Order Code RL30202
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Appropriations for FY2000:
Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of
the President, and General Government
Updated July 23, 1999
Sharon Gressle, Coordinator
Government and Finance 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
passes each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House
and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Treasury, Postal Service, Executive
Office of the President, and General Government. 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
and 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: Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government
Summary
Current funding for the Department of the Treasury, the Postal Service, the
Executive Office of the President and several independent agencies is part of the
Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY1999
(P.L. 105-277/H.R. 4328, 112 Stat. 2681, at 2681-480), enacted October 21, 1998.
Prior to passage of the omnibus bill, the accounts were funded through six continuing
resolutions for FY1999.
The Senate, on July 1, 1999, and the House, on July 15, 1999, passed versions
of the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government Appropriation. The Senate
would fund the accounts at $27.77 billion and the House at $27.8 billion. The
President’s FY2000 budget, submitted February 1, 1999, requests a funding level of
$27.997 billion for the mandatory and discretionary accounts. This is an increase over
the FY1999 level enacted at just under $27 billion in regular appropriations, with
additional emergency funding.. Using Congressional Budget Office adjusted data, the
combined mandatory and discretionary funding, would have the President’s request
at $28.46 billion and the Senate and House at $27.967 billion and $28 billion,
respectively.
Both the House committee and Senate committee determined that $14.534
billion would be necessary to fund the mandatory accounts. The President’s FY2000
request for mandatory funding is also $14.534 billion, as compared to $13.656
enacted for FY1999. The discretionary spending was set by the House subcommittee
would be $13.706 billion, with $13.398 reported to the Senate. Apparently the bill
lost support on the House floor because the full committee set the discretionary
funding level at $249 million lower than agreed upon in subcommittee.
Upon adoption of the FY2000 congressional budget resolution (H. Con. Res. 68,
106
th Congress), a discretionary 302(b) allocation of $538.2 billion in budget authority
and $578.2 billion in outlays was made to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations. Those committees after having allocated discretionary funding levels
to each of the subcommittees, have made revisions in the allocations. As of July 1,
the House is allocating $13.562 billion in budget authority (with $13.969 billion for
outlays) to the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government appropriation. The
Senate is providing the Treasury accounts with $13.204 billion in budget authority
(with $13.817 billion for outlays).
The Department of the Treasury manages both financial and law enforcement
activities and programs. The largest account is for the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS). The Executive Office of the President includes several agencies in direct
support of Administration policy development, such as the Office of Management and
Budget, the Council of Economic Advisors, the Office of National Drug Control
Policy. Some of the independent agencies funded through this measure are the
General Services Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, and the
National Archives and Records Administration. For the most part, the U.S. Postal
Service has become self-supporting.

---

Key Policy Staff
Area of Expertise
Name
CRS Division
Tel.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
William Krouse
G&F
7-2225
Council of Economic Advisers
Edward Knight
G&F
7-7785
Customs Service
William Krouse
G&F
7-2225
Debt Management
James Bickley
G&F
7-7794
Executive Office of the President
Rogelio Garcia
G&F
7-8687
Federal Child Care Policy
Melinda Gish
DSP
7-4618
Federal Election Commission
Joseph Cantor
G&F
7-7876
Federal Employee Health Care Policy
Carolyn Merck
DSP
7-7320
Federal Employee Pension Policy
Patrick Purcell
DSP
7-7571
General Services Administration
Stephanie Smith
G&F
7-8674
Independent Agencies
Sharon Gressle
G&F
7-8677
Internal Revenue Service
Sylvia Morrison
G&F
7-7755
National Archives
Harold Relyea
G&F
7-8679
Office of Government Ethics
Mildred Amer
G&F
7-8304
Office of Personnel Management
Barbara Schwemle
G&F
7-8655
Postal Service
Bernevia McCalip
G&F
7-7781
Presidential Salary
Sharon Gressle
G&F
7-8677
Procurement Reform
Stephanie Smith
G&F
7-8674
Secret Service
Stephanie Smith
G&F
7-8674
Year 2000 Conversion
Richard Nunno
RSI
7-7037
Division abbreviations: G&F = Government and Finance; DSP = Domestic Social Policy; RSI=Resources,
Science, and Industry.

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Status and Legislative History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Budget and Key Policy Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Department of the Treasury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the President 13
Independent Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Federal Child Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Year 2000 Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Major Funding Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Glossary of Budget Process Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
For Additional Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
CRS Issue Briefs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
CRS Info Packs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
CRS Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Other Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Selected World Wide Web Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
List of Tables
Table 1. Status of FY2000 Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President and General Government . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 2. Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the
President, and General Government, FY1995 to FY1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 3. Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President and General
Government Appropriation, FY2000, by Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 4. Department of Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President,
and General Government Appropriations (in thousands of dollars) . . . . . . 25

---

Appropriations for FY2000: Treasury, Postal
Service, Executive Office of the President, and
General Government
Most Recent Developments
On July 19, 1999, the Senate passed H.R. 2490, amended to incorporate the
language of S. 1282, as passed the Senate. The Senate conferees were named that
day, with the House conferees named July 21. As of the afternoon of July 23, the
conference had not been scheduled.
The House, on July 15, passed H.R.. 2490, to make appropriations for the
Department of the Treasury, the Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President
and other independent agencies for FY2000, by one vote. On July 13, the House
Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 2490 (H. Rept. 106-231),. On May 14, the
House Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General
Government completed work on the FY2000 appropriations. The full Committee had
scheduled mark-up for May 20 but that action was postponed.
The Senate passed S. 1282 on July 1, 1999 and will hold it until the House
version is received in the Senate. The Senate Committee on Appropriations reported
the bill on June 24, 1999 (S. Rept. 106-87).
In mid-April, the House (April 14) and the Senate (April 15) agreed to the
conference report on the FY2000 Budget Resolution, establishing the congressional
budget for the U.S. Government.
On February 1, 1999, the President sent to Congress the Budget of the United
States Government for FY2000.
Introduction
The President, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required
to submit to Congress, annually, the Budget of the United States Government. On
February 1, 1999, the budget for FY2000 was submitted.1
1U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the
United States Government, Fiscal Year 2000 (Washington: GPO, 1999). Hereinafter referred
to as Budget, with specific budget document cited.

---

CRS-2
Congress has established a procedure under which it passes a concurrent
resolution which establishes the congressional budget for the government and sets
forth budgetary levels for several years in the future. The House and Senat
2
e
Appropriations Committees then allocate the discretionary funding levels (302(b)
allocations) to each of the subcommittees. Since passage of the FY2000 budget
resolution, the committees have changed the allocations several times. Th
3
e
Congressional Budget Office has offered spending and revenue options in the context
of budgetary discipline.4
Appropriations for the Department of the Treasury, in addition to funding the
operations of the department, fund the work of a group of law enforcement
organizations, which include the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the
Customs Service, the Secret Service, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Treasury appropriations also cover
the Internal Revenue Service, the Financial Management Service, and the Bureau of
Public Debt.
For the most part, the U.S. Postal Service has become self-supporting. Federal
contributions are limited to payments to the Postal Service Fund to compensate for
revenues forgone (e.g., free postal service for the blind).
Appropriations for the Executive Office of the President provide salaries and
expenses for the White House Offices, operation of the residences of the President
and Vice President, and most other agencies within the Executive Office of the
President (EOP). Organizations such as the Council of Economic Advisers, the
National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of
National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) are funded through these provisions.
Specific funding for drug control initiatives is provided for distribution by ONDCP.
Among the independent agencies financed through this bill are the Federal
Election Commission, the General Services Administration, the National Archives and
Records Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, the Office of Special
Counsel, and the U.S. Tax Court.
The Senate, in passing S. 1282, added a title to the bill for the purpose of
ensuring “the safety and availability of child care centers in Federal facilities.”
According to the sponsors of the amendment,
2H.Con.Res. 68, 106 Congress, agreed to by the House April 14, 1999 and by the Senat
th
e
April 15, 1999.
U.S.
3
Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Report on the Revised Suballocation
of Budget Allocations for Fiscal Year 2000, 106th Cong., 1st sess., H. Rept. 106-217
(Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999) and U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations,
Further Revised Allocation to Subcommittees of Budget Totals for Fiscal Year 2000, 106th
Cong., 1st sess., S. Rept. 106-101 (Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999).
4U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining Budgetary Discipline: Spending and
Revenue Options (Washington: GPO, 1999), hereafter referred to as: CBO, Budgetary
Discipline.

---

CRS-3
This amendment will require all child care services located in federal
facilities to meet, at the very least, the same level of health and safety standards
required of other child care centers in the same geographical area.5
The House bill, as passed, does not contain all of the child care provisions included
in the Senate amendment. However, it does contain the same language addressing the
issue of improving the affordability of child care for federal employees. An
amendment similar to this year’s Senate amendment was offered to the FY1999
Treasury bill, adopted in the Senate, and fell in conference.
Among other provisions adopted by the Senate, the following would
! Convey federal land to the Columbia Hospital for Women;
! Amend the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to provide bonus grants to high performance States based on certain
criteria and collect data to evaluate the outcome of welfare reform;
! Prohibit the use of funds to pay for an abortion or to pay for the administrative
expenses in connection with certain health plans that provide coverage for
abortions;
! Provide additional funding to reduce methamphetamine usage in High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Areas;
! Increase U.S. Customs Service funding to enable the hiring of 500 new
inspectors to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. and to facilitate
legitimate cross-border trade and commerce; and
! Require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an Internet site where a
taxpayer may generate a receipt for an income tax payment which itemizes the
portion of the payment which is allocable to various government spending
categories.
The Senate rejected the amendment which would have required the inclusion of
alcohol abuse by minors in the ongoing national anti-drug media campaign for youth.
The House narrowly passed H.R. 2490 (210-209) on July 15, 1999. The House
committee, in an effort to bring total spending down to FY1999's freeze level, had
reduced the subcommittee discretionary funding levels by $249 million. That action
contributed to many Members withdrawing support of the bill. The programs
affected by that reduction are Treasury-wide systems and capital improvements,
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) processing, assistance, and management, IRS tax law
enforcement, IRS information systems, and General Services Administration repairs
and alterations.
Several amendments were offered during consideration of H.R. 2490. Those
subject to voice vote were
! An amendment to prohibit the import of any children’s sleepwear without the
labels required by the flammability standards issued by the Consumer Product
Safety Commission was agreed to;
“Treasury
5
and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
145 (Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999) p. S7987, at S7996.

---

CRS-4
! An amendment to change the language of the provision requiring contraceptive
coverage in the FEHBP was agreed to, amended;
! An amendment to provide $3 million for grants to investigate money
laundering and related financial crimes; and
! An amendment to establish that no funds may be used to enforce any
prohibition on women breastfeeding their children in federal buildings or on
federal property.
Those subject to roll call votes were
! An amendment to strike language limiting funds availability through the
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) failed;
! An amendment to strike language increasing the President’s salary failed;
! An amendment to amend the amendment offered to change the language of the
provision requiring contraceptive coverage in the FEHBP was agreed to; and
! An amendment to limit use of the Exchange Stabilization Fund failed.
Several House Members offered amendments and then subsequently withdrew
them after receiving assurances from the managers of the bill that the issues would
either be addressed in conference or would be pursued with the appropriate executive
branch administrators. Among those were amendments to provide for the release of
frozen assets of a foreign state to satisfy all pending court judgements; to require an
U.S. Customs Service report on the conduct of strip searches, including data on the
ethnicity, gender, nationality, and race of the individuals subject to the searches; to
require that any U.S. Customs officer conducting a strip search be of the same gender
as the subject of the search; to study the safety of red-dye kerosene fuel available to
elderly and low income individuals; and to allow enrollees in the Federal Employee
Health Benefits Program the option of choosing dental, optometry, infertility, or
prescription drug benefits in lieu of mandated contraceptive coverage.
An amendment to prevent Members of Congress from receiving a pay adjustment
in January 2000 was not in order, under the rule (H. Res. 246) for H.R. 2490, and
was not offered on the floor. The bill, as passed, provides increase in the President’s
salary, to $400,000, effective January 20, 2001.

---

CRS-5
The funding levels in the tables in this report are provided by the House
Appropriations Committee. The funding levels in the text are, unless otherwise
noted, also provided by the House committee. The Senate documentation is
noted if there are differences between the two versions. Also, in some instances
the account totals may differ between the budget as submitted by the President
and the requested funding levels calculated by the House and Senate committees.
Any significant differences will be discussed in the text. The committee data are
more current and represent the amounts used by Members in considering various
funding alternatives.
The Budget documents provided by the Office of Management and Budget
and the appropriations bills do not necessarily follow the same organization of
accounts. For example, not all of the agencies which are organizationally within
the Executive Office of the President, as found in the budget, are funded through
the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government appropriations legislation.
Also, the FY2000 and FY1999 individual account data in this report do not reflect
scorekeeping by the Congressional Budget Office.
See the glossary for definitions of discretionary and mandatory spending. In
some instances, the mandatory levels drive up the percent of increase represented
in the appropriation. The appropriators are bound by those entitlements under
permanent law and control only the discretionary spending levels. The data on the
tables and the funding levels provided in the text, unless otherwise noted, reflect
the mandatory and discretionary funding combined.
Status and Legislative History
For the purposes of legislative history on the FY1999 omnibus funding act, the
reader is reminded that P.L. 105-2776 was a product of using the Transportation
appropriation bill (H.R. 4328) as the vehicle for creating the larger bill. The Treasury
and General Government appropriation was subject to congressional action as H.R.
4104 (105 Congress) prior to being included in the omnibus measure.
th
The House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal
Service, and General Government held eight days of hearings during February and
March 1999. The subcommittee marked up a bill and sent it to the full committee
P.L. 105-277, §101(h), October 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681, at 2681-480. See: Conference
6
Report on H.R. 4328, making omnibus consolidated and emergency supplemental
appropriations for fiscal year 1999, Congressional Record, daily edition, October 19, 1998,
p. H11044, et. seq.

---

CRS-6
on May 14. The House Appropriations full committee marked up the subcommittee
provisions and reported the bill, H.R. 2490 (H. Rept. 106-231) on July 13, 1999.7
Pursuant to a rule for consideration (H. Res. 246, H. Rept. 106-234),8 H. R.
2490, amended, passed the House July 15, 1999.9
On July 1, 1999, the Senate passed S. 1282, the Treasury appropriations bill for
FY2000.
10 By unanimous consent, the Senate agreed to hold the bill at the desk until
the companion measure is received from the House.
Several days of hearings were held by the Senate Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government subcommittee
during February, March, and April. The subcommittee had scheduled consideration
of the Senate version of the appropriations measure on June 22. However, in lieu of
subcommittee action, the full committee marked up the measure June 24. It was
introduced as S. 1282, accompanied by S. Rept. 106-87.11
On July 19, 1999, the Senate passed H.R. 2490, amended to incorporate the
Senate-passed language of S. 1282. Senate conferee
12
s were named at that time. The
House disagreed with the Senate amendments and insisted on a conference.
13
A
motion to instruct was offered and agreed to. Later in the day, conferees were
named.14
As of July 23, 1999, no conference had been scheduled.
7U. S. House, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury, Postal Service, and General
Government Appropriations Bill, 2000, report to accompany H.R. 2490, 106th Cong., 1st
sess., H. Rept. 106-231 (Washington: GPO, 1999). Hereafter referred to as H. Rept. 106-
231.
8“Providing for the Consideration of H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, July 15,
1999), p. H5608-5611.
“Treasury
9
and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
145 (Washington: GPO, July 15, 1999), pp. H5612-H5677.
“Treasury
10
and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
145, parts I and II (Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999), pp. S7981-S8011, S8036-S8050.
U.S.
11
Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury and General Government
Appropriation Bill, 2000, report to accompany S. 1282, 106th Cong., 1st sess., S. Rept. 106-
87 (Washington: GPO, 1999). Hereafter referred to as S. Rept. 106-87.
“Treasury
12
and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
145 (Washington: GPO, July 19, 1999), p. S8811.
13“Appointment of Conferees on H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, July 21,
1999), pp. H6026-6027.
Ibid
14
, p. H6082.

---

CRS-7
Table 1. Status of FY2000 Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President and General Government
Subcommittee
Conference Report
Markup
Confer
Approval
House
House
Senate
Senate
ence
House
Senate
Report
Passage
Report
Passage
Report
House
Senate
Public Law
7/13/99
6/24/99
6/22/99
H. Rept.
S. Rept.
5/14/99
scheduled
106-231
7/15/99
106-87
7/1/99
—
—
—
—
Budget and Key Policy Issues
Department of the Treasury
The Department of the Treasury has both financial and law enforcement
functions. The financial functions are carried out by the Financial Management
Service, the Mint, and the Bureau of Public Debt. The law enforcement functions are
carried out by the Customs Service, the Secret Service, the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The Internal Revenue Service has both
a financial function—to determine and audit tax obligations—and a law enforcement
function—to enforce collection of amounts due.
For FY1999, Congress appropriated $12,637,225,000 to the Department of the
Treasury (P.L. 105-277), including emergency funding. Of this amount,
$8,375,165,000 (including emergency Y2K funding), or 66.3 % of the total
departmental funding, was allocated to the Internal Revenue Service. The President’s
budget request for FY2000 totals somewhat less—$12,376,130,000 for the
department with $8,248,774,000 allocated for the IRS. Of the total departmental
request, 66.6% would be assigned to the IRS.
As passed by the Senate July 1, 1999, S. 1282 would fund the department
accounts at $12,234,649,000. As passed by the House July 15, 1999, H.R. 2490
would fund the accounts at $12,189,648,000. An amendment agreed to in the House
would earmark $3 million to be used for grants in combating money laundering.
The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and
General Government marked up the FY2000 appropriations measure on May 14.
Their mark for the Department of the Treasury was $12,329,592,000. On July 13, the
House Appropriations Committee reported their bill. As reported, H.R. 2490 would
fund the Department of Treasury at $12,198,648,000. According to a July 13 press
release from the committee, a major amendment to the subcommittee mark would
reduce funding to the department by $139 million: $4.9 million to Treasury-wide
Systems and Capital Improvement; $42.4 million to IRS Processing, Assistance, and
Management; $31.7 million to IRS Tax Law Enforcement; and $60.86 million to IRS
Information Systems.

---

CRS-8
On June 24, the Senate Committee on Appropriations reported their bill. The
funding level in the Senate would be $12,213,529,000. Senate floor action would
increase funding, beyond the Senate committee spending levels, for the U.S. Customs
Service, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program for reducing
methamphetamine usage, and for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’
Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative.
The Department of the Treasury established the Office of Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration in January 1999, as required by P.L. 105-206, the
Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. The IRS Office of
the Chief Inspector was abolished. To provide the necessary flexibility for
establishing and reorganizing the new office, the House Appropriations Committee
authorized voluntary separation incentives for the office’s employees. The incentives
of up to $25,000 may be offered from October 1, 1999 through January 1, 2003. The
Office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration may redeploy or use
the positions vacated through voluntary separations to make other positions available
to more critical locations or more critical occupations.
The Chicago Financial Center of the Department of the Treasury’s Financial
Management Service is being closed. To provide the necessary flexibility to carry out
the closure, the House Appropriations Committee authorized voluntary separation
incentives for the center’s employees. The incentives of up to $25,000 may be offered
from October 1, 1999 through January 31, 2000. The Secretary of the Treasury, prior
to obligating any resources for the payments, must submit a strategic plan to the
Office of Management and Budget outlining the intended use of the payments and a
proposed organizational chart for the agency once the payments have been completed.
The total number of funded positions in the agency will be reduced by one full-time
equivalent position for each vacancy created by a separation incentive. This provision
could be waived if the agency demonstrated that the positions would better be used
to reallocate occupations or reshape the workforce and to produce a more cost-
effective result.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). The Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) is a law enforcement agency that monitors compliance
with federal laws related to the manufacture, importation, and distribution of alcohol,
tobacco, firearms, and explosives. While these laws prohibit certain illegal activities,
they also regulate legal activities related to these commodities. ATF also enforces
federal laws related to arson. In enforcing federal law, ATF officers often work
closely with other federal, state, and local law enforcement officers. ATF’s mission
is focused on three goals: 1) reducing crime, 2) collecting revenue, and 3) protecting
the public.
For FY2000, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $569 million
for ATF. The Senate bill, as passed, would fund ATF at $590 million. The House
enacted the Appropriations Committee recommendation of $567 million. Both the
House and Senate amounts are increases over the agency’s FY1999 funding of $553
million. By contrast, the Administration requested $585 million for ATF. Over and
above this amount, the Administration also requested $15 million for the relocation
of ATF headquarters and laboratory facilities.

---

CRS-9
For the Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative, the Senate adopted an
amendment to increase total funding for this program to $39 million, earmarking over
$1 million to expand this program to include Las Vegas, Nevada. This program
coordinates federal, state and local law enforcement efforts by facilitating the sharing
of information related to illegal sources of firearms for juveniles and criminals. In
addition, the Senate would provide $3 million and the House $5 million in increased
funding for the Integrated Ballistic Identification System. The House committee
would also provide $5 million for implementing the tobacco compliance provision
arising from the 1997 balance budget agreement, which gave the ATF the authority
to enter and examine commercial enterprises that re-import U.S. cigarettes in an
attempt to by-pass taxes and licensing fees. On the other hand, neither the Senate nor
House would provide the $15 million requested by the Administration to relocate the
ATF headquarters and laboratory facilities; rather, both the Senate committee and the
House subcommittee suggest that future budgetary resources will be available for
such a move .
Among ATF’s activities, the regulation and enforcement of laws related to
firearms commerce and possession appears to be the most controversial. Consistent
with language included in ATF appropriations in previous years, the agency’s
appropriation bill language specifies that agency funding cannot be used to
electronically retrieve information gathered from the sales records of firearms or
ammunition businesses that have gone out of business or have been sold.
Furthermore, the agency’s appropriation bill language specifies that agency funding
cannot be used to implement regulations concerning a modification to the term
“curios or relics,” or investigate relief for individuals disqualified from possessing a
firearm or corporations disqualified from dealing in firearms.
Both the House and Senate have acted on gun control-related legislation. For
further information, see CRS IB10014, Gun Control.
Customs Service.
The U.S. Customs Service, the federal government’s oldest
law enforcement agency, is responsible for monitoring the movement of persons,
carriers, merchandise, and commodities between the United States and other Nations.
In FY1998, Customs inspected nearly 460 million passengers, 121 million private
vehicles, 237 million private and commercial aircraft, 10 million commercial trucks,
and 5 million vessel cargo containers. As part of this process, Customs also assesses
trade-related duties, taxes, and fees on imported merchandise, collecting about $22
million in revenue annually.
As passed by the Senate, S. 1282 would fund Customs at $1,782,435,000 and,
as passed by the House, H.R. 2490 would fund the agency at $1,817,502,000. “To
stop the flow of illegal drugs into the United States and facilitate legitimate cross-
border trade and commerce,” the Senate adopted an amendment to increase the
committee mark for the Customs Service by $50 million to hire 500 new inspectors.
By contrast, the Administration’s request for FY2000, by comparison, was for
$1,830, which is $219 million less than the previous year’s appropriation. This
decrease, however, is largely reflective of supplemental appropriations for FY1999
totaling $276 million to increase counter-drug trafficking activities. A large part of

---

CRS-10
this funding was for the one-time acquisition of aircraft and non-intrusive inspection
technology.
In regard to the proposed automated system user fee, the Senate Committee on
Appropriations in report language and the House Appropriations Subcommittee on
Treasury, Postal Service and General Government in a May 14 press release rejected
th
the Administrations proposal to modernize the Automated Commercial System and
lay the foundation for an Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) through a user
fee. It is currently estimated that it will cost $1.8 million over four years to develop
the ACE system. The House committee expressed its strong dissatisfaction in a July
13 press release:
As compared to the President’s request, the Subcommittee faced the task of
making “whole” the U.S. Customs Service. The President proposed to fund $312
million in base operations through a controversial new passenger tax — in reality
under-funding Customs by assuming the tax would become law by July 1, 1999.
The Subcommittee fully funded Customs with a direct appropriation. In part, the
$312 million in proposed new taxes came from a moratorium on GSA
construction, including denying the President’s request to fund the first stage of a
controversial $500 million new complex fro the Food and Drug Administration.
In addition, both the Senate and the House committee support the Customs
Service’s Cyber Smuggling Center and activities aimed at tracking child pornography
trafficking and child exploitation over the Internet. For these purposes, the House
committee provided an earmark of $4 million. Furthermore, the Senate would
provide an increase of $4 million to expand the Customs Integrity Awareness
Program to improve screening of new job-applicants and to administer polygraph
examinations to candidates for positions that are the most susceptible to corruption.
As its organizational needs and structure have changed, and to meet the
requirements of the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA or the Results
Act), the Customs Service recently subdivided its activities into two broad categories:
commercial and drug and other enforcement.15
! (1) Commercial Activities include monitoring trade compliance, processing
passengers, gathering intelligence, and examination and analysis. These
activities usually occur prior to a violation being confirmed and investigated.
! (2) Drug and Other Enforcement Activities include efforts to combat drug
trafficking, smuggling of other contraband, and money laundering. In addition
to inspections at ports of entry, the air and marine interdiction program plays
an integral role in this effort.
Related to these high-profile activities, GAO has identified several issues that
currently face the Customs Service. In the area of drug interdiction, GAO identified
four issues: 1) “internal control weaknesses” in programs designed to expedite
Prior
15
to 1999, the Customs Service budget consisted of three broad activities: Inspection
and Control, Enforcement, and Tariff and Trade.

---

CRS-11
inspections for low-risk cargo carriers; 2) an expanding international mission for the
Customs air interdiction program, with a declining budget from FY1992-FY1997, and
a lack of adequate performance measures; 3) problems associated with the
development of pulsed fast neutron analysis (PFNA), a technology that is designed
to easily detect narcotics and other smuggled contraband; and 4) a need for improved
drug intelligence capabilities. GAO has also reported that the Customs Service, along
with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, could be doing more to prevent
drug-related employee corruption.16
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). For FY1999, Congress appropriated
$8,375,165,000 (including emergency Y2K funding), to the Internal Revenue Service.
The President’s budget request for FY2000 would fund $8,248,774,000 to the IRS.
Excluding emergency funding from the total FY1999 enacted, shows the President’s
FY2000 request exceeding the regular FY1999 funding.
The Senate agreed to a funding level of $8,191,135,000. An amendment was
adopted by the Senate to require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an Internet
site where a taxpayer may generate a receipt for an income tax payment which
itemizes the portion of the payment which is allocable to various government spending
categories.17
The House Treasury Subcommittee had recommended an appropriation of
$8,244,774,000. The bill reported from full committee on July 13 included a major
amendment would reduce funding to the department by $139 million: $4.9 million to
Treasury-wide Systems and Capital Improvement; $42.4 million to IRS Processing,
Assistance, and Management; $31.7 million to IRS Tax Law Enforcement; and
$60.86 million to IRS Information Systems. As reported and passed, the bill would
fund the IRS at $8,109,774,000. The House conferees have been instructed to restore
$50 million in funding for the IRS to complete its Y2K compliance effort.
The President’s budget for FY2000 lists implementation of IRS reforms as a
Priority Management Objective. Specifically, the modernization of the IRS
18
’
organization and its information technology to better serve taxpayers and improve
productivity are stated as the major goals of the restructuring. In December 1998, the
service let a contract for designing and installing information technology
improvements. In the spring of 1999, IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti is due to
begin implementation of system improvements.
16U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. Customs Service: Budget Authorization Issues,
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Ways and Means, GAO/T-GGD-99-79,
(Washington: April 13, 1999).
17“Treasury and General Government Appropriations, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
145, part II (Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999), p. 8044.
18Budget, Budget, Table IV-2, p. 56 and 56.

---

CRS-12
In the 105 Congress, P.L. 105-206 was enacted to address long standin
th
g
operational problems in the IRS. On January 8, the first report to Congres
19
s
mandated by the new law was delivered. The report, 1998 IRS National Taxpayer
Advocate’s Annual Report to Congress, spelled out action taken by the Nationa
20
l
Taxpayer Advocate, as required by the statute to address IRS issues with taxpayers.
Secret Service. The U.S. Secret Service provides for the protection and security
of the President, Vice President, and other dignitaries and designated persons. It is
also responsible for the protection of the White House and other Washington, D.C.,
buildings, as well as the enforcement of federal laws pertaining to financial crimes and
frauds.
For FY2000, the President requested $661,312,000 for salaries and expenses
for the Secret Service.
On July 1, 1999, the Senate agreed to an appropriation of $643,739,000,
including $638,816,000 to carry out its presidential candidate and nominee protection,
protective research, and counterfeiting investigations, and $3,196,000 for the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
The bill, as reported to the House from the full committee, would provide an
appropriation of $643,739,000. On July 15, 1999, the House agreed to an
appropriation of $666,235,000 for protective functions, acquisition, and
improvements.

Postal Service
While the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) generates most of the funding it requires
through sales of its products and services, it also receives an appropriation from the
federal government. The USPS receives an annual appropriation to its Postal Service
Fund to pay for revenue forgone on free and reduced rate mail (for the blind and
visually impaired and overseas voting). P. L. 105-277 provided FY1999 funding at
$71,195,000. Supplemental appropriations for FY1999 provided an additional
$29,000,000 for revenue forgone reimbursement. For payment to the Postal Service
Fund for revenue forgone for FY2000, the President is requesting $93,436,000. As
passed by the Senate and the House, the bill would provide funding at $93,436,000,
with $29,000,000 prior to October 1, 2000 and the remaining $64,436,000 deferred
until October 1, 2000.
P.L. 105-277 required that the Postal Service submit, within six months of
enactment, a report on its current and future commercial services. Further language
required the USPS to report on its packaging service, especially how such service
meets customer demand nationally, especially in rural areas, before such service is
19U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Restructuring the Internal
Revenue Service in the 105th Congress: P.L. 105-206, by Sylvia Morrison, CRS Report 97-
984 E. (Washington: August 25, 1998).
20Bureau of National Affairs, Daily Tax Report, (Washington: BNA, January 8, 1999).

---

CRS-13
initiated. In compliance with P.L. 105-277, the report was submitted by the Postal
Service to the Appropriations Committee in April 1999.
Finally, P.L. 105-277 amended the USPS’ international service agreements by
making the Secretary of State solely responsible for formulating, coordinating, and
overseeing foreign policy related to international postal and delivery services. USPS
officials, with presidential consent, may establish international rates and/or fees for
mail and delivery services. Regarding the importing or exporting of mail shipments,
the USPS is required to follow the same procedures and laws applicable to similar
shipments transmitted by or to private companies.
Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the
President
The Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government appropriations bill funds
all the offices in the Executive Office of the President (EOP), except the following
three offices—the Council on Environmental Quality and the Office of Science and
Technology Policy (both funded under Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban
Development, and Independent Agencies appropriations), and the Office of the United
States Trade Representative (funded under Commerce, Justice, State, and the
Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations). Moreover, the Federal Drug Control
Programs account, which comprises almost two-thirds of EOP’s appropriation, is not
for use by agencies within EOP, but for transfer to federal and state entities for their
drug control programs. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), which
is located in the EOP, distributes the funds to federal and state entities.
The President’s FY2000 budget for the EOP and Funds Appropriated to the
President proposes appropriations of $639,498,000, which is 4.6% less than the
$670,112,000 appropriated in FY1999. The House approved an appropriation of
$654,762,000, an increase of 2.4%, or $15,264,000 over the President’s request.
The bulk of the difference is found in increased support for the ONDCP’s media
campaign to reduce and prevent drug use among youth and funding for the High
Intensity Drug Trafficking program. The Senate has passed an appropriation of
$570,128,000, which is 12.2% or $69,370,000 less than the President requested. The
smaller amount appropriated by the Senate is due to a decrease in the funding for the
special forfeiture account in the Federal drug control program.
The specific accounts are discussed below. In those cases in which there is no
difference between the FY2000 request and Senate and House passage, only the
request is noted.
Compensation of the President. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation
of $250,000 for compensation of the President, including an allowance of $50,000 for
official expenses. This is the same amount as appropriated in FY1999.
The House has approved an increase in the President’s salary to $400,000 per
annum. Hearings on the issue were held May 24 by the House Committee on
Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and

---

CRS-14
Technology.
21 Under constitutional provisions, any change in presidential salary could
not take effect before the change of administrations in January 2001. An amendment
to strike the provision failed during consideration of H.R. 2490 on the House floor.
White House Office. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation of
$52,444,000 for salaries and expenses in the White House Office, an increase of .2%
over the $52,344,000 appropriated in FY1999. The FY2000 request includes
$10,313,000 for reimbursements to the White House Communications Agency, a
Department of Defense component which has historically provided non-
telecommunications support services. The reimbursements are in accordance with P.L.
104-21.
Executive Residence (White House). The FY2000 budget proposes an
appropriation of $9,260,000 for the Executive Residence at the White House, an
increase of 6.5% over the $8,691,000 appropriated in FY1999. The FY2000 budget
also proposes an appropriation of $810,000 for the repair, alteration, and
improvement of the Executive Residence. (Maintenance and repair costs for the
White House are also funded by the National Park Service as part of that agency’s
responsibility for national monuments. Entertainment costs for state functions are
funded by the Department of State.) As in previous appropriations statutes,
reimbursable political events in the Executive Residence are to be paid for in advance
by the sponsor, and all such advance payments are to be credited to a reimbursable
expenses account. The political party of the President is to deposit $25,000 to be
available for expenses relating to reimbursable political events during the fiscal year.
Special Assistance to the President (Office of the Vice President) and Official
Residence of the Vice President. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation of
$3,617,000 for the Office of Vice President, an increase of 3% over the $3,512,000
appropriated in FY1999. The FY2000 budget also proposes an appropriation of
$345,000 for the Official Residence of the Vice President, an increase of 3.3% of over
the $334,000 appropriated in FY1999. Up to $90,000 could be used for official
entertainment expenses.
Council of Economic Advisers. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation
of $3,840,000, an increase of 4.7% over the $3,666,000 appropriated in FY1999.
Office of Policy Development. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation
of $4,032,000, the same as appropriated in FY1999.

National Security Council. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation of
$6,997,000, an increase 2.8% over the $6,806,000 appropriated in FY1999.
Office of Administration. The FY2000 budget proposes an appropriation of
$39,198,000, which is 32.6% less than the $58,141,000 appropriated in FY1999.
(The FY1999 appropriation included $29,791,000 in emergency funding for Y2K
21A listing of the witnesses and the transcripts of the Chairman and several witnesses’
statements can be found on the subcommittee’s web site:
[http://www.house.gov/reform/gmit/hearings/hindex.htm]

---

CRS-15
conversion. An additional $12,000,000 was transferred to the office from other
accounts.) Of the FY2000 funds, $8,806,000 would be expended for a capital
investment plan which provides for the modernization of the information technology
infrastructure. The House has approved an FY2000 appropriation of $39,448,000, an
increase of $250,000 over the President’s request. The $250,000 would be used to
establish a new position for a Chief Financial Officer in the Executive Office of the
President. The Senate has approved the same amount as requested by the President.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The FY2000 budget proposes an
appropriation of $63,495,000, an increase of 4.7% over the $60,617,000 appropriated
in FY1999. To combat crimes against intellectual property rights, the Senate
Appropriations Committee has directed the Director of OMB to submit a plan to
establish an inter-agency National Intellectual Property Coordination Center, not later
than February 15, 2000, unless the President determines that such a center is not
necessary.22 The committee also directs the Director to prepare an inventory of
Federal grant programs for fiscal year 1999, as a step in simplifying and consolidating
the federal grant process.23
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). The FY2000 budget
proposes an appropriation of $43,133,000, a 12.4% decrease from the $49,242,000
appropriated in FY1999 (which included $1,200,000 for counterdrug emergency
funding). Of the funds, $21,200,000 would remain available until expended,
consisting of $16,000,000 for the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
(available for transfer to other federal departments or agencies); $2,200,000 for policy
research and evaluation; and $3,000,000 for the continued operation of the
technology transfer program. The House has approved $52,221,000 for FY2000,
21.1% over the President’s request. The focus of the increased funding would be the
media campaign to reduce and prevent drug use among youth. A proposal to include
underage alcohol consumption as a target in that media campaign was dropped from
the bill, as provided by the subcommittee. The Congressional Budget Office, in
offering options for government-wide spending cuts, suggested that additional
appropriations for the media campaign should be eliminated. Their report presumes
that the effectiveness of the campaign would be sustained at the level of funding
appropriated in FY1999.24
The Senate has passed an appropriation of $21,963,000, 49.1% or $21,170,000
below the President’s request. At the same time, the Senate would create a new
appropriations line item for the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, which
formerly had been funded under the ONDCP operating account, and recommends an
appropriation of $31,100,000 for the account. This funding includes $13,000,000 for
the continuation of the technology transfer program to state and local law
enforcement.
S. Rept. 106-87, p. 47.
22
Ibid
23
., pp. 47-48.
CBO,
24
Budgetary Discipline, . 214.

---

CRS-16
Appropriations also include funding for two federal drug programs that ONDCP
is to transfer to federal and state entities. For high intensity drug trafficking areas
(HIDTA) the President requested $185,777,000 ($1,800,000 for auditing services)
for FY2000, an increase of 0.4% over the 184,977,000 appropriated in FY1999. For
the special forfeiture fund he requested $225,300,000, an increase of 4.1% over the
$216,500,000 appropriated in FY1999.
As passed in the House, HIDTA funding would be set at $192,000,000, and the
special forfeiture account at $225,000,000. The Senate passed an appropriation of
$205,277,000 for the HIDTA account, and $127,500,000 for the special forfeiture
account.
Unanticipated Needs. The FY2000 budget proposes $1,000,000 for
discretionary expenses necessary to enable the President to meet unanticipated needs,
in furtherance of the national interest, security, or defense which may arise at home
or abroad. While the House has approved $1,000,000, the Senate did not fund this
account. In FY1999, two additional appropriations were included under this account
that are not included in FY2000. Both appropriations were included under the
Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. One was
$30,000,000 (of which $10,000,000 was later rescinded) for a grant to the Red Cross
for reimbursement of disaster relief, recovery expenditures and emergency services
(P.L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681, at 2681-576). The second was emergency funding of
$2,250,000,000, for Year 2000 conversion of federal information technology systems,
and related expenses, with allocations specified (P.L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681, at
2681-572).
Independent Agencies
Federal Election Commission (FEC). In its FY2000 budget submission, the
Administration requested $38.5 million for the Federal Election Commission (FEC),
the agency that administers federal campaign finance law, oversees disclosure
requirements, limits on contributions and expenditures, and the presidential election
public funding system, and retains civil enforcement authority.
The requested funding level constituted a 5.5% increase over the $36.5 million
appropriated for the agency in FY1999. Of the $38.5 million total, no less than $4.9
million was designated for computer modernization, 10.5% more than was earmarked
for such purposes in the prior year. While the agency has been criticized as either
overly intrusive or insufficiently vigilant in its enforcement capacities, depending on
the source, there has been widespread support for improving the automated data
processing systems. Through greater availability and use of electronic disclosure,
computer modernization is seen as a way to alleviate burdens on staff resources and
enforcement functions.
The Senate adopted the Senate Appropriations Committee recommendation of
$38.2 million for the FEC, $341,000 less than was requested. Of the $38.2 million
total, no less than $4.9 million would be designated for computer modernization—the
same amount specified in the Administration’s request.

---

CRS-17
The House approved the Appropriations Committee’s recommendation for an
FEC appropriation of $38.2 million, $364,000 less than was requested, and with the
proviso that no less than $4.9 million would be designated for computer
modernization. The total figure reflected a cut of five full-time positions from the
nine new ones requested. The Committee had included the Treasury subcommittee’s
recommendation of three legislative provisions that had been proposed by a recent
Price Waterhouse Coopers management study of the agency and by the FEC itself.
Aimed at improving operations, these provisions would give the FEC authority to
require electronic filing by committees meeting a threshold financial activity level,
allow an administrative fine schedule for minor, unambiguous disclosure violations
(with reasonable appeals procedures), and allow candidate report filing on an election
cycle, rather than calendar year, basis.
The Senate appropriation figure is $23,000 higher than the House figure, but
both earmark the same $4.9 million for computer modernization. The Senate version
does not contain the three legislative provisions included in the House bill.
Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). A difference of $147,000
separates the House-passed funding of $23,828,000 and the Senate-passed funding
of $23,681,000 for the FLRA. The agency serves as a neutral party in the settlement
of disputes that arise between unions, employees, and agencies on matters outlined
in the federal service labor management relations statute; decides major policy issues;
prescribes regulations; and disseminates information appropriate to the needs of
agencies, labor organizations, and the public. Matching the President’s budget
request, the House-passed funding is 5.5% above the $22,586,000 appropriated in FY
1999. The Senate-passed funding is 4.8% above that amount
General Services Administration (GSA). Established in 1949, GSA administers
and coordinates the federal civilian acquisition policy program. The agency also
oversees the management of federal real and surplus property, which includes the
construction and maintenance of federal buildings. Other functions include
transportation, telecommunications, and information systems technology management.
For FY2000, the President requested $158,316,000 for GSA’s operating
expenses. The President’s request also prescribed $5,345,100,000 (from revenues)
in new obligational authority for GSA’s Federal Buildings Fund for real property
management and related activities.
On July 13, 1999, the House Committee on Appropriations agreed to a funding
level of $146,006,000 for GSA’s FY2000 operating expenses. The House, in passing
H.R. 2490, did not change the funding level further.
In their June 24 report, the Senate committee recommended that funds in the
Federal Buildings Fund be transferred to meet program requirements, subject to
advance approval by the Appropriations Committees. No funds were to be used in
FY2001 for courthouse construction not meeting the Administrative Office of the
U.S. Court’s five-year plan and design standards. Any new proposed construction
plan was required to include a standardized courtroom utilization study. No funds
were to be used to provide cleaning services or security enhancements usually
provided through the Federal Buildings Fund to any agency not paying GSA’s

---

CRS-18
assessed costs. Claims against the government of less than $250,000 from direct
construction were to be liquidated from savings in other projects, with prior
notification to the Appropriations Committees. Funds made available for new
construction projects by the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997
(Public Law 104-208) were to remain available prior to September 30, 1999. A total
of $59,203,500 is not to be made available for rental of space and $59,203,500 is not
to be made available for building operations from the “Federal Buildings Fund
Limitations on Availability of Revenue.”
During floor consideration and adoption of S. 1282 on July 1, 1999, in addition
to funding of GSA at $156,297,000, two GSA amendments were agreed to by the
Senate. Senate Amendment No. 1192 increased the aggregate amount available in the
Federal Buildings Fund to $5,261,478,000. The Campbell Amendment (No. 1218),
agreed to by voice vote, reaffirmed aggregate reductions in the Federal Buildings
Fund for rental of space and buildings operations.
Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The House-passed funding of
$27,586,000 and the Senate-passed funding of $27,422,000 for the MSPB differ by
$164,000. Additionally, both versions of the Treasury bill provide that $2,430,000
be transferred from the Civil Service Retirement and Disability trust fund for
administrative expenses to adjudicate retirement appeals. The MSPB assists federal
agencies in running a merit-based civil service system. The agency’s FY 1999
appropriation was $25,805,000 and emergency funding of $66,000 was provided for
Y2K conversion. These amounts totaled $25,871,000. The House-passed funding
matches the President’s budget request, and not including the trust fund transfer, is
6.9% above the $25,805,000 and 6.6% above the $25,871,000. The Senate-passed
funding is 6.3% above the $25,805,000 and 6.0% above the $25,871,000.
National Archives and Records (NARA). The custodian of the historically
valuable records of the federal government since its establishment in 1934, NARA
also prescribes policy and provides both guidance and management assistance
concerning the entire life cycle of federal records. It also administers the presidential
libraries system; publishes the laws, regulations, and presidential and other documents;
and assists the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), which manages federal
security classification and declassification policies, and the National Historical
Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), which makes grants nationwide to
help nonprofit organizations identify, preserve, and provide access to materials that
document American history.
In the House, the July 15, 1999, passage of H.R. 2490 resulted in a
recommendation of $180,398,000 for NARA FY2000 operating expenses. This
amount is $6,054,000 less than the $186,452,000 requested by the President, and is
$44,216,000 less than the $224,614,000 appropriated for FY1999. Operating
expenses include costs incurred in connection with the administration of NARA
(including ISOO), archived federal records and related activities, and the review and
declassification of documents. The additional $6 million requested for FY2000 for
NHPRC operations and programs, which is $4 million less than the amount
appropriated for the commission for FY1999, was recommended by the committee,
as well. The panel also agreed to the President’s recommendation of the establishment
of a records center revolving fund and an appropriation of $22,000,000 as initial

---

CRS-19
capitalization of the fund. This revolving fund is available for expenses and equipment
necessary to provide for storage and related services for all temporary and prearchival
federal records to be or actually stored at federal national and regional records centers
by agencies and other instrumentalities of the federal government.
In the Senate, the FY2000 funding levels for NARA provided in S. 1282, as
amended and reported from committee, remained unchanged during floor
consideration and adoption of the bill on July 1, 1999. As reported on June 24, 1999,
the bill recommended $179,738,000 for NARA FY2000 operating expenses. This
amount was $6,714,000 less than the $186,452,000 requested by the President, and
was $44,876,000 less than the $224,614,000 appropriated for FY1999. The $6
million requested for NHPRC FY2000 operations and programs was met by the
Senate committee and an additional $250,000 was included, making the total amount
recommended $6,250,000. The additional $250,000 was provided for the Fort
Buford reconstruction project, deemed “an important Lewis and Clark ‘Corps of
Discovery’ site” by the committee. The records center revolving fund and its initial
$22 million capitalization as recommended in the President’s budget was also adopted
by the committee.
Office of Government Ethics (OGE). The Office of Government Ethics, a small
agency within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in Government Act
of 1978. Originally part of the Office of Personnel Management, OGE became a
separate agency on October 1, 1989, as part of the Office of Government Ethics
Reorganization Act of 1988. The Office of Government Ethics exercises leadership
in the executive branch to prevent conflicts of interest on the part of government
employees, and to resolve those conflicts of interest that do occur. In partnership
with executive branch agencies and departments, OGE fosters high ethical standards
for employees and strengthens the public’s confidence that the Government’s business
is conducted with impartiality and integrity. For FY2000, the budget request is
$9,114,000. This is a 7.3% ($622,000) increase from the $8,492,000 appropriated
for FY1999. When the Senate passed the measure, it included $9,071,000 for OGE.
This amount, recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee, is $43,000 less
than the budget request. The House, however, subsequently approved the same
amount requested by the President.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). While the agency’s budget provides
budget authority for both permanent and current appropriations, this report discusses
only that for current appropriations. For OPM’s salaries and expenses account, the
House-passed funding of 90,584,000 and the Senate-passed funding of $91,584,000
differ by $1,000,000. The Senate amount matches the President’s budget request for
the agency, which is responsible for administering personnel management functions.
In addition, both the House and Senate versions of the Treasury bill, matching the
President’s budget request, provide an appropriation of $960,000 for the Office of
Inspector General (OIG) salaries and expenses. Mandatory funding of
$5,105,482,000 for the government payment for annuitants of the employees health
benefits program (FEHB), $36,207,000 for the government payment for annuitants
of the employees life insurance program, and $9,120,872,000 for payment to the civil
service retirement and disability fund is also provided. The President’s

---

CRS-20
recommendation and the Senate-passed funding provide a total appropriation o
25
f
$14,355,105,000 for OPM. The House-passed funding provides a total appropriation
of $14,354,105,000.
The agency’s FY 1999 appropriation was $13,478,212,000 and emergency
funding of $2,428,000 was provided for Y2K conversion. These amounts totaled
$13,480,640,000. The combined discretionary and mandatory funding, recommended
by the President and passed by the Senate and the House, is 6.5% above both the
$13,478,212,000 and the $13,480,640,000 amounts. Not included in this total are
recommended trust fund transfers of $95,486,000 for salaries and expenses and
$9,645,000 for OIG salaries and expenses. (In FY1999, $91,236,000 for salaries and
expenses and $9,145,000 for OIG salaries and expenses were transferred from trust
funds.)
Both versions of the Treasury bill, as passed by the House and the Senate,
assume a federal civilian pay increase of 4.4% in January 2000. The Senate
committee report, however, stated that, in order to stay within its 302(b) allocations,
both budget authority and outlays had to be reduced without harming essential
programs. Therefore, the committee said that it “was forced to deny all requests for
additional funding, to cover the remaining months of the calendar year 1999 statutory
annual pay adjustment.” Employees whose salaries are administratively determined
and who do not receive the government-wide adjustments were the only exception to
this across-the-board reduction.26
The House-passed, but not the Senate-passed Treasury bill includes a statement
relating to the Sense of the Congress on the federal civilian pay adjustment. President
Clinton proposed a 4.4% pay adjustment for federal employees in his FY 2000
budget. This amount is the overall average increase, including locality pay
adjustments. Legislation passed the Senate (S. 4 ,106 Congress), which woul
th
d
provide a 4.8% military pay adjustment. That measure and a
27
FY1999 emergency
supplemental (P.L. 106-31) contain Sense of the Congress resolutions calling for
parity between the military pay adjustment and that for civilian personnel. Th
28
e
House-passed Treasury bill includes this same Sense of the Congress language.
25The source for the FY 2000 budget data is U.S. Office of Personnel Management,
Congressional Budget Justification, Annual Performance Plan, Fiscal Year 2000
(Washington: Feb. 1999), p. 15. The President’s FY 2000 budget rounds the mandatory
appropriations of “such sums as may be necessary” for these accounts: Government Payment
for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits, $5,105,000,000; Government Payment for
Annuitants, Employees Life Insurance - $36,000,000; and Payment to the Civil Service
Retirement and Disability Fund - $9,121,000,000 (Budget, Appendix, pp. 1067, 1070-1071).
S. Report 106-87, p. 3.
26
For
27
an analysis of the military pay raise issue see: U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional
Research Service, Appropriations for FY 2000: Defense, by Stephen Daggett, CRS Report
RL30205 (Washington: June 21, 1999).
In
28
addition to S. 4 and P.L. 106-31, other measures in the 106th Congress which express the
desire for parity between the civilian and uniformed military pay adjustments are H.R. 1664
(as passed the House), H. Con. Res. 34 and S. Con. Res. 10.

---

CRS-21
The Congressional Budget Office offered spending cut options which would
affect both the federal health benefits and the retirement programs. One option would
be that the federal government, continuing to share the costs of health benefits, would
offer employees a flat rate voucher to be used toward the premiums. Another option
would be to reduce the retiree health benefits for those with relatively short federal
careers and preserve the right of the retirees to continue in the FEHB program.29
There were several cost-cutting options offered by CBO. These include deferring
cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) for annuitants under the Civil Service Retirement
System (CSRS), limiting some COLAs for federal retirees in both the CSRS and the
Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), reducing COLAs ;for middle- and
high-income federal retirees, modifying the salary used to set federal pensions,
restricting the government’s matching contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan, and
increasing employee contributions for federal pensions.30
During the consideration of H.R. 2490 in the House July 15, amendments were
offered to the provision in the bill relating the FEHB and contraceptive policy. In the
FY1999 funding bill, P.L. 105-277, policy was established which required any health
plan provider, which included coverage of prescription drugs, to also include
coverage of contraceptives. Similar language passed by the House, in the general
provisions section of the FY2000 bill, was amended to allow all persons prescribing
or providing drugs or devices to, on grounds of religious beliefs or moral convictions,
refuse to provide those related to contraception. Previously, only those prescribing
were accorded the choice.
Office of Special Counsel (OSC). The difference between the House-passed
funding of $9,740,000 and the Senate-passed funding of $9,689,000 for the OSC is
$51,000. In its report accompanying H.R. 2490, the House Committee stated its wish
to be kept fully informed of the additional funding’s impact on the agency’s current
backlog of cases. The OSC investigates federal employee allegations of prohibited
personnel practices and, when appropriate, prosecutes before the Merit Systems
Protection Board; provides a channel for whistle blowing by federal employees; and
enforces the Hatch Act. The agency’s FY 1999 appropriation was $8,720,000 and
emergency funding of $100,000 was provided for Y2K conversion. These amounts
totaled $8,820,000. The House-passed funding is 11.7% above the $8,720,000 and
10.4% above the $8,820,000, and matches the President’s budget request. The
Senate-passed funding is 11.1% above the $8,720,000 and 9.9% above the
$8,820,000.
Federal Child Care
The Senate, in passing S. 1282, added a title to the bill (Amendment No. 1197)
that would establish new requirements for child care facilities operated by federal
agencies, including legislative and judicial branch agencies, for their employees. The
provision would require that executive facilities meet state or local licensing standards
CBO,
29
Budgetary Discipline, pp. 152 and 153.
CBO,
30
Budgetary Discipline, pp. 191-196.

---

CRS-22
within six months of the legislation’s enactment, and comply with (or have made
substantial progress towards complying with) standards set by a state or nationally
recognized accreditation entity within three years of enactment.
The bill also would require regulations, set by the Administrator of General
Services, establishing health and safety standards for federal agency child care
programs. Legislative agency facilities would be required to meet a state or nationally
recognized accreditation entity’s standards within one year of the bill’s enactment.
If the legislative facility does not maintain accreditation, it must follow regulations no
less stringent than those of executive agency facilities. Judicial branch facilities
would also be required to meet regulations (issued by the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts) pertaining to licensing and accreditation that are no less
stringent than those of executive branch agencies. Executive branch agencies would
be authorized to use agency funds to provide child care for employees and to improve
the affordability of such care for low-income employees. The amendment would also
authorize $900,000 in fiscal year 2000, and such sums thereafter, for an interagency
council of federal agencies to share best practices and coordinate policy with regard
to child care. A similar amendment was offered to the FY1999 Treasury bill, adopted
in the Senate, and fell in conference.
H.R. 2490, as passed by the House, July 15, 1999, includes the provision (also
included in S. 1282) allowing executive branch federal agencies to use agency funds
to provide child care services, in a facility owned or leased by the agency, for
employees of the agency, provided these funds are used to improve the affordability
of child care for low-income federal employees. It does not contain the other child
care provisions included in the Senate bill.
Year 2000 Compliance
The FY1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681, at
2681-572) included $3.35 billion which did not require budget offsets, to be used as
emergency funding for federal agencies to complete their year 2000 (Y2K) computer
conversions. Of that total, $30 million was transferred to the Legislative and Judiciary
Branches, $1.1 billion to the Department of Defense (DOD), and the remaining $2.25
billion was made available to other federal agencies, to be allocated by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). In addition to the emergency funds, many agencies
received funding for Y2K conversion within their operational accounts.
By April 2, 1999, OMB had allocated $1.667 billion of these funds to civilian
agencies and $61.8 million to the District of Columbia, and $935 million were
allocated by DOD, representing approximately 80% of the total emergency Y2K
funds. The Administration did not request additional emergency Y2K funds in its
FY1999 Supplemental Appropriations request.
The FY2000 budget request included $433.2 million of non-emergency funds for
Y2K project offices to manage and monitor the transition into 2000 and the
completion of final contingency planning. The Department of Treasury led the
agencies requesting funds for FY2000: Department of Treasury ($250 million for IRS

---

CRS-23
and $4 million non-IRS), the Department of Health and Human Services ($150 million
for the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) and $16 million non-HCFA),
Department of State ($7 million), and Department of Housing and Urban
Development ($6.2 million).
The IRS Y2K funding is part of its Information systems account. Over $60
million were cut from this account were cut by the House Appropriations Committee,
from the funding level recommended by the Treasury subcommittee. On July 21, the
House conferees were instructed to “restore $50 million in funding for the IRS to
complete its Year 2000 compliance...” The Senate version would fund this account
at over $50 million more than the House. House Treasury Subcommittee Chairman
Kolbe stated that while he had no objection to the sentiment of the instruction and
would try to carry it out, he was concerned as to the source for that restoration. He
went on to say, “But I am certainly hopeful that it will be possible for us to restore at
least this amount of the Y2K funding to the Internal Revenue Service and other
Federal agencies.”31
No emergency Y2K funds for FY2000 were requested, nor have they been
included in either the House or Senate versions of H.R. 2490 (S.1282).
Major Funding Trends
In summary and prior to scorekeeping adjustments by the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO), the Administration has requested a total of $27,997,054 for accounts
within this appropriation. The House and Senate data for FY1999 enacted are
different. The House shows $27,922,712,000 as a grand total in budget authority and
the Senate shows $27,915,604,000. Using either figure, the FY2000 levels approved
by the House Subcommittee and the Senate Committee represent an increase over
the FY1999 enacted level of $26,978,249,000. The House Treasury Appropriations
Subcommittee recommended a FY2000 funding level of $28,095,811. And the Senate
Committee on Appropriations reported a funding level of $27,737,971,000.32
House documents, using CBO scorekeeping data shows that the mandatory
funding requested equals $14,533,811,000 for FY2000, compared to
$13,656,152,000 enacted for FY1999. Both the House- and Senate-reported figures
are $14,533,811,000, equal to the requested level.
According to the House documents, the FY2000 request for discretionary
funding is $13,926,438,000, an increase over $13,465,985,000, FY1999 enacted.
The House Committee mark for discretionary funding is $13,466,056,000 and the
Senate would provide $13,434,138,000 in discretionary funding. The Administration
31“Appointment of Conferees on H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145, 106th Cong., 1st sess.
(Washington: GPO, July 21, 1999), pp. H6026-6027.
Fundin
32
g data are derived from a detailed computer printout, dated July 13, 1999, from the
House Committee on Appropriations and from Senate Report 106-87, dated June 24, 1999.

---

CRS-24
is shown to have requested $132,127,000 for the crime trust fund as compared to the
FY1999 enacted level of $132,000,000. The House committee would fund this
account at the FY1999 level of $132,000,000. The Senate, however, would increase
the amount to $194,000,000 in this account.
Table 2. Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive
Office of the President, and General Government, FY1995 to FY1999
(in billions of current dollars) a
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
23.455
23.164
24.102
25.585
27.122
Source for FY1999: U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, as of July 13, 1999.
a These figures, in current dollars, include CBO adjustments for permanent budget authorities,
rescissions, supplementals, as well as other elements factored into the CBO scorekeeping process.
For a brief presentation on CBO scorekeeping see: U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining
Budgetary Discipline: Spending and Revenue Options (Washington: GOP, 1999). The appendix
beginning on p. 281 provides the “Scorekeeping Guidelines” as found in the conference report to the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Also available at [http://www.cbo.gov/].
Table 3. Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President
and General Government Appropriation, FY2000, by Title
(In millions, without CBO scorekeeping)
FY1999
FY2000
House
Senate
FY2000
Title
Enacted
Request
Reported
Passed
Enacted
I. Treasury
12,637.2
12,376.1
12,189.7
12,234.7
—
II. USPS
100.2
93.4
93.4
93.4
—
III. EOP
670.1
639.5
654.8
570.1
—
IV. Agencies
14,515.2
14,888.0
14,862.3
14,876.4
—
Total
27,922.7
27,997.1
27,800.1
27,774.6
—
Source: The source for the House data is the House Committee on Appropriations. The
Senate data are also from the House Committee, as released to them by the Senate July 14,
1999.

---

CRS-25
Table 4. Department of Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the
President, and General Government Appropriations33 (in thousands of dollars)
FY1999
FY2000
House
Senate
FY2000
Bureau or Agency
Enacted
Request
Reported
Passed
Enacted
Title I: Department of the Treasury, Selected Accounts
Department Offices a
123,151
134,630
134,206
133,168
—
Department-wide systems and
capital investments
programs
28,690
53,561
31,017
35,561
—
Treasury Building Repair and
Restoration b
27,000
23,000
23,000
15,000
—
Office of Inspector
General
30,678
32,017
30,716
30,483
—
Inspector General for Tax
Administration
—
112,207
112,207
111,340
—
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network
24,000
28,418
29,656
27,681
—
Federal Law Enforcement
Training Center c
110,231
107,846
107,137
101,725
—
Financial Management
Service d
202,490
202,670
201,320
200,054
—
Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms e
552,769
599,859
567,059
590,345
—
U.S. Customs Service f
2,049,154
1,829,783
1,817,502
1,782,435
—
Bureau of the Public Debt g
172,100
177,819
176,919
176,983
—
Internal Revenue Service,
Total h
8,375,165
8,248,774
8,109,774
8,191,135
—
Processing, Assistance,
and Management i
3,086,208
3,312,535
3,270,098
3,291,945
—
Earned Income Tax Credit
Compliance Initiative
143,000
144,000
144,000
144,000
—
Tax Law Enforcement
3,164,189
3,336,838
3,301,136
3,305,090
—
Information Systems j
1,770,768
1,455,401
1,394,540
1,450,100
—
U.S. Secret Service k
692,873
666,235
667,235
643,739
—
Violent Crime Reduction
Program (Crime Control Trust
Fund)
132,000
132,127
132,000
194,000
—
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms
3,000
3,000
26,800
17,847
—
The
33
source is House Committee on Appropriations, as of July 14, 1999. The Senate data
are also from the House committee, as released to them by the Senate July 14.

---

CRS-26
FY1999
FY2000
House
Senate
FY2000
Bureau or Agency
Enacted
Request
Reported
Passed
Enacted
Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network
1,400
1,263
—
1,863
—
Interagency Crime and
Drug Enforcement
24,000
49,716
27,000
28,366
—
U.S. Secret Service
22,628
3,196
4,200
21,950
—
ONDCP-HIDTA
1,000
—
—
—
—
Gang Resistance Education
and Training: Grants
13,000
10,000
10,000
13,000
—
U.S. Customs Service
65,472
64,952
64,000
52,774
—
Federal Law Enforcement
Training Center
—
—
—
9,200
—
Federal Drug Control
Programs: Special Forfeiture
Fund
—
—
—
49,000
—
Total, Treasury
12,637,225
12,376,130
12,189,648
12,234,649
—
Appropriations
10,714,759
12,376,130
12,189,648
12,234,649
—
Rescission
-4,500

—
—
—
—
Emergency Funding
1,926,966
—
—
—
—
Title II: U.S. Postal Service
Payments to Postal Service
Fund
100,195
93,436
29,000
29,000
—
(Delay in Obligation)
(-71,195)
—
—
—
—
Advance Appropriation,
FY2001
—
—
64,436
64,436
—
Total, Postal Service l
100,195
93,436
93,436
93,436
—
Title III: Executive Office of the President (EOP) and Funds Appropriated to the President
m
Compensation of the President
n
250
250
250
250
—
The White House Office
(salaries and expenses)
52,344
52,444
52,444
52,444
—
Executive Residence at the
White House (operating
expenses)
8,691
9,260
9,260
9,260
—
White House Repair and
Restoration
—
810
810
810
—
Office of the Vice President
(salaries and expenses)
3,512
3,617
3,617
3,617
—
Official Residence of the Vice
President (operating expenses)
334
345
345
345
—

---

CRS-27
FY1999
FY2000
House
Senate
FY2000
Bureau or Agency
Enacted
Request
Reported
Passed
Enacted
Council of Economic
Advisers
3,666
3,840
3,840
3,840
—
Office of Policy
Development
4,032
4,032
4,032
4,032
—
National Security Council
6,806
6,997
6,997
6,997
—
Office of Administration o
58,141
39,198
39,448
39,198
—
Office of Management and
Budget
60,617
63,495
63,495
63,495
—
Office of National Drug
Control Policy (ONDCP)p q
49,242
43,133
52,221
21,963
—
ONDCP Counterdrug
Technology Assessment
Center
—
—
—
31,100
—
Federal Drug Control
Program, High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Areas
Program (HIDTA)
184,977
185,777
192,000
205,277
—
Federal Drug Control
Program, Special
Forfeiture Fund
216,500
225,300
225,000
127,500
—
Funds Appropriated to the
President - Unanticipated
needs r
21,000
1,000
1,000
—
—
Total, EOP and Funds
Appropriated to the
President
670,112
639,498
654,762
570,128
—
Appropriations
607,121
639,498
654,762
553,128
—
Emergency Funding
62,991
—
—
—
—
Title IV: Independent Agencies
Committee for Purchase from
People Who Are Blind or
Severely Disabled
2,464
2,674
2,674
2,657
—
Federal Election
Commission s
36,500
38,516
38,152
38,175
—
Federal Labor Relations
Authority
22,586
23,828
23,828
23,681
—
General Services
Administration t
643,960
158,316
146,006
156,297
—
Federal Buildings Fund
450,018
—
—
—
—
Policy and Operations u
158,001
122,158
110,448
120,198
—
Office of Inspector General
32,000
33,917
33,317
33,858
—
Allowances and Office Staff
for Former Presidents
2,241
2,241
2,241
2,241
—

---

CRS-28
FY1999
FY2000
House
Senate
FY2000
Bureau or Agency
Enacted
Request
Reported
Passed
Enacted
Expenses, presidential
transition
—
—
—
—
—
Supplemental general
provision (P.L. 106-31)
1,700
—
—
—
—
Merit Systems Protection
Board (salaries and expenses)
25,805
27,586
27,586
27,422
—
Morris K. Udall scholarship
and excellence in national
environmental policy
foundation
—
3,000
1,000
—
—
Environmental Dispute
Resolution Fund
4,250
1,250
1,250
—
—
National Archives and
Records Administration v
248,589
222,372
212,318
220,108
—
Operating Expenses w
231,276
186,452
180,398
179,738
—
Reduction of Debt
- 4,012
-5,598
-5,598
-5,598
—
Repairs and Restoration
11,325
13,518
13,518
21,518
—
National Historical
Publications and Records
Commission: Grants
Program x
10,000
6,000
6,000
6,250
—
Records Center Revolving
Fund
—
22,000
22,000
22,000
—
Office of Government
Ethics
8,492
9,114
9,114
9,071
—
Office of Personnel
Management
13,480,640
14,355,105
14,354,105
14,355,105
—
Salaries and expenses
85,350
91,584
90,584
91,584
—
Office of Inspector General
960
960
960
960
—
Government Payment for
Annuitants, Employees
Health Benefits
4,654,146
5,105,482
5,105,482
5,105,482
—
Government Payment for
Annuitants, Employees
Life Insurance
34,576
36,207
36,207
36,207
—
Payment to Civil Service
Retirement and Disability
Fund
8,703,180
9,120,872
9,120,872
9,120,872
—
Office of Special Counsel y
8,820
9,740
9,740
9,689
—
United States Tax Court
32,765
36,489
36,489
34,179
—

---

CRS-29
FY1999
FY2000
House
Senate
FY2000
Bureau or Agency
Enacted
Request
Reported
Passed
Enacted
Total, Independent
Agencies
14,515,180
14,887,990
14,862,262
14,876,384
—
Appropriations
14,399,368
14,887,990
14,866,262
14,880,184
—
Rescissions
—
—
-4,000
-3,800
—
Emergency Funding
115,812
—
—
—
—
Source: U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, as of July 14, 1999.
Table 4 Notes:
a Treasury Departmental Offices— FY1999 enacted includes the following emergency funding accounts:
Salaries and expenses, $1,500,000 for counterdrug activities and $1,238,000 for Y2K conversion; and three
Automation enhancement funding points for Y2K conversion, totaling $52,665,000.

b Treasury Building Fund— FY1999 statute requires delay in obligating the $27,000,000 until the close of the
fiscal year.

c Law Enforcement Training Center— FY1999 enacted includes $3,548,000 in emergency funding for
antiterrorism.
d Financial Management Center— FY1999 enacted includes $6,000,000 in emergency funding for Y2K
conversion.
e ATF—FY1999 enacted includes three Y2K conversion funding points totaling $11,195,000 and excludes
$2,206,000 delayed obligation of appropriated funds. The Y2K funding was subject to a rescission of
$4,500,000. Neither congressional version includes the budget request for $15,000,000 to fund laboratory
facilities and headquarters.
fCustoms— FY1999 enacted includes three emergency funding counterdrug items totaling $276,000,000, Y2K
conversion emergency funding at $10,200,000, and excludes $9,500,000 delayed obligation of appropriated
funds. Note that the Committee print out provides the total shown for FY1999 enacted, however, a tally of the
individual accounts shown results in a total of $2,037,953,000. The Senate report shows another $1,701,000.
Public Debt—FY1999 enacted includes $1,000,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding.
g
h IRS—Total for IRS reflects funding adjustments presented in notes for specific accounts within the IRS
account.
Processing—FY1999 enacted does not reflect $130,000,000 delayed obligation of appropriated funds.
i
jInformation Systems—FY1999 enacted includes $483,000,000 and $22,312,000 in Y2K conversion emergency
funding.

k U.S. Secret Service—FY1999 enacted includes $80,808,000 in emergency funding for antiterrorism and two
emergency funding items totaling $3,695,000 for Y2K conversion. It does not exclude $5,000,000 delayed
obligation of appropriated funds.
USPS—FY1999 does not exclude $71,195 delayed obligation.
l

m The Council on Environmental Quality/Office of Environmental Quality, Office of Science and Technology
Policy, and the Office of the United States Trade Representative are funded under other appropriations.
n Since 1969, the President’s salary has been $200,000 per annum. Since 1949, the expense allowance has
been $50,000 per annum..
o Off. of Admin.—FY1999 enacted includes three Y2K conversion items of emergency funding totaling
$29,791,000.

---

CRS-30

p ONDCP—FY1999 enacted includes counterdrug emergency funding of $1,200,000. The Senate committee
recommends creating a new line item which would fund the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
separately, instead of previous practice of including it in the general ONDCP account.
q ONDCP Federal Drug Control—Since these funds are not for operations of the Executive Office of the
President (EOP), but are to be transferred to federal, state and local agencies for anti-drug operations, they are
not included in the EOP operations funds. The funds are under the control of the ONDCP. FY1999 enacted
for the Special forfeiture fund includes $2,000,000 in counterdrug emergency funding.
r Unanticipated Needs—FY1999 enacted reflects $30,000,000 in emergency funding, as reduced by a
$10,000,000 rescission.
s FEC—FY1999 enacted includes $243,000 in emergency funding for counterdrug.
t GSA total—FY1999 enacted includes $22,503,000 in emergency funding. The FY1999 agency regular
appropriation was $593,853,000.

u GSA Policy and Operations—The House documents show FY1999 enacted with five Y2K conversion items
of emergency funding totaling $48,407,000. The Senate Report shows FY1999 enacted with four Y2K
conversion items of emergency funding totaling $41,299,000.
v NARA total—FY1999 enacted includes $6,662,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding, but does not
exclude a total of $11,861,000 delayed obligations.

w NARA Operating expenses—FY1999 enacted includes $6,662,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding,
but does not exclude $7,861,000 delayed obligations.

x NARA/NHPRC—FY1999 does not include a $4,000,000 obligation delay. The FY2000 totals do not reflect
proposed rescissions of $4,000,000 and $3,800,000 by the House and Senate respectively.
OSC—FY1999 enacted includes $1,00,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding.
y

---

CRS-31
Glossary of Budget Process Terms
The following definitions are selected from the “Glossary of Budgetary Terms”
as found in Manual on the Federal Budget Process, a CRS report (98-720) by Robert
Keith in consultation with Alan Schick.
Account. A control and reporting unit for budgeting an accounting.
Appropriation. A provision of law providing budget authority that permits federal
agencies to incur obligations and to make payments of the U.S. Treasury for specified
purposes. Annual appropriations are provided in appropriations acts; most permanent
appropriations are provided in substantive law.
Authorization. A provision in law that authorizes appropriations for a program or
agency.
Budget Authority. Authority provided by law to enter into obligations that normally
result in outlays. The main forms of budget authority are appropriations, borrowing
authority, and contract authority.
Budget Resolution. A concurrent resolution passed by both Houses of Congress,
but not requiring the signature of the President, setting forth the congressional budget
for at least the next five fiscal years. The budget resolution sets forth various budget
totals and functional allocations, and may include reconciliation instructions, to
designated House or Senate committees.
Continuing Resolution. An act (in the form of a joint resolution) that provides
budget authority to agencies or programs whose regular appropriation has not been
enacted after the new fiscal year has started. A continuing resolution usually is a
temporary measure that expires on a specified date or is superseded by enactment of
the regular appropriations act. Some continuing resolutions, however, are in effect
for the remainder of the fiscal year and are the means of enacting regular
appropriations.
Direct Spending. Budget authority, and the resulting outlays, provided in laws other
than annual appropriations acts. Appropriated entitlements are classified as direct
spending. Direct spending is distinguished by the Budget Enforcement Act from
discretionary spending and is subject to the PAGO rules. It is also referred to as
“mandatory spending.”
Discretionary Spending. Budget authority, and the resulting outlays, provided in
annual appropriations acts, but not including appropriated entitlements.
Federal Funds. All monies collected and spent by the federal government other than
those designated as trust funds. Federal funds include general, special, public
enterprise, and intragovernmental funds.
Mandatory Spending. See “Direct Spending.”

---

CRS-32
Obligation. A binding agreement (such as through a contract or purchase order) that
will require payment.
Outlays. Payments made (generally through the issuance of checks or disbursement
of cash) to liquidate obligations. Outlays during a fiscal year may be for payment of
obligations incurred in prior years or in the same year.
PAGO (Pay-as-You-Go) Process. The procedure established by the Budget
Enforcement Act to ensure that revenue and direct spending legislation does not add
to the deficit or reduce the surplus. PAGO requires that any increase in the deficit or
reduction in the surplus due to legislation be offset by other legislation or
sequestration. PAGO is enforced by estimating the five-year budgetary effects of all
new revenue and direct spending laws.

Reconciliation Process. A process established in the Congressional Budget Act by
which Congress changes existing laws to conform tax and spending levels to the levels
set in a budget resolution. Changes recommended by committees pursuant to a
reconciliation instruction are incorporated into a reconciliation bill.
Revolving Fund. An account or fund in which all income derived from its operations
is available to finance the fund’s continuing operations without fiscal year limitation.
Scorekeeping. Procedures for tracking and reporting on the status of congressional
budgetary actions affecting budget authority, receipt, outlays, the surplus or deficit,
and the public debt limit.
Supplemental Appropriation. Budget authority provided in an appropriations act
in addition to regular or continuing appropriations already provided. Supplemental
appropriations acts sometimes include items not included in regular appropriations
acts for lack of timely authorization.
Trust Funds. Accounts designated by law as trust funds for receipts and
expenditures earmarked for specific purposes.
User Fees. Fees charged to users of goods or services provided by the federal
government. In levying or authorizing these fees, Congress determines whether the
revenue should go into the U.S. Treasury or should be available to the agency
providing the goods or services.

---

CRS-33
For Additional Reading
CRS Issue Briefs
CRS Issue Brief 98024, Federal Employees and the FY1999 Budget, by Sharon S.
Gressle.
CRS Issue Brief 95035, Federal Regulatory Reform: An Overview, by Roger Garcia.
CRS Issue Brief 10014, Gun Control, by Keith Alan Bea and William J. Krouse.
CRS Issue Brief 89148, Item Veto and Expanded Impoundment Proposals, by
Virginia A. McMurtry.
CRS Issue Brief 95083, Postal Service’s Mail Monopoly: Is It Time for Change?,
by Bernevia McCalip.
CRS Issue Brief 97036, The Year-2000 Problem: Congressional Issues, by Richard
Nunno.
CRS Info Packs
CRS Info Pack 517G, Government Performance and Results Act: implementing the
results.
CRS Reports
CRS Report 97-635, The Balanced Budget Act of 1997: Retirement and Health
Insurance Provisions for Postal and Federal Personnel, by Carolyn L. Merck.
CRS Report 98-829, Brady Act Firearm Purchase Requirements Summarized, by
Keith Bea.
CRS Report 98-814, Budget Reconciliation Legislation: Development and
Consideration, by Bill Heniff, Jr.
CRS Report RL30021, Child Care Issues in the 106 Congress
th
, by Karen Spar and
Melinda T. Gish.
CRS Report RS20255, Civil Service Retirement Bills in the 106 Congress
th
, by
Patrick J. Purcell.
CRS Report 97-892, Continuing Appropriations Acts: Brief Overview of Recent
Practices, by Sandy Streeter
CRS Report 97-1008, Federal Pay: FY1999 Salary Adjustments, by Barbara L.
Schwemle.

---

CRS-34
CRS Report 98-956, Federal Pay: FY2000 Salary Adjustment, by Barbara L.
Schwemle.
CRS Report RS20257, Government Performance and Results Act: Brief History and
Implementation Activities During the First Session of the 106 Congress
th
, by
Genevieve J. Knezo.
CRS Report 97-382, Government Performance and Results Act: Implications for
Congressional Oversight, by Frederick M. Kaiser and Virginia A. McMurtry.
CRS Report 97-70, Government Performance and Results Act, P.L. 103-62:
Implementation Through Fall 1996 and Issues for the 105th Congress, by
Genevieve J. Knezo.
CRS Report RS20183, Immigration and Naturalization Service’s FY2000 Budget,
by William J. Krouse.
CRS Report 98-4, Implementation of P.L. 105-206: Personnel Management
Flexibility for the Internal Revenue Service, by Barbara L. Schwemle.
CRS Report 98-721, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 98-720, Manual on the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 97-72, Performance-Based Organizations in the Federal Government:
A Reinvention Innovation, by Harold C. Relyea.
CRS Report 97-974, Reorganization Proposals for U.S. Border Management
Agencies, by Frederick Kaiser.
CRS Report 98-53, Salaries of Federal Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RL30014, Salaries of Members of Congress: Current Procedures and
Recent Adjustments, by Paul E. Dwyer.
CRS Report 97-1011, Salaries of Members of Congress: Payable Rates and
Effective Dates, 1789-1999, by Paul E. Dwyer.
CRS Report RS20114, Salary of the President Compared with That of Other Federal
Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RS20115, Salary of the President: Process for Change, by Sharon S.
Gressle.
CRS Report 98-844, Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Effects, and
Process, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report 97-216, Treasury-Inflation Protection Securities: A Fact Sheet, by
James Bickley.

---

CRS-35
CRS Report 97-134, Treasury-Inflation Protection Securities: Description, Goals,
and Policy Issues, by James Bickley.
CRS Report 98-202, Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President, and
General Government: Appropriations for FY1999, by Sylvia Morrison and
Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report 98-377, Year 2000 Problem: Chronology of Hearings and Legislation
in the 104 and 105
th
Congresses
th
, by Richard Nunno.
CRS Report 98-967, Year 2000 Problem: Potential Impacts on National
Infrastructures, by Richard Nunno.
Other Readings
Syracuse University, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Government
Performance Project, Grading Government, (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse
University, February 1999).
U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury and General
Government Appropriation Bill, 2000, report to accompany s. 1282, 106th
Cong., 1 sess., S. Rept. 106-87 (Washington: GPO, 1999).
st
U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining Budgetary Discipline: Spending and
Revenue Options (Washington: GPO, 1999). [Available on CBO Web site.]
U.S. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Customs Service
Strategic Plan (FY97-02), by Commissioner of Customs George Weiss,
(Washington: U.S. Customs Service, August 1, 1997).
U.S. General Accounting Office, High Risk Series, IRS Management, GAO report
HR 97-8, (Washington: February 1997).
——-, Customs Service: Comments on Strategic Plan and Resource Allocation
Process, GAO report GGD-98-15, (Washington: October 16, 1998).
——-, Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of the
Treasury, GAO report OCG-99-14, (Washington: October 21, 1998).
U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Progress on Year 2000 Conversion, A
Quarterly Report to Congress, (Washington: March 1999).
Selected World Wide Web Sites
Important information regarding current and past budgets (including budget
documents), the federal budget process, and duties and functions are available at the
following web or gopher sites.

---

CRS-36
Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
[http://www.cbo.gov]
General Accounting Office (GAO).
[http://www.gao.gov]
National Commission on Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service
[http://www.house.gov/natcommirs/main.htm]
Office of Government Ethics
[http://www.usoge.gov]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
[http://www.whitehouse.Gov/WH/EOP/OMB/html/ombhome.html]
Office of Management and Budget, Statements of Administration Policy (SAPS)
[http://www.whitehouse.Gov/WH/EOP/OMB/SAP]

---