the Commission to contract with the National Academy of
Sciences for a study of the potential toxicologic risks of fire-retardant chemicals that
the Commission has proposed be required in residential upholstered furniture, and in
children’s sleepwear.
Corporation for National and Community Service (CNS). The Corporation
administers programs authorized under the National and Community Service Act of
1990 (NCSA) and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 (DVSA).
Appropriations for the NCSA programs, the largest of which is AmeriCorps, are
included in the VA-HUD bill. The Administration’s FY2000 budget requested $545.5
million for the NCSA programs (plus a $3 million request for the CNS Office of the
Inspector General (OIG). For FY1999, Congress provided $425.5 million (plus $3
million for the OIG) for these programs. It then added $10 million for AmeriCorps
in the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Appropriations Act, 1999 (P.L.
105-277). Total funding for AmeriCorps for FY1999 was $237 million; the President
has requested $302 million for FY2000.
The key issue concerning the Corporation and the NCSA programs, which are
strongly supported by President Clinton, has been budgetary survival. Some Members
have expressed concerns about partisan activities, program costs, financial
management, and federally funding a “paid volunteer” program. (The DVSA
programs, — e.g., Foster Grandparents Program and Senior Companion Program —
are funded under the Labor/HHS Appropriation bill and have been non-controversial.)
Authorization for CNS, and programs and activities authorized by NCSA, expired at
the end of FY1996. Since then, continued program authority has occurred through
the appropriations process.
For further information on the Corporation and its programs see: CRS Report
RL30186, Community Service: A Description of AmeriCorps, Foster Grandparents,
and Other Federally Funded Programs, by Ann Lordeman and Alice D. Butler.
Council on Environmental Quality; Office of Environmental Quality.
These two entities are administered by the Executive Office of the President. The
Council is responsible for oversight and coordination of interagency decisions in
matters affecting the environment; the Office provides the professional and
administrative staff for the Council. Congress appropriated $2.675 million for these
functions in FY1999; the President has requested $3.02 million for FY2000.
Court of Veterans Appeals. The Court of Veterans Appeals has exclusive
jurisdiction to review decisions of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, and has the
authority to decide relevant conflicts in the interpretation of law by VA and the Board
of Veterans’ Appeals, and its decisions constitute precedent to guide subsequent

---

CRS-25
decisions by that Board. Congress provided $10.2 million for operations for the
Court in FY1999; the President has requested $11.45 million for FY2000.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The FDIC’s Office of the Inspector
General is funded from deposit insurance funds, and has no direct support from
federal taxpayers. Before FY1998, the amount was approved by the FDIC Board of
Directors; the amount is now directly appropriated to ensure the independence of the
IG office. For FY2000, the amount requested is $33.7 million; Congress approved
$34.7 million for FY1999.
Table 14. Appropriations: Other Independent Agencies, FY2000
(budget authority in billions of $)
FY2000
Admin.
House
Senate
Program
FY1999 request
bill
bill
Final
American Battle
Monuments Commission
0.026
0.026
—
—
—
Chem. Safety and Hazard
0.007
0.008
—
—
—
Investigations Board
Cemetery Exp., Army
0.012
0.012
—
—
—
Community Development
Financial Institutions
0.095a
0.125
—
—
—
Consumer Inform. Center
0.003
0.003
—
—
—
Consumer Product Safety
Commission
0.047
0.051
—
—
—
Corporation for National
and Community Serviceb
0.439
0.549
—
—
—
Council on Environ. Quality
0.003
0.003
—
—
—
Court of Veterans Appeals
0.010
0.011
—
—
—
Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation (transfer)
(0.035
(0.034)
—
—
—
Neighborhood
Reinvestment Corporation
0.090
0.090
—
—
—
National Credit Union
0.002
0.000
—
—
—
Administration
Office, Science &Tech.
0.005
0.005
—
—
—
Selective Service System
0.024
0.025
—
—
—
Subtotal:
(rounded, may not add)
0.763
0.909
—
—
—
Source: House Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies.

---

CRS-26
Includes $15 million in additional funds provided by P.L. 105-277
a
b Includes $10 million in additional funds provided by P.L. 105-277 for FY1999; for both years,
includes $3 million for CNS Office of the Inspector General.
National Credit Union Administration. The purpose of this administrative
office, created under the National Credit Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (P.L.
95-630), is to improve the general financial stability of credit unions. Subscribing
credit unions may borrow from the agency to meet short-term requirements. The
Administration proposed a limitation on administrative expenses, which are financed
from the revolving fund, of $257,000 for FY2000. For FY1999, the Administration
proposed a limitation of $176,000 for the agency’s functions; Congress accepted that
amount, and approved a House proposal for a revolving loan program for credit union
risk pooling, with a subsidy of $2 million.
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NRC). The NRC leverages funds
for reinvestment in older neighborhoods through community-based organizations
called NeighborWorks. Among projects supported by the financing activities of the
NRC are lending activities for home ownership of low-income families. The President
requested $90 million for FY2000, the same amount as Congress provided for
FY1999.
Office of Science and Technology Policy. The Office of Science and
Technology Policy coordinates science and technology policy for the White House.
The Office provides scientific and technological information, analysis and advice to
the President and executive branch, and reviews and participates in formulation of
national policies affecting those areas. The President requested $5.2 million for
FY2000; Congress appropriated $5.03 million for FY1999.
Selective Service System (SSS). The SSS was created to supply manpower to
the U.S. Armed Forces during time of national emergency. Although since 1973, the
the Armed Forces have been on voluntary recruitment and incentives, the SSS remains
the primary vehicle for conscription should it become necessary. In 1987, the SSS
was given the task of developing a postmobilization health care system that would
assist with providing the Armed Forces with health care personnel in time of
emergency. Congress appropriated $24.4 million for this office for FY1999; the
President has requested $25.3 for FY2000.
Selected World Wide Web Sites
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Summary and Justification of Budget.
[http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage]
Corporation for National and Community Service
[http://www.cns.gov/]
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
[http://www.hud.gov]
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
[http://www.fema.gov]

---

CRS-27
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
[http://www.hq.nasa.gov]
National Science Foundation (NSF).
[http://www.nsf.gov]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OMB/html/ombhome.html]
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
[http://www.va.gov

---