Order Code RL32885
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Science, State, Justice, Commerce and
Related Agencies (House)/
Commerce, Justice, Science and
Related Agencies (Senate):
FY2006 Appropriations
Updated October 5, 2005
Ian F. Fergusson, Coordinator
Analyst in International Trade and Finance
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Susan B. Epstein, Coordinator
Specialist In Foreign Policy and Trade
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade 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 the regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year.
It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House Committee on
Appropriations and Senate Subcommittee on Legislative Branch of the Senate Committee
on Appropriations. It summarizes the current legislative status of the bill, its scope, major
issues, funding levels, and related legislative activity. The report lists the key CRS staff
relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products.
NOTE: A Web version of this document with active links is
available to congressional staff at:
[ h t t p : / / b e t a . c r s . g o v / c l i / l e v e l _ 2 . a s p x
?PRDS_CLI_ITEM_ID=73].

---

Science, State, Justice, Commerce and Related
Agencies (House)/ Commerce, Justice, Science and
Related Agencies (Senate): Appropriations for FY2006
Summary
This report monitors actions taken by the 109th Congress for the House’s
Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies (SSJC) and the Senate’s
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) FY2006 appropriations
legislation. Appropriations bills reflect the jurisdiction of the subcommittees of the
House and Senate Appropriations Committees in which they are considered.
Jurisdictions for the subcommittees of the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees changed at the beginning of the 109th Congress. In the 108th Congress,
both the House and Senate subcommittees had identical jurisdiction and produced the
Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations bills.
In the 109th Congress, jurisdiction for the Judiciary appropriation was removed to the
Treasury, Transportation, HUD Subcommittees in the House and the Senate. Science
appropriations, namely the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA)
and the National Science Foundation (NSF) were transferred to the former CJS
subcommittees in both chambers. In the Senate, Appropriations for the Department
of State was transferred to the Foreign Operations subcommittee, however, it remains
under the jurisdiction of SSJC in the House.
The Administration requested $60.977 billion/$51.173 billion for SSJC/CJS
appropriations in its FY2006 budget request sent to Congress on February 7, 2005.
The requests of the major departments and their related agencies are: Department of
Justice — $20.5 billion; Department of Commerce — $9.0 billion; Department of
State — $9.8 billion; Science — $22.1 billion; and Related Agencies — $2.2
billion. The House Appropriations Committee’s most recent FY2006 302(b)
allocation for SSJC is $57.814 billion. The Senate Appropriations Committee’s most
recent FY2006 302(b) budget allocation for CJS was set at $48.875 billion. Due to
jurisdictional differences, the latter figure does not include the State Department.
The House Appropriations Committee reported its SSJC bill (H.R. 2862,
H.Rept. 109-118) on June 7, 2005 and the House enacted the bill on June 16 after
three days of debate and 43 amendments. It provides $61.5 billion to the SSJC
agencies including $21.8 billion for the Department of Justice; $5.8 billion for the
Department of Commerce; $9.6 billion for the State Department; and 22.1 billion for
NASA and the NSF. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported its bill (H.R.
2862, S.Rept. 109-88) on June 23, 2005. The Senate Appropriations Committee
reported its State, Foreign Operations Appropriation bill (H.R. 3057/S.Rept. 109-96)
June 30. It contains the Senate figures of $9,709.2 for the Department of State,
International Broadcasting, and related agencies. The full Senate passed the bill on
July 20. The Senate passed the CJS bill on September 15, 2005 after consideration
of 122 amendments by a vote of 91-4. It provides $52.8 billion to the CJS agencies,
including $21.2 billion for the Department of Justice; $7.4 billion for the Department
of Commerce; and $21.9 billion for NASA and the NSF. Since October 1, the
SSJC/CJS agencies have been operating under continuing resolution (P.L.109-77),
which will fund these agencies until November 18, 2005.

---

CRS Key Policy Staff
CRS
Area of Expertise
Name
Division
Telephone and E-Mail
Departments
Department of Justice
Celinda Franco
DSP
7-7360
cfranco@crs.loc.gov
Department of Commerce
Kevin Kosar
G&F
7-3968
kkosar@crs.loc.gov
Department of State and
Susan Epstein
FDT
7-6678
International Broadcasting
sepstein@crs.loc.gov
Agencies and Policy Areas
Patent and Trademark Office, NIST,
Wendy H. Schacht
RSI
7-7066
Technology Administration
wschacht@crs.loc.gov
Telecommunications, NTIA
Glenn McLoughlin
RSI
7-7073
gmcloughlin@crs.loc.gov
NASA
Marcia Smith
RSI
7-7076
mssmith@crs.loc.gov
NSF
Christine Matthews
RSI
7-7055
cmatthews@crs.loc.gov
NTIS
Jeffrey Seifert
RSI
7-0781
jseifert@crs.loc.gov
FCC
Patty Figliola
RSI
7-2508
pfigliola@crs.loc.gov
NOAA
Wayne Morrissey
RSI
7-7072
wmorrissey@crs.loc.gov
EDA, SBA, and FTC
Bruce Mulock
G&F
7-7775
bmulock@crs.loc.gov
Bureau of the Census
Jennifer D. Williams
G&F
7-8640
jwilliams@crs.loc.gov
Trade agencies: ITA, ITC, USTR, BIS,
Ian Fergusson
FDT
7-4997
NIPLECC
ifergusson@crs.loc.gov
Equal Employment Opportunity
Linda Levine
DSP
7-7756
Commission
llevine@crs.loc.gov
Legal Services Corporation
Carmen Solomon-
DSP
7-7306
Fears
csolomonfears@crs.loc.gov
Securities and Exchange Commission
Mark Jickling
G&F
7-7784
mjickling@crs.loc.gov
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Garrine Laney
DSP
7-2518
glaney@crs.loc.gov
State Justice Institute
Steve Rutkus
G&F
7-7162
srutkus@crs.loc.gov
International Religious Freedom
Vita Bite
FDT
7-7662
Commission
vbite@crs.loc.gov
U.S. Institute of Peace
Susan Epstein
FDT
7-6678
sepstein@crs.loc.gov
Division abbreviations: ALD = American Law Division; DSP = Domestic Social Policy Division;
FDT = Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division; G&F = Government and Finance Division; RSI
= Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

Contents
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Synopsis of FY2005 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Departmental Funding Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Survey of High-Profile Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
GPRA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
FY2006 Budget Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
General Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
U.S. Parole Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Legal Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Interagency Law Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Federal Bureau of Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Drug Enforcement Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Federal Prison System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Office of Justice Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Justice Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Improving the Criminal Justice System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Research, Development, Evaluation, and Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Technology for Crime Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Juvenile Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Substance Abuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Victims of Crime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Office on Violence Against Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Related Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Related CRS Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Commerce and Related Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Departmental Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
International Trade Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Manufacturing and Services Unit (MSU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Market Access and Compliance Unit (MAC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Import Administration Unit (IA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Trade Promotion/U.S. Foreign Commercial Service (TP/FCS) . . . . . 20
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
NIPLECC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Bureau of Industry and Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Economic Development Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Economic Development Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Minority Business Development Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
National Telecommunications and Information Administration . . . . . . . . . 26
National Technical Information Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

---

Bureau of the Census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Technology Administration/Office of the Under Secretary of Technology . 31
National Institute of Standards and Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) . . . . . . . . . . 33
The President’s Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Administration Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
House Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Bush Administration Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Senate Version of H.R. 2862 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Second Bush Administration Statement on H.R. 2682 (Amended) . . . 35
Related Budget Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Related Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Related CRS Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Science Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
National Aeronautics and Space Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
National Science Foundation (NSF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Agency Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Key Budget Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Related CRS Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Department of State and International Broadcasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
FY2006 Funding Issues — Administration of Foreign Affairs . . . . . . . . . . 51
Diplomatic & Consular Programs (D&CP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Embassy, Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM) . . . . . . . 52
Worldwide Security Upgrades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Educational and Cultural Exchanges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Capital Investment Fund (CIF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
International Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
International Organizations and Conferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Contributions to International Peacekeeping (CIPA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Related Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
The Asia Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
National Endowment for Democracy (NED) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
East-West and North-South Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
The International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue
Trust Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
International Broadcasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Related Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Related CRS Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Independent Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Legal Services Corporation (LSC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Small Business Administration (SBA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
State Justice Institute (SJI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

---

U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
U.S. Institute of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
U.S. Institute of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Related CRS Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Related Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
List of Tables
Table 1. Legislative Status of SSJC/CJS Appropriations, FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 2. Funding for Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, and
Science Agencies
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Table 3. Department of Justice Funding Accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Table 4. NOAA Budget Request and Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table 5. FY2006 Funding for the Department of Commerce and
Related Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Table 6. NASA’s FY2006 Budget Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Table 7. National Science Foundation, FY2004 to FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Table 8. Funding for the Title III Science Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Table 9. Funding for the Department of State and International Broadcasting . 58
Table 10. FY2006 Funding for CJS Related Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Appendix. SSJC/CJS Appropriations by Department, FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

---

Science, State, Justice, Commerce and
Related Agencies (House)/ Commerce,
Justice, Science and Related Agencies
(Senate): Appropriations for FY2006
Most Recent Developments
The Administration submitted its FY2006 budget to Congress on February 7,
2005. The Administration requested $60.977 billion for the agencies under the
jurisdiction of the Science, State, Justice, Commerce Appropriations subcommittee
of the House and $51.173 billion for the Agencies under the Commerce, Justice,
Science Appropriations subcommittee in the Senate. The requests of the major
departments and their related agencies are: Department of Justice — $20.5 billion;
Department of Commerce — $9.0 billion; Department of State — $9.8 billion;
Science — $22.1 billion; and Related Agencies — $2.2 billion. The House
Appropriations Committee’s most recent FY2006 302(b) allocation for SSJC is
$57.814 billion. The Senate Appropriations Committee’s most recent FY2006
302(b) budget allocation for CJS was set at $48.875 billion. Due to jurisdictional
differences, the latter figure does not include the State Department.
The House Appropriations Committee reported its SSJC bill (H.R. 2862,
H.Rept. 109-118) on June 7, 2005 and the House enacted the bill on June 16 after
three days of debate and 43 amendments. It provides $61.5 billion to the SSJC
agencies including $21.8 billion for the Department of Justice; $5.8 billion for the
Department of Commerce; $9.6 billion for the State Department; and 22.1 billion for
NASA and the NSF. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported its Commerce,
Justice, Science (CJS) bill (H.R. 2862, S.Rept. 109-88) on June 23, 2005. It provides
$ 52.6 billion to the CJS agencies, including $21.2 billion for the Department of
Justice; $7.2 billion for the Department of Commerce; and $21.9 billion for NASA
and the NSF. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported its State, Foreign
Operations Appropriation bill (H.R. 3057. S.Rept. 109-96) June 30. It contains the
Senate figures of $9,709.2 for the Department of State, International Broadcasting,
and related agencies which the full Senate passed on July 20th. The Senate passed the
CJS bill on September 15, 2005 after consideration of 122 amendments by a vote of
91-4. It provides $52.8 billion to the CJS agencies, including $21.2 billion for the
Department of Justice; $7.4 billion for the Department of Commerce; and $21.9
billion for NASA and the NSF. Since October 1, the SSJC/CJS agencies have been
operating under continuing resolution (P.L.109-77), which will fund these agencies
until November 18, 2005.
Appropriations bills reflect the jurisdiction of the subcommittees of the House
and Senate Appropriations Committees in which they are considered. Jurisdictions

---

CRS-2
for the subcommittees of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees were
changed at the beginning of the 109th Congress. In the 108th Congress, both the
House and Senate subcommittees had identical jurisdiction and produced the
Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations bills.
In the 109th Congress, jurisdiction for the the Judiciary appropriation was removed
to the Treasury, Transportation, HUD Subcommittees in the House and the Senate.
Science appropriations, namely the National Aeronautical and Space Administration
and the National Science Foundation were transferred to the former CJS
subcommittees in both chambers. In the Senate, appropriations for the Department
of State were transferred to the Foreign Operations subcommittee, however, they
remains under the jurisdiction of SSJC in the House. Additionally, the Senate
Appropriations Committee has placed the National Institute of Science and
Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under its
Title III Science Agencies. For the purposes of comparison, this report will retain
reference these agencies in Title II Commerce agencies.
Table 1. Legislative Status of SSJC/CJS Appropriations,
FY2006
Subcommittee
Conf. Report
Markup
House
House
Senate
Senate
Conf.
Approval
Public
Report
Passage Report Passage Report
Law
House
Senate
House
Senate
6/7/05
6/23/05
5/24/05
6/21/05 H.R. 2862 6/16/05 S.Rept. 9/15/05
H.Rept.
109-88
109-118
Background Information
Synopsis of FY2005 Appropriations
The Administration’s request for the FY2005 Commerce, Justice, State, and the
Judiciary and Related Agency totaled $43.2 billion. The House CJS Subcommittee
on Appropriations marked up its bill on June 15, 2004. The full House
Appropriations Committee by voice vote approved the unnumbered bill on June 23,
and reported it as H.R. 4754 (H.Rept. 108-576) on July 1. The House passed this bill
on July 8, 2004. The House bill provided a total of $43.5 billion. The Senate
Appropriations Committee marked up its bill (S. 2809, S.Rept. 108-344) and passed
it unanimously on September 15, 2004 providing a total of $40.5 billion. The CJS
appropriation was in Division B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of FY2005
(P.L. 108-447). The Conference Report (H.R. 4818, H.Rept. 108-792) was approved
in both the House and Senate on November 20, 2004. The act ( P.L.108-447) was
signed by the President on December 8, 2004.

---

CRS-3
Departmental Funding Trends
The table below shows funding trends for the major agencies in CJS
appropriations over the five-year period FY2001-FY2005, including supplemental
appropriations. Over the five-year period, funding decreased for the Department of
Justice by $437 million (-2.1%); and increased for the Department of Commerce by
$1.48 billion (29%); for the Title III Science Agencies by $2.96 billion (14%); and
for the Department of State by $2.17 billion (33%).
The Justice Department’s budget rose steadily until FY2003, when it was
reduced by nearly $4.7 billion below the FY2002 level due to the relocation of some
activities to the Department of Homeland Security, however, by FY2005 it was
nearly back to the FY2001 level. The Commerce Department budget has generally
increased over the five-year span. The State Department’s increases reflect post-
September 11th security environment, technology improvements and a new hiring
initiative. State has received the greatest increase of about $2.17 billion from
FY2001 to FY2005, reflecting supplemental funds appropriated in FY2002, FY2003,
and FY2004.
Table 2. Funding for Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,
and Science Agencies
(in billions of current dollars)
Department or Agency
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
Justice
21.049
23.707
19.648
19.850
20.612
Commerce
5.153
5.739
5.796
5.943
6.637
Science*
19.08
19.71
20.600
20.960
21.676
State
6.601
7.362
8.179
9.429
8.767
Sources: Funding totals provided by Budget Offices of CJS and Judiciary agencies, and U.S. House of
Representatives, Committee on Appropriations.
* Previous to FY2006, Title III Science Agencies were contained in the VA/HUD appropriations legislation.
Survey of High-Profile Issues
Department of Justice
! The elimination of funding for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grants (JAG) program and the Edward Byrne
Discretionary Grant program.
! The elimination of most funding for the Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) programs administered by the COPS
Office and the realignment of the Bulletproof Vest program, the
DNA Backlog program, the Gun Violence Reduction program, and
the Southwest Border Prosecution Assistance program into other
Office of Justice Assistance programs.

---

CRS-4
! Certain appropriations limitations related to FBI background checks
for firearm transfers and ATF firearm regulation responsibilities.
! The proposed rescission of the Victims of Crime Fund balance,
while requesting an FY2006 funding cap of $660 million for current
services under the Victims of Crime program.
! The President’s FY2006 request proposes to reduce overall federal
funding for juvenile justice by 39% from FY2005 levels, and to
eliminate funding for the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant in
FY2006.
Department of Commerce and Related Agencies
! Appropriations measures that limit the use by the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office of the full amount of fees collected in the current
fiscal year.
! The extent to which federal funds should be used to support
industrial technology development programs at the National Institute
of Standards and Technology, particularly the Advanced Technology
Program and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership.
! Importation of prescription drugs from foreign countries.
! The ability of U.S. trade agencies and PTO to fight intellectual
property infringement abroad.
! The efficacy of U.S. trade agency enforcement of U.S. trade remedy
laws against unfair foreign competition.
! The possible consolidation of all of NOAA’s budget authority under
a single Organic Act.
! Funding to upgrade the U.S. tsunami early warning system.
Science Agencies
! President Bush’s “Vision for Space Exploration” and its consequent
reprioritization of NASA programs, and potential personnel cuts
(especially in aeronautics research).
! Whether to use the space shuttle to service the Hubble Space
Telescope.

---

CRS-5
Department of State and International Broadcasting
! Construction of new embassy facilities in Baghdad with regional
offices throughout Iraq.
! Increased emphasis on public diplomacy activities focusing on
Muslim/Arab populations.
! Passport and visa policies related to homeland security issues.
Department of Justice1
Background
Title I of the CJS bill typically covers appropriations for the Department of
Justice (DOJ). Established by an act of 1870 (28 U.S.C. 501) with the Attorney
General at its head, DOJ provides counsel for citizens and protects them through law
enforcement. It represents the federal government in all proceedings, civil and
criminal, before the Supreme Court. In legal matters, generally, the Department
provides legal advice and opinions, upon request, to the President and executive
branch department heads. The major functions of DOJ agencies and offices are
described below:
! United States Attorneys prosecute criminal offenses against the
United States, represent the federal government in civil actions, and
initiate proceedings for the collection of fines, penalties, and
forfeitures owed to the United States.
! United States Marshals Service provides security for the federal
judiciary, protects witnesses, executes warrants and court orders,
manages seized assets, detains and transports unsentenced prisoners,
and apprehends fugitives.
! Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigates violations of
federal criminal law; helps protect the United States against
terrorism and hostile intelligence efforts; provides assistance to other
federal, state and local law enforcement agencies; and shares
jurisdiction with Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) over
federal drug violations.
! Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigates federal drug
law violations; coordinates its efforts with state, local, and other
federal law enforcement agencies; develops and maintains drug
intelligence systems; regulates legitimate controlled substances
activities; and conducts joint intelligence-gathering activities with
foreign governments.
! Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
enforces federal law related to the manufacture, importation, and
1 This title is written by Celinda Franco, Specialist in Social Legislation, Domestic Social
Policy Division.

---

CRS-6
distribution of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. It was
transferred from the Department of the Treasury to the Department
of Justice by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296).
! Federal Prison System provides for the custody and care of the
federal prison population, the maintenance of prison-related
facilities, and the boarding of sentenced federal prisoners
incarcerated in state and local institutions.
! Office of Justice Programs (OJP) manages and coordinates the
activities of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS), and the Office of Victims of Crime.
Most crime control has traditionally been a state and local responsibility. With
the passage of the Crime Control Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-351), however, the federal
role in the administration of criminal justice has increased incrementally. Since
1984, Congress has enacted five major omnibus crime control bills, designating new
federal crimes, penalties, and additional law enforcement assistance programs for
state and local governments. Crime control is one of the few areas of the federal
budget where discretionary spending has increased over the past two decades.
GPRA
The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) required the
Department of Justice, along with other federal agencies, to prepare a five-year
strategic plan, including a mission statement, long-range goals, and program
assessment measures. The Department’s Strategic Plan for FY2003-2008 sets forth
four goals:
! prevent terrorism and promote national security;
! enforce federal criminal laws and represent the rights and interests
of the American people;
! prevent and reduce crime and violence by assisting state, local, and
tribal efforts;
! ensure the fair and efficient operation of the Federal justice system.
FY2006 Budget Request
The Department of Justice is requesting an FY2006 budget of $20.7 billion in
mandatory and discretionary spending, which represents an increase of $70 million
over what Congress enacted for FY2005. For FY2006, the Department’s plan has
four missions: (1) prevent terrorism and promote the nation’s security; (2) enforce
federal laws and represent the rights and interests of the American people; (3) assist
state, local, and tribal efforts to prevent or reduce crime and violence; and (4) ensure
the fair and efficient operation of the federal justice system.
The President’s FY2006 budget provides for increased funding for
counterterrorism and homeland defense efforts. The FY2006 budget request provides
funding increases for the FBI, the lead agency in combating terrorism, proposing

---

CRS-7
funding of $5.7 billion in 2006, an increase of $555 million over FY2005
appropriations. The FY2006 request would support the FBI in intelligence reform,
in counterterrorism and counterintelligence initiatives, and bolster the intelligence
program.
The total amount of funding requested for DEA in FY2006 is almost $1.7
billion. As a part of a comprehensive drug enforcement strategy, the DOJ has
deployed numerous federal law enforcement agencies to identify and target the most
significant drug supply organizations. The FY2006 President’s Budget includes
funding for the DEA of $72.9 million to carry out a new drug enforcement strategy
to identify and target the most significant drug supply organizations and related
components.
To help state and local law enforcement agencies target gun crime, under the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) the President’s budget
would provide additional funding for gun crime initiatives, such as Violent Crime
Impact Teams (VCIT), which target gun crime “hot spots,” identifying the worst
criminals, arresting criminal suspects, and arresting suspects while disrupting and
dismantling the violent criminal street gangs in that area.
The FY2006 President’s request would eliminate “non-performing” and
programs it considers to be lower priority, including state and local law enforcement
programs, such as the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) hiring grants
and the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants; State Criminal Alien Assistance Program
(SCAAP) grants; Juvenile Accountability Block Grants (JABG); and programs like
the Byrne Discretionary Grants and the COPS Law Enforcement Technology Grants,
which are entirely earmarked by Congress.
General Administration. The General Administration account for the
Department of Justice includes salaries and expenses, as well as other programs
designed to ensure that the collaborative functions of the DOJ agencies are
coordinated to help fight crime as efficiently as possible. Examples include the Joint
Automated Booking System and the Automated Biometric Identification System.
For FY2006, the President’s budget included $1.977 billion for General
Administration, $553 million more than enacted for FY2005. The General
Administration account funds the Attorney General’s office, senior departmental
management, the Inspector General’s office, efforts to integrate identification systems
(e.g., IAFIS and IDENT), and narrowband communications, among other things. For
FY2006, the budget request included new funding of $181.490 million for the Justice
Information Sharing Technology initiative. The House-passed bill (H.R. 2862
recommended a total of $1.834 billion for General Administration. The Senate-
passed bill includes $1.850 billion.
For salaries and expenses, the President’s FY2006 budget requests $161.4
million for supporting the Attorney General and DOJ senior policy level officials in
managing Department resources and developing policies for legal, law enforcement,
and criminal justice activities. The House-passed bill includes $126.9 million and
the Senate-passed bill includes $116.9 million.

---

CRS-8
For the Federal Office of Detention Trustee (OFDT), the FY2006 request
included $1.222 billion in funding, a $347.4 million increase over the amount
appropriated by Congress for FY2005. The OFDT provides overall management and
oversight for federal detention services relating to the detention of federal prisoners
in non-federal institutions or otherwise in the custody of the U.S. Marshal’s Service.
The House-passed and Senate-passed bills include $1.222 billion.
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is responsible for detecting and
deterring waste, fraud, abuse, involving DOJ programs and personnel and promoting
economy and efficiency in DOJ operations. The OIG also investigates allegations of
departmental misconduct. The Administration’s FY2006 request included $67.4
million for the OIG, which represents a $4.5 million increase as compared to the
FY2005 appropriation. The House-passed bill includes $66.8 million for funding the
OIG. The Senate-passed bill includes $70.4 million.
U.S. Parole Commission.The U.S. Parole Commission adjudicates parole
requests for prisoners who are serving felony sentences under federal and District of
Columbia Code violations. The authorization for the parole commission was due to
expire in November 2002, but the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations
Authorization Act (P.L. 107-273) provided for a temporary extension of the parole
commission for three years until November 1, 2005. For FY2006, the
Administration’s request included $11.3 million for the parole commission, an
increase of $800,000 over the Commission’s FY2005 appropriation (after
rescissions). The House-passed bill recommends $11.2 million and the Senate-passed
bill includes $11.0 million.
Legal Activities. The Legal Activities account includes several subaccounts:
(1) general legal activities, (2) U.S. Attorneys, (3) U.S. Marshals Service, (4) prisoner
detention, and (5) other legal activities. For FY2006, the Administration’s request
included $3.368 billion for legal activities, an increase of $150.4 million over the
FY2005 enacted budget. The House-passed bill includes $3.327 billion for total
legal expenses. The Senate-passed bill includes $3.239 billion.
The General Legal Activities account funds the Solicitor General’s supervision
of the department’s conduct in proceedings before the Supreme Court. It also funds
several departmental divisions (tax, criminal, civil, environment and natural
resources, legal counsel, civil rights, and antitrust). For these purposes, the
Administration’s FY2006 request included $679.7 million, an increase of almost
$45.0 million over the FY2005 enacted appropriation. The House-passed bill
includes $665.8 million and the Senate-passed bill includes $648.2 million.
The U.S. Attorneys and the U.S. Marshals Service are present in all of the 94
federal judicial districts. The U.S. Attorneys prosecute criminal cases and represent
the federal government in civil actions. For the U.S. Attorneys Office, the
Administration’s FY2006 request included $1.626 billion, an increase of nearly $99.3
million over the enacted FY2005 budget for this office. The House-passed bill
recommends the same amount as the Administration requested, $1.626 billion, for
the U.S. Attorneys Office. The Senate-passed bill includes $1.573 billion.

---

CRS-9
The U.S. Marshals are responsible for the protection of the Federal Judiciary,
protection of witnesses, execution of warrants and court orders, custody and
transportation of unsentenced federal prisoners, and fugitive apprehension. The
FY2006 request included $790.3 million for the Marshals Service, an increase of
$42.7 million over the Service’s FY2005 enacted budget. The House-passed bill
includes almost $800.3 million for the USMS. The Senate passed-bill includes
$764.2 million.
For other legal activities. e.g., the Community Relations Service, the
Independent Counsel, the U.S. Trustee Fund (which is responsible for maintaining
the integrity of the U.S. bankruptcy system by, among other things, prosecuting
criminal bankruptcy violations), and the Asset Forfeiture program, the FY2006
request included $235.3 million. The Administration also requested $42.8 million
in discretionary funding for the Radiation Exposure Compensation Trust Fund
(RECA), $22.2 million less than was appropriated in FY2005. The House-passed
and Senate-passed bills include a total of $199.1 million for other legal activities and
do not include any funding for RECA Trust Fund.
Interagency Law Enforcement. The Interagency Law Enforcement account
reimburses departmental agencies for their participation in the Organized Crime
Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) program. Organized into nine regional
task forces, this program combines the expertise of federal agencies with the efforts
of state and local law enforcement to disrupt and dismantle major narcotics
trafficking and money laundering organizations. From the Department of Justice, the
federal agencies that participate in OCDETF are the Drug Enforcement
Administration; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives; U.S. Marshals Service; the Justice, Tax and Criminal
Divisions; and the U.S. Attorneys. From the Department of Homeland Security, the
U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard
participate in OCDETF. Additionally, the Internal Revenue Service and Treasury
Office of Enforcement also participate from the Department of the Treasury. State
and Local Law Enforcement Agencies participate in approximately 87% of all
OCDETF investigations. The FY2006 DOJ budget request includes $661.9 million
for OCDETF. For FY2005, $553.5 million was provided for OCDETF, $108 million
less than the FY2006 amount requested by the Administration. The House-passed
bill includes $506.9 million and the Senate-passed bill includes $440.2 million for
FY2006 funding.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), as the lead federal investigative agency, continues to reorganize to focus more
sharply on preventing terrorism and other criminal activities. The Administration’s
request included $5.691 billion for FY2006, $548.6 million more than what was
enacted in FY2005. Of that amount, the request provides $10.1 million for
construction. The House-passed bill recommends $5.761, of which $20.1 million
would be for construction. The Senate-passed bill includes $5.296 billion, of which
$25.2 million for construction. The Senate measure also recommends a rescission
of $120 million from unobligated balances in this account.
Drug Enforcement Agency. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
is the lead federal agency tasked with reducing the illicit supply and abuse of

---

CRS-10
dangerous narcotics and drugs. The Administration’s FY2006 request includes
$1.694 billion for the DEA, almost $63 million more than the amount appropriated
by Congress in FY2005. The FY2006 budget request includes $172.5 million for the
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF), which brings together
major DOJ agencies such as DEA and FBI, the Criminal Division’s Narcotic and
Dangerous Drug Section, and the U.S. Attorneys, along with their state and local law
enforcement counterparts, to disrupt and dismantle major drug supply organizations.
For FY2006, 76% of DEA’s budgetary resources (including reimbursable funds)
would be used for domestic enforcement, 14% for international enforcement, 2% for
state and local assistance, and 8% for the Diversion Control Fee Account (criminal
and complaint investigations targeting pharmaceutical controlled substances
traffickers and online pharmacy investigations). The House-passed bill recommends
$1.716 billion. The Senate-passed bill recommends $1.649 billion. In addition, the
Senate-passed bill would require the Attorney General to establish a
Methamphetamine Task Force within DEA that would be responsible for improving
and targeting federal policies with respect to the production and trafficking of
methamphetamine.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The Bureau
of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) enforces federal law related to
the manufacture, importation, and distribution of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and
explosives. The FY2006 request includes $923.6 million for ATF, an increase of
$41.1 million over the Bureau’s FY2005 enacted budget of $878.5 million. The
Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) initiative brings together federal, state, and local
law enforcement agencies to identify the most pressing gun crime problems in their
communities and develop strategies to attack those problems through prevention,
deterrence, and aggressive prosecution. DOJ also launched a companion initiative,
the Violent Crime Impact Teams (VCIT), which combine the efforts of federal, state,
and local law enforcement to target gun crime “hot spots.” VCIT is currently active
in 10 cities and the FY2006 budget request would expand the initiative to 25 cities.
The FY2006 request includes $31.3 million in these and other gun crime enforcement
initiatives. The House-passed bill recommends $923.6 million and the Senate-
passed bill recommends $923.7 million.
Federal Prison System. The Federal Prison System is administered by the
Bureau of Prisons (BOP), maintains penal institutions nationwide, and contracts with
state, local, and private concerns for additional detention space. The Administration
estimates that, as of January 2005, there were nearly 181,000 federal inmates in 112
institutions and over 153,000 were in facilities operated by the BOP. The
Administration requests $4.755 billion for the Federal Prison System for FY2006,
$20.4 million less than Congress appropriated for FY2005. The House-passed
measure recommends $4.969 billion. The Senate-passed bill recommends $4.889
billion.
Office of Justice Programs. The Office of Justice Programs (OJP)
manages and coordinates the National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Victims
of Crimes, Bureau of Justice Assistance, and related grant programs. For the Office
of Justice Programs and related offices, bureaus and programs, the Administration’s
requested $1.569 billion for FY2006, a reduction of more than $1.4 billion below the

---

CRS-11
amount appropriated by Congress for FY2005. The House-passed bill recommends
$2.319 billion and the Senate-passed bill recommends $1.946 billion for FY2006
funding.
Several factors account for the difference in funding for FY2006, compared to
FY2005. For example, the Consolidated Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L.
108-447) consolidated the Local Law Enforcement and Edward Byrne Memorial
Block grants, replacing them with a Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance
Grant (JAG) program, and reducing funding by $91 million, compared to amounts
appropriated for these two separate programs in FY2004. In FY2005, JAG was
funded at $625.5 million. For FY2006, the Administration proposed that the JAG
program be eliminated completely. The Edward Byrne Discretionary Grant program
received appropriations of $170 million for FY2005; the Administration’s FY2006
request would have eliminated funding for the program. The elimination of these
two programs represents a reduction in funding of over $822 million. The House-
passed bill recommends $366.4 million for the JAG program and $110 million for
Byrne Discretionary. The Senate-passed bill recommends $530 million for the JAG
program and $177 million for the Byrne Discretionary grant program.
In addition, funding for state and local law enforcement would have been
eliminated under the Administration’s FY2006 request, although some COPS
programs would have been moved into other program areas within OJP and funded,
particularly programs originally under the Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS) program. In FY2005, all state and local law enforcement received total
appropriations of over $1.278 billion. The House-passed bill recommends $1.001
billion for total state and local law enforcement and the Senate-passed bill
recommends $1.353 billion for FY2006.
Justice Assistance. The Justice Assistance account funds the operations of
OJP bureaus and offices. Besides funding OJP management and administration, this
account also funds the National Institute of Justice, the Bureau of Justice Statistics,
cooperative efforts that address missing children, and regional criminal intelligence.
For FY2006, the Administration’s requested $1.203 billion for this account along
with a proposed $115.5 million rescission.2
Under the FY2006 budget request, COPS would have been maintained as an
account separate from Justice Assistance accounts, but only four out of 18 COPS
programs would have continued to be funded from the COPS account. Specifically,
the Administration requested $117.781 million in funding for FY2006, funding for
Community Policing Development ($7 million); Tribal Law Enforcement ($51.6
million); Police Integrity ($10 million); Meth Hot Spots ($20 million); and
Management and administration ($29.2 million). The FY2006 request also included
a rescission of $115.5 million for these COPS programs, resulting in a net funding
request after rescissions of $2.781 million.
2 Rescissions under the President’s budget request for DOJ typically are monies that have
not been spent in the previous year or are recovered from grantees for whom funds were
obligated but not spent or were mis-spent in previous years.

---

CRS-12
The House and Senate appropriators did not adopt the Administration’s proposal
on the reorganization of the COPS program. The House-passed bill recommends
total COPS funding of $520 million and a rescission of $86.5 million for FY2006,
providing funding of $94 million for Meth Hot Spots; $120 million for Technology
and Interoperable Communications; $38 million for Tribal Law Enforcement; $10
million for Offender Reentry; and $60 million for an Anti-Gang initiative.
The Senate-passed bill recommends total COPS funding of $535 million,
providing funding of $80 million for Meth Hot Spots; $137 million for Law
Enforcement Technology grants; $3 million for Offender Reentry; $37.5 million for
Technology Interoperability; $27 million for Bulletproof Vests; $89.5 for DNA
Initiative; $2 millions for Hiring; $14 million for Training and Technical Assistance;
$20 million for Tribal Law Enforcement; $10 million for Police Corps; $20 million
for Criminal Records Upgrade; $22 million for Coverdell Forensics Science
Improvement; $30 million for Crime Identification Technology; $5 million for Safe
Schools Initiative; and $7.5 million for Police Integrity Grants.
Improving the Criminal Justice System. For Improving the Criminal
Justice System, the Administration’s request included $446.1 million. This amount
included, among other programs, $59.6 million for the Weed and Seed program;
$48.4 million for the Southwest Border Prosecutor Initiative; $73.8 million for State
and Local Gun Violence Assistance program; $45.0 million for the Regional
Information Sharing System; $10.2 for Prison Rape Prevention & Prosecution; $29.9
million for the Bulletproof Vest Partnership (formerly funded under COPS), and
$179.2 million for other crime control programs. The Administration’s FY2006
request would have eliminated funding for the State Criminal Alien Assistance
program (SCAAP).
The House-passed bill recommends FY2006 funding of $30 million for the
Southwest Border Prosecutor Initiative; $50 million for Weed and Seed program; $30
million for the Bulletproof Vest program; and $405 million for SCAAP. The Senate-
passed bill recommends $27 million for Bulletproof Vest program;$50.28 million for
the Weed and Seed program; $170 million for SCAAP; and $30 million for the
Southwest Border Prosecutor Initiative.
Research, Development, Evaluation, and Statistics. For Research,
Development, Evaluation and Statistics, the Administration’s FY2006 requested
$139.5 million: $62.8 million for criminal justice statistics and $76.7 million for
research, evaluation, and demonstration projects. The House-passed bill
recommends $56 million for the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) for research and
development in the field of criminal justice, and $35 million for the Bureau of Justice
Statistics (BJS) in FY2006. The Senate-passed bill recommends $54 million for NIJ
and $34.1 million for BJS.
Technology for Crime Identification. For Technology for Crime
Identification, the Administration’s request included $238.2 million: $177 million
for the DNA initiative and $58 million for the National Criminal History
Improvement Program (formerly funded under COPS); and nearly $2.9 million for
the stalker database under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The House-
passed bill recommends FY2006 funding of $177 million for the DNA Initiative, $25

---

CRS-13
million for the Criminal History Improvement Program, $387.5 million for VAWA
and $2.9 for the stalker database. The Senate-passed bill recommends $89.5 million
for the DNA initiative, and $2.962 million for the stalker database.
Juvenile Justice. For Strengthening the Juvenile Justice System, the
Administration’s FY2006 request included $186.7 million, $172.6 million less than
what was appropriated for juvenile justice programs in FY2005. The
Administration’s request proposed funding of $93.9 million for the Juvenile Justice
Formula Grants, $11 million more than the Congress appropriated in FY2005 for the
program. The budget request included funding of $43 million for the Juvenile
Delinquency Block Grants, a program the Congress did not fund in FY2005. For the
Developing New Initiatives program, the President’s budget requested $6.6 million,
while in FY2005 the Congress appropriated $100.8 million. Congress appropriated
$54.3 million for the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant in FY2005, a
program for which the Administration requested no funding for FY2006.
The House-passed bill recommends $333.7 million for Juvenile Justice
programs: $712,000 for Part A, administering and implementing juvenile justice
programs; $83 million for Part B, State Formula Grants; $70 million for Part E,
Demonstration projects; $80 million for Title V, Incentive Grants, which provides
$10 million for Tribal Youth, $25 million for Gang Prevention, and $25 million for
Alcohol Prevention; $5 million for Part G, Juvenile Mentoring; $15 million for the
Secure Our Schools Act; $15 million for Victims of Child Abuse Programs; $60
million for the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant; and $5 million for Project
Childsafe.
The Senate-passed bill recommends $352 million for Juvenile Justice programs:
$1 million for Part A; $82 million for Part B, State Formula Grants; $5 million for
Part C, Discretionary Grants; $8 million for Part D, Research, Evaluation, and
Training; $75 million for Part E, Developing New Initiatives; $15 million for Part G,
Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP); $20 million for Title V, At Risk Children
Programs; $10 million for the Tribal Youth program; $25 million for Enforcing
Underage Drinking Laws programs; $25 million for Gang Prevention programs; $15
million for the Secure Our Schools Act; $5 million for Project Childsafe; $15 million
for Victims of Child Abuse Act; and $49 million for the Juvenile Accountability
Block Grants.
Substance Abuse. For Substance Abuse: Demand Reduction, the
Administration’s FY2006 request includes $133.3 million, significantly more than
the $69 million enacted by the Congress for FY2005. The President’s request
includes $70 million for drug courts and $44.1 million for Residential Substance
Abuse Treatment (RSAT), drug treatment for state prisoners, for which the Congress
appropriated $24.6 million in FY2005. The Cannabis Eradication Grant program,
which the budget request would transfer to OJP from DEA, would be funded at $19.1
million in FY2006, $8 million more than the Congress appropriated for the program
in FY2005. However, the FY2006 budget request does not include funding for
Indian Country Alcohol and Crime Demonstration grants, for which Congress
appropriated $4.9 million in FY2005.

---

CRS-14
The House-passed bill recommends $40 million for Drug Courts; $25 million
for RSAT; and $11.6 million for Cannabis eradication, and no funding for Indian
Country grants. The Senate-passed bill recommends $25 million for Drug Courts;
$15 million for RSAT; and $15 million for Indian Country grants. The Senate bill
does not include funding for Cannabis eradication.
Victims of Crime. For Services for Victims of Crime (VOC) within the
Justice Assistance account, the Administration’s FY2006 request includes $84.2
million. Among other things, this amount includes funding authorized under the
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and Victims of Child Abuse Act. It also
includes funding provided under the Public Safety Officers Benefit (PSOB) program,
which provides death benefits to survivors of public safety officers who die in the
line of duty, and disability benefits to those officers injured and disabled in the line
of duty. Benefits provided by this program were increased by the USA PATRIOT
Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-56). The Administration’s FY2006 request includes $49.7
million in funding for death benefits under the PSOB program and $6.4 million for
disability and educational assistance. For FY2005, $69.4 million was provided for
PSOB death, disability, and education benefits.
The House-passed bill recommends $72.9 million for PSOB. The Senate-
passed bill includes $221 million for VOC and the same funding level as the House
for PSOB.
Office on Violence Against Women. The Office on Violence Against
Women (OVW), was created in 1995 as a component of the Department of Justice.
OVW implements VAWA and subsequent legislation. The FY2005 request
establishes the Office of Violence Against Women as an office administratively
separate from the Office of Justice Programs. The Administration’s FY2006 request
for this office is $363 million. Funding for VAWA programs in FY2005 was $382.1
million. The House-passed bill recommends $387.5 million for the Office of
Violence Against Women. The Senate-passed bill recommends $371.9 million for
VAWA.
Related Legislation
H.R. 3402 (Sensenbrenner)
Would amend present law to reauthorize the Department of Justice
appropriations for FY2006 through 2009. Would reauthorize and amend the
Violence Against Women Act and includes other provisions related to domestic
violence, sexual assault, stalking, and protections for immigrant victims of violence.
Introduced on July 22, 2005, referred to House Committee on the Judiciary. Passed
in the House on September 28, 2005.

---

CRS-15
Table 3. Department of Justice Funding Accounts
($ millions in budget authority) a
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2006
FY2006
Accounts
enacted
enactedb
request
House
Senate
General Administration
$1,316.6
$1,608.3
$1,977.3
$1,834.8
$1,850.0
U.S. Parole Commission
10.5
10.6
11.3
11.2
11.0
Legal Activities
3,078.5
3,152.8
3,368.5
3,327.4
3,239.0
General legal activities
629.0
634.2
679.7
665.8
648.2
United States Attorneys
1,510.2
1,547.5
1,626.1
1,626.1
1,573.0
United States Marshals
726.1
757.7
790.3
800.3
764.2
Service
Other
213.2
213.4
272.4
235.2
253.6
Federal Bureau of Investigation
4,590.7
5,219.6
5,701.2
5,761.2
5,296.0
Salaries and expenses
4,033.8
4,132.1
4,091.1
3,452.2
3,670.8
Counterintelligence and
484.9
1,003.4
1,600.0
2,288.9
1,600.0
national security
Construction
11.1
10.1
10.1
20.1
25.2
Foreign terrorist tracking
60.9
—
—
—
—
Drug Enforcement
Administration
1,584.5
1,638.8
1,694.2
1,716.2
1,649.1
Interagency Law Enforcement
550.6
553.5
661.9
506.9
440.2
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives
827.3
882.5
923.6
923.6
923.7
Federal Prison System
4,811.2
4,779.8
4,755.1
4,969.1
4,889.6
Office of Justice Programs
3,164.9
2,611.0
1,206.3
2,319.9
2,584.5
Justice assistance
188.1
224.9
1,203.5
227.5
221.0
State and local law
enforcement assistance
1,386.0
1,278.2
—
1,069.2
1,353.4
Weed and seed program
57.9
61.2
—
50.0
50.3
fund
Community oriented
policing services
748.3
598.3
2.8
566.6
534.9
Juvenile justice programs
349.0
379.0
—
333.7
352.0
Office on Violence Against
383.6
382.1
363.0
389.5
371.9
Women
Public safety officers
benefits program
52.0
69.3
—
72.9
72.9
Additional Funding
15.4
396.9
887.6
389.6
319.4
Rescission
(100.0)
(586.5)
Total: Department of Justice
19,850.3
20,853.8
20,600.5
21,759.9
21,202.5
Source: U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Committees on Appropriations.
a. Amounts may not total due to rounding.
b. FY2005 figures do not reflect two rescissions (0.80% and 0.54%) in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, P. L. 108-447.

---

CRS-16
Related CRS Products
CRS Report RL32095, FBI: Past, Present and Future, by Todd Masse and William
J. Krouse.
CRS Report RL32827, Selected Federal Crime Control Assistance to State and
Local Governments, by Cindy Hill.
CRS Report RL32842, Gun Legislation in the 109th Congress, by William J. Krouse.
CRS Report RL30871, Violence Against Women Act: History and Federal Funding,
by Garrine Laney and Alison Siskin.
CRS Report RL32336, FBI Intelligence Reform Since September 11, 2001: Issues
and Options for Congress, by Alfred Cummings and Todd Masse.
CRS Report RL32249, Gun Control Proposals to Regulate Gun Shows, by William
Krouse.
CRS Report RS21259, Violence Against Women Office: Background and Current
Issues, by Garrine P. Laney.
CRS Report RL32366, Terrorist Identification, Screening, and Tracking Under
Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6, by William J. Krouse.
CRS Report RL32579, Victims of Crime Compensation and Assistance: Background
and Funding, by M. Ann Wolfe.
CRS Report RS22151, Long-Range Fifty Caliber Rifles: Should They Be More
Strictly Regulated?, by William J. Krouse.
Commerce and Related Agencies3
Title II includes the appropriations for the Department of Commerce and related
agencies. The origins of the department date to 1903 with the establishment of the
Department of Commerce and Labor (32 Stat. 825). The separate Department of
Commerce was established on March 4, 1913 (37 Stat. 7365; 15 U.S.C. 1501).
The department’s responsibilities are numerous and quite varied, but its
activities center on five basic missions: (1) promoting the development of American
business and increasing foreign trade; (2) improving the nation’s technological
competitiveness; (3) encouraging economic development; (4) fostering
environmental stewardship and assessment; and (5) compiling, analyzing and
disseminating statistical information on the U.S. economy and population.
3 This title is coordinated by Kevin Kosar, Analyst in American National Government,
Government and Finance Division.

---

CRS-17
The following agencies within the Commerce Department carry out these
missions:
! Economic Development Administration (EDA) provides grants for
economic development projects in economically distressed
communities and regions.
! Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) seeks to promote
private and public sector investment in minority businesses.
! Bureau of the Census collects, compiles, and publishes a broad range
of economic, demographic, and social data.
! Economic and Statistical Analysis Programs provide (1) timely
information on the state of the economy through preparation,
development, and interpretation of economic data; and (2) analytical
support to department officials in meeting their policy
responsibilities. Much of the analysis is conducted by the Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA).
! International Trade Administration (ITA) seeks to develop the
export potential of U.S. firms and to improve the trade performance
of U.S. industry.
! Bureau of Industry and Security enforces U.S. export laws consistent
with national security, foreign policy, and short-supply objectives
(formerly the Bureau of Export Administration).
! National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides
scientific, technical, and management expertise to (1) promote safe
and efficient marine and air navigation; (2) assess the health of
coastal and marine resources; (3) monitor and predict the coastal,
ocean, and global environments (including weather forecasting); and
(4) protect and manage the nation’s coastal resources.
! Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) examines and approves
applications for patents for claimed inventions and registration of
trademarks.
! Technology Administration, through the Office of Technology
Policy, advocates integrated policies that seek to maximize the
impact of technology on economic growth, conducts technology
development and deployment programs, and disseminates
technological information.
! National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) assists
industry in developing technology to improve product quality,
modernize manufacturing processes, ensure product reliability, and
facilitate rapid commercialization of products based on new
scientific discoveries.
! National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) advises the President on domestic and international
communications policy, manages the federal government’s use of
the radio frequency spectrum, and performs research in
telecommunications sciences.
The President’s FY2006 budget request calls for $9.6 billion for the Department
of Commerce and related agencies. This represents a 44 percent increase over the
FY2005 appropriation of $6.7 billion (P.L. 108-447) for Title II and related agencies.

---

CRS-18
This proposed increase primarily would be the result of the creation of a $3.7 billion
Strengthening America’s Communities Grant Program. The President’s budget
proposes major reductions in the Advanced Technology Program, the Emergency
Steel Guarantee Loan Program, and the Public Telecommunications Facilities,
Planning and Construction Program.
The House bill (H.R. 2862) passed on June 16, 2005 and proposes $5.8 billion
in appropriations (which includes a $35 million rescission), a 13.4 percent decrease
from FY2005. H.R. 2862 would reduce significantly the appropriations for the
Economic Development Administration, the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
H.R. 2862 would not include funding for the Administration’s Strengthening
America’s Communities Grant Program.
The Senate bill (H.R. 2862) was passed on September 15, 2005 and proposes
$7.7 billion in appropriations (with no rescissions), a 14.3 percent increase from
FY2005. It would cease funding for the Technology Administration (funded in
FY2005 at $6.5 million) and would not fund the Administration’s Strengthening
America’s Communities Grant Program.
Departmental Management
The President’s FY2006 budget requests $106.3 million for Departmental
Management; of this amount, $53.53 million would be for salaries and expenses,
$22.76 would be for the Office of Inspector General (IG), and $30 million would be
for the renovation of the headquarters of the Department of Commerce.
H.R. 2862 would appropriate $70.2 million, with $47.5 for Departmental
Management and $22.7 for the IG. The Senate bill would appropriate $77.4 million,
with $49.6 million for Departmental Management and $22.8 million for the IG, and
$5 million for the U.S Travel and Tourism Promotion Program.4
International Trade Administration5
The President’s FY2006 request for the International Trade Administration
(ITA) is $395.9 million, a $7.6 million (1.9%) increase over the FY2005
appropriation. The 2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 4818, H.Rept. 108-
792) enacted $393.5 million in direct appropriations with $8 million to be derived
from fees, thus raising the level of budget authority to $401.5 million. In contrast,
the President’s FY2006 request anticipates the collection of $13 million in fees
raising available funds to $408.9 million. The House enacted $393.9 million in direct
appropriations with an additional $13 million to be collected from fees. The Senate
enacted the Senate Appropriations Committee recommendation of $401.6 million,
4 On the federal government and tourism promotion, see CRS Report RL32647, Government
Advertisement of Tourism: Recent Action and Long-Standing Controversies, by Kevin R.
Kosar.
5 The sections on ITA, USTR, NIPLECC, ITC, and BIS were written by Ian F. Fergusson,
Analyst in International Trade and Finance, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.

---

CRS-19
with $8 million derived from fees. The Senate enacted a total of $396.6 million, also
with $8 million derived from fees. The Senate transferred $5 million from ITA to the
provision of U.S. Travel and Tourism Promotion program. The Senate report
(S.Rept. 109-88) contends that implementing the additional fees contained in the
President’s request and approved by the House “would significantly impair ITA’s
ability to provide trade assistance to small business.” The Senate version went a step
further containing language exempting the agency from the full-cost recovery
provisions of OMB Circular A25.
ITA provides export promotion services, works to assure compliance with trade
agreements, administers trade remedies such as antidumping and countervailing
duties, and provides analytical support for ongoing trade negotiations. The agency is
divided into four policy units and an Executive and Administrative Directorate, with
a total full time staff of 2,553 in FY2005. The House and Senate have approved
$25.8 million for executive administration and direction functions. ITA’s export
promotion activities were last authorized by the Jobs Through Trade Expansion Act
(P.L. 103-392), which expired at the end of FY1996.
Manufacturing and Services Unit (MSU). The MSU carries out certain
industry analysis functions of the former Trade Development Unit (TD), but it is also
tasked with promoting the competitiveness and expansion of the U.S. manufacturing
sector under the President’s Manufacturing Initiative of March 2003. Congress
transferred the trade promotion activities of TD — the Advocacy Center, the Trade
Information Center, and Office of Export Assistance — to the new Trade Promotion
Unit. The FY2005 appropriation provided $48.5 million for the MSU. The President
requested $47.4 million in direct obligations for FY2006 and the House enacted this
amount. The Senate provided $43.1 million, shaving $5 million from the Senate
Appropriations Committee figure to allocate to the U.S. Travel and Tourism
Promotion Program (see below). The Senate Committee provided earmarks for the
following items traditionally within the funding provided for the MSU, $13 million
for the National Textile Center, $3.5 million for the Textile/Clothing Technology
Corporation, 1.5 million for the Textile Marking System, $1.5 for Auburn University
for advanced research and development of novel polymetrics.
Office of Travel and Tourism Industries (OTTI).6 The Consolidated
Appropriations Resolution of 2003 (P.L. 108-7, Sec. 210) authorized the Secretary
of Commerce to award $50 million in grants to promote tourism to America in
Europe. The Office of Travel and Tourism Industries (OTTI) in the Department of
Commerce was to run this campaign. Before the campaign began, however,
Congress rescinded $44 million of the appropriation.7 OTTI has scaled back its
6 This section was written by Kevin Kosar, Analyst in American National Government,
Government and Finance Division.
7 P.L. 108-199, Title VII, enacted Jan. 23, 2004, included a $40 million rescission of funds
for the advertising program in Title VII. Section 215 of the law further rescinds $100
million in unobligated Department of Commerce funding, some $4 million of which,
according to OTTI, was taken from the promotional campaign, leaving $6 million for the
Visit America campaign. A review of the hearing and the reports on the appropriation bills
(continued...)

---

CRS-20
proposed activities and refocused the $6 million campaign on the U.K. alone.8 The
Visit America campaign began in late spring of 2004.9 In FY2005, Congress
provided another $10 million for the program (P.L. 108-447, Title II). For FY2006,
the Senate bill would appropriate $5 million for the U.S Travel and Tourism
Promotion Program. The House bill would not provide the program with additional
funding. In addition, the Senate Appropriations Committee earmarked $1.0 for the
Travel and Tourism Promotion Advisory Board.
Market Access and Compliance Unit (MAC). The MAC monitors foreign
country compliance with trade agreements, identifies compliance problems and
market access obstacles, and informs U.S. firms of foreign business practices and
opportunities. Congress enacted $40.1 million for MAC in FY2005, and the
President requested $39.8 million in FY2006. Both the House and the Senate have
adopted this figure.
Import Administration Unit (IA). IA administers the trade remedy laws of
the United States, including antidumping, countervailing duty, and safeguard actions.
The FY2005 funding level is $64.5 million, of which no less than $3 million is for
the Office of China Compliance. The Administration has requested $62.1 million for
IA in FY2006, a figure enacted by the House. The Senate adopted $64.1 million, the
Administration’s request plus $2 million for additional placement and maintenance
of overseas enforcement officers. The House designates $3.0 million of its
appropriations for the Office of China Compliance. The House report expresses
concern that the amount of antidumping and countervailing duty cases undertaken by
IA has fallen “significantly” while the funding levels for IA have increased. It directs
the unit to self-initiate investigations, and to engage in market trends analysis in order
to anticipate unfair trade practices.
Trade Promotion/U.S. Foreign Commercial Service (TP/FCS). For
FY2006, the Administration requested $222.4 million for this Unit, with $1.5 million
7 (...continued)
preceding the law that rescinded these funds did not reveal any disapproval of the
advertising campaign; indeed, a number of Members and travel and tourism industry
representatives voiced their enthusiasm for it. Exactly why these funds were rescinded is
unclear; according to some reports, the funds were rescinded in the course of an effort to
locate budget offsets. U.S. Congress, House Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, Travel and Tourism in
America Today, hearing, 108th Cong., 1st sess., April 30, 2003 (Washington, GPO, 2003);
U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Departments of Commerce, Justice,
and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2004, report
to accompany H.R. 2799, 108th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 108-221 (Washington, GPO, 2003);
and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year
2004, report to accompany S. 1585, 108th Cong., 1st sess., S. Report 108-44 (Washington,
GPO, 2003).
8 Ibid.
9 Office of Travel and Tourism Industries press release, “U.S. Department of Commerce
Names Marketing Contractor for International Tourism Promotion Campaign,” March 19,
2004, [http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/tinews/archive/20040319.html], visited May 4, 2004.

---

CRS-21
dedicated for the Advocacy Center, $2.5 million for the Trade Information Center,
and $2.1 million for the China and Middle East Business Center. For FY2005, the
TP/FCS received an appropriation of $220.7 million. Both the House and the Senate
have adopted an appropriation of $231.7 million. The House report provides $1.0 for
the Rural Export Initiative. The Senate version contains language exempting the
agency from OMB Circular A25, the effect of which would relax the requirement for
full cost recovery (through user fees) for the provision of trade promotion services.
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)
USTR, located in the Executive Office of the President (EOP), is responsible
for developing and coordinating U.S. international trade and direct investment
policies. The President’s FY2006 request is $38.8 million, $2.2 million less than the
amount appropriated by Congress in FY2005 ($41.0 million). The House enacted an
appropriation of $44.8 million for USTR: 15.4% over the request and 9% over the
current year appropriation. The House report (H.Rept. 109-118) maintains that
funding levels proposed by the Administration remain inadequate for the operational
requirements of USTR. The Senate adopted the amount of the current appropriation
for FY2005, $41 million.
The USTR is responsible for advancing U.S. interests at the WTO and
negotiating bilateral and regional free trade agreements (FTA). In the last year, the
Administration has concluded FTAs with the 5 nations of the Central American
Common Market, the Dominican Republic, and Bahrain, subject to Congressional
approval, and Congress has approved FTAs with Australia and Morocco. The
Administration is also conducting negotiations with the Southern African Customs
Union, Panama, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Thailand, Kuwait, and Oman. The Office
had 225 FTEs in FY2005. USTR was last authorized by the Trade Act of 2002 (P.L.
107-210) for FY2003 and FY2004.
The House Report expressed its concern over USTR’s commitment to
intellectual property rights (IPR) enforcement. It notes that USTR has not taken an
IPR enforcement case to the WTO. The Committee expressed “dismay” that the
position of Chief Negotiator for Intellectual Property Enforcement, created by
FY2005 appropriations language, remains vacant. Senate report language (S Rept.
109-88) directed USTR to report on the impact of this position by November 1, 2005.
The House report also directs USTR to place at least 4 additional personnel in
USTR’s IPR office.
Sec. 634 of the House version and Sec 532 of the Senate version of H.R. 2862
seeks to prevent USTR from including certain IPR-related parallel importation
provisions in future trade agreements. Parallel importation occurs when products
marketed by a patent holder in one country are imported into another country without
the patent holder’s permission. Recent U.S free trade agreements with Morocco,
Singapore and Australia protect the rights of a patent holder to prohibit the
importation of parallel products from other countries. Parallel imports often occur
because the price in one jurisdiction is often different than that in another due to
regulatory or competitive reasons. Critics claim these provisions in trade agreements
would hamper the ability of U.S. consumers to import cheaper pharmaceutical from

---

CRS-22
other countries and would impair poor nations from obtaining inexpensive
pharmaceuticals for national epidemics.
U.S. trade remedy laws were the subject of two amendments in Senate floor
debate. One amendment introduced by Senator Dorgan (Amendment 1665) would
have prohibited USTR from using appropriated funds to negotiate trade agreements
that modify or amend trade remedy laws such as antidumping, countervailing duties,
or safeguard actions. This measure was aimed at restricting the activities of the rules
negotiations of the ongoing Doha Development Round. This provision was criticized
by some business groups and drew a veto threat from the administration. The
amendment was rejected by a vote of 39-60. A substitute amendment introduced by
Senator Grassley (Amendment 1713) to provide that funds appropriated be used in
a manner consistent with trade promotion authority was passed unanimously. Trade
promotion authority requires the President to negotiate agreements that protect U.S.
trade remedy laws.
NIPLECC
The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005 (P.L. 108-447) provided a direct
appropriation of $2 million for the National Intellectual Property Law Enforcement
Coordinating Council (NIPLECC). The President’s FY2006 submission did not
request an appropriation for NIPLECC. The Senate provides $500,000 for NIPLECC
under the Patent and Trademark Office. This interagency council, which was created
by the Treasury Appropriations Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-58) and funded by the
participating agencies, previously had not received a direct appropriation. Its function
is to coordinate the activities of government agencies with domestic and international
intellectual property law enforcement functions. It is comprised of the of Director of
the Patent and Trademark Office, the Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division,
the Under Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs, the Assistant U.S.
Trade Representative, the Commissioner of Customs, and the Undersecretary of
Commerce for International Trade.
U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)
ITC is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that advises the President and
Congress on the impact of U.S. foreign economic policies on U.S. industries and,
along with the Import Administration Unit of ITA, is charged with administering
various U.S. trade remedy laws. Its six commissioners are appointed by the President
for nine-year terms. As a matter of policy, its budget request is submitted to
Congress by the President without revision.
For FY2006, ITC requests $65.3 million, a $4.5 million increase from the
amount requested and appropriated by Congress in FY2005 ($60.8 million). The
House and Senate enacted an appropriation of $62.8 million. This figure reflects a
revised budget request provided to both committees of $62.5 million. In FY2005,
ITC had 380 employees. ITC was last authorized by the Trade Act of 2002 (P.L.
107-210) for FY2003 and FY2004.

---

CRS-23
Bureau of Industry and Security
The President’s FY2006 request for the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
is $77.0 million, a 14.1% increase from the $67.5 million appropriated by Congress
for FY2005. This figure was enacted by both the House and the Senate. BIS
administers export controls on dual-use goods and technology through its licensing
and enforcement functions. It cooperates with other nations on export control policy,
and provides assistance to the U.S. business community to comply with U.S. and
multilateral export controls. It also administers U.S. anti-boycott statutes, and it is
charged with monitoring the U.S. defense industrial base. The agency had 418 full-
time employees in FY2005. Authorization for the activities of BIS, the Export
Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2401, et seq), expired in August 2001. On August 17,
2001, President Bush invoked the authorities granted by the International Economic
Emergency Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1703(b)) to continue in effect the system of
controls contained in the act and by the Export Administration Regulations (15
C.F.R., Parts 730-799). This authority was most recently extended on August 6,
2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 48763).
BIS divides its FY2006 funding request between licensing activity ($37.8
million), enforcement activities ($32.5 million), and management and policy
coordination ($6.7 million). This allocation was adopted by the Senate in
Appropriations committee report language, but the House allocated $36.8 million,
$33.5 million, and $6.65 million for these activities, respectively. The House and
Senate Committee also differ on the amount to be expended on national security
related inspections. The Senate provides $7.2 million for such activities; the House
provides $14.8 million . The President’s request highlights 3 new programmatic
initiatives which would add 13 full-time employees (FTEs) and cost $6.9 million.
Senate report language earmarks funding for these initiatives.
BIS seeks $1.05 million for an Enhanced Deemed Export Control Initiative.
Exports of technology, know-how, and non-encryption source code is “deemed” to
have been exported when it is released to a foreign national within the United States.
BIS licenses certain types of these exports and seeks additional resources to manage
the increasing volume of license applications and to expand the scope of deemed
export information outreach.
BIS also seeks to create an Office of Technology Evaluation to enable the
Bureau to identify new technologies for inclusion on the Commerce Control List
(CCL), to review the inclusion of current items on the CCL, and to review
multilateral export control regimes and national control regimes of other nations. BIS
requests $2.58 million for this program. This Office was originally proposed in
FY2004 to respond to a GAO report that cited BIS for failing to conduct regular
foreign availability assessments and neglecting to analyze the cumulative effects of
certain technology transfers. (See GAO Report 02-620, Export Controls: Rapid
Advances in China’s Semiconductor Industry Underscore Need for Fundamental
U.S. Policy Review, May 8, 2002). Congress did not appropriate funds for this
proposal in 2004 or 2005.
A third priority for BIS in terms of additional funding is the provision of
additional resources for export enforcement to prevent the diversion of sensitive

---

CRS-24
dual-use items to countries of concern and terrorist entities. BIS seeks an additional
appropriation of $1.7 million for additional enforcement personnel.
Economic Development Administration10
The President’s FY2006 Budget proposes dramatic changes for the Commerce
Department’s Economic Development Administration (EDA), both in terms of its
annual appropriation and, perhaps more importantly, in its role as the federal
government’s lead player in the realm of economic development. Although EDA has
long been touted as the principal federal agency concerned with economic
development, reality has been quite different. EDA has functioned as but one of a
host of agencies and programs providing various types of economic development
assistance to a broad range of organizations and political entities, as well as to the
Nation as a whole.
For FY2006, the Administration has requested a total appropriation of $26.6
million, less than a tenth of last year’s funding. Absent from this year’s budget
submission is any funding request for the agency’s Economic Development
Assistance Programs (EDAP). On the other hand, EDA’s responsibilities would be
dramatically increased.
On February 7, 2005, the Bush Administration released its budget
recommendations for FY2006. Included in the budget was a proposal that would
consolidate the activities of at least 18 existing community and economic
development programs into a two-part grant proposal called the “Strengthening
America’s Communities Initiative.” As outlined by the Administration, the proposal
would realign several, but not all, federal economic and community development
programs. Responsibility for the programs now being carried out by five federal
agencies would be transferred to EDA. EDA would administer the core program and
a bonus program, which would award additional funds to communities that
demonstrated efforts to improve economic conditions. The Administration has
offered a general outline of the new programs, but it has not yet submitted a detailed
proposal for congressional consideration. It has stated that the new program will
emphasize flexibility, will be results oriented, and will be targeted to communities
based on need.
Currently, the House and Senate are moving forward with appropriations for
EDA in a manner which does not take into account the Administration’s
Strengthening America’s Communities Initiative (SACI) proposal. (The SACI
proposal had requested $3.71 billion, a large part of which was to go to Social
Service Block Grants—albeit at a greatly reduced level from FY2005 funding.) The
House has approved the Appropriation Committee’s recommendation of $201 for
the agency’s Economic Development Assistance Programs (EDAP) and $26.6
million for Salaries and Expenses (S&E), for a total FY2006 appropriation of $227.6
million for EDA. In the Senate, the Appropriations Committee has recommended
a total of $314.9 million for EDA for FY2006, an increase of $27 million over
10 This section was written by Bruce Mulock, Specialist in Government and Business,
Government and Finance Division.

---

CRS-25
current funding. More specifically, the Senate committee recommends $30.9 million
for S&E and $284 million for EDAP.
For FY2005, the Administration had requested a total appropriation of $320.3
million for the Economic Development Administration. More specifically, it
requested $289.8 million for EDAP and $30.6 million for S&E. The House approved
these amounts. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a slightly
lower amount for EDAP — $285 million — and $30.4 million for S&E, for a total
appropriation of $315.5 million for FY2005 (the same total amount the agency
received for FY2004). During the September 15th floor debate on the appropriations
bill, two significant amendments dealing with emergency spending were adopted.
As part of $4.3 billion designated as emergency spending related to aiding victims
of Hurricane Katrina (emergency spending does not count against the spending cap
assigned by the budget resolution (H Con Res 95)) $210 million was provided for
economic development activity in the disaster area. Some observers have surmised
that EDA is the logical recipient of this emergency funding. Similarly, Senator
Snowe introduced an amendment (SA 1717), which was accepted, providing $400
million to the Department of Commerce for bridge loans to small businesses. As one
observer noted, EDA is more likely to assume spending authority for this funding
then is the Census Bureau. The Senate bill did not include funding for the
President’s Strengthening America Initiative.
Regarding appropriations for FY2005, the Omnibus bill that was enacted
reduced the agency’s appropriation for EDAP, providing $257.4 million or $26.6
million less than EDA received for FY2004. Salaries and Expenses remained
virtually unchanged at $30.48 million, giving EDA a total FY2005 appropriation of
$287.9 million. It is perhaps worth noting that for FY2001, FY2002 and FY2003,
Congress provided EDA with appropriations of $439 million, $365.6 million, and
$320.8 million, respectively.
For FY2004, the Administration had requested a total appropriation of $364.4
million. Of this amount, $331 million was for EDAP, and $33.4 million was for
S&E. The House approved a total of $318.7 million for the Economic Development
Administration, including $288.1 billion for EDAP and $30.6 million for S&E. The
Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a total of $387.7 million for EDA,
including $357.1 million for EDAP and $30.6 million for S&E. The conference
agreement provided EDA with a total appropriation of $315.3 million — $285
million for EDAP and $30.2 million for S&E.
The agency’s authorization expired at the end of FY2003. Hearings on the
Administration’s proposal (H.R. 2454) for reauthorizing EDA were held in June
2003 by the House Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and
Emergency Management. On June 23, 2003, the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee adopted a modified version (H.R. 2535) of the
Administration’s five-year reauthorization bill. The Senate Environment and Public
Works Committee did not take up the EDA reauthorization issue until late in the 2nd
session of the 108th Congress. Finally, on October 7, 2004, the Senate passed S.
1134 under a suspension of the rules by a vote of 388 to 31. President Bush signed
the bill, the Economic Development Administration Reauthorization Act of 2004,
into law (P.L. 108-382) on October 15, 2004.

---

CRS-26
The legislation allows the Secretary of Commerce to finance more than 80
percent of project costs with federal funds. Additionally, the bill gave EDA the
authority to allow local governments to keep surplus (or under-run) funds from
projects completed under budget. Finally, the bill allowed EDA to use additional
excess project funds to increase the federal government’s share of the cost or to allow
individual projects to be improved without the need for further appropriations action
by Congress.
Economic Development Challenge11
The President’s FY2006 budget proposes creating a new entity, the Economic
Development Challenge (EDC), which would administer the proposed $3.71 billion
dollar Strengthening America’s Communities Grant Program. EDC would award
grants to economically distressed communities for planning, infrastructure
development, and business financing to achieve long-term economic stability and
growth. The Administration has yet to propose legislation for this new entity and
program. Neither the House or Senate bills would fund this proposed initiative.
Minority Business Development Agency12
The Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) is charged with playing
the lead role in the Federal Government for coordinating all minority business
programs. For FY2006 the President’s budget calls for providing the MBDA with
$30.7 million, an increase of $828,000 or about 2.77 percent over the current
appropriation. The House passed the Appropriation Committee’s recommendation
of $30 million. The Senate Appropriations Committee has recommended $30.7
million, the same amount proposed by the Administration. The Senate-passed
version mirrored the Appropriation Committee’s recommendation. FY2005 the
Administration had requested $34.46 million for the agency, an increase of nearly $6
million over FY2004 funding. The House approved $28.9 million. The Senate
Appropriations Committee recommended $31.55 million for the agency. The
Omnibus bill provided the MBDA with $29.9 million for FY2005, an increase of a
little less than $1.5 million over FY2004.
National Telecommunications and Information
Administration13
For FY2006, the Bush Administration has continued to request significant
changes in the NTIA budget. For the coming fiscal year, the Administration has
requested $23.5 million for the overall NTIA budget; the full House approved $19.7
million for FY2006 on June 16, while on June 23 the Senate Appropriations
11 This title is coordinated by Kevin Kosar, Analyst in American National Government,
Government and Finance Division.
12 This section was written by Bruce Mulock, Specialist in Government and Business,
Government and Finance Division.
13 This section was written by Glenn McGloughlin, Specialist in Technology and
Telecommunications Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-27
Committee approved $57.3 million for the coming fiscal year. (For FY2005
appropriations, the NTIA budget is $38.7 million). There are two major components
to the NTIA budget. The first is Salaries and Expenses. The Administration has
requested $21.4 million for FY2006, while the full House approved $17.7 million
and the Senate approved $20.3 million (Congress appropriated $17.2 million in
FY2005). A large part of this program ($7 million in FY2005) is for management
of the federal government’s use of radio spectrum, which would increase under both
the Administration’s request and House action. For the second, the Public
Telecommunications Facilities, Planning and Construction (PTFPC) program, the
President has requested that funding end in FY2006, except for a carryover of $2
million to fulfill current program functions. The House approved this request.
(Congress provided $21.4 million for this program in FY2005), while the Senate
approved $22 million. A third component the Technologies Opportunities Program
(TOP), was eliminated in the FY2005 appropriations act. However, the Senate has
restored $15 million to this program.
The NTIA is the executive branch’s principal advisory office on domestic and
international telecommunications and information technology issues and policies.
It has as its mandate to provide greater access for all Americans to
telecommunications services; to support U.S. attempts to open foreign markets; to
advise on international telecommunications negotiations; to fund research grants for
new technologies and their applications; and to assist non-profit organizations
converting to digital transmission in the 21st century.
The NTIA also manages federal use of radio frequency spectrum domestically
and internationally. Both the Administration and the House have requested that
NTIA be reimbursed by other agencies for services it provides those agencies on
spectrum management, analysis and research services. However, some have also
argued that NTIA’s role in spectrum management responsibilities should be
broadened and expanded to include greater coordination across the federal
government through an expanded budget and resources.
For the PTFPC program, the House has noted that as of March 2005, 307 of 356
(93.9%) public television stations are now transmitting a digital signals, indicating
that the program has successfully achieved its goals. However, others contend that
this issue is part of a larger concern about public broadcasting in general, and support
for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting specifically; and until all stations are
broadcasting with digital technology, the program should be supported and funded.
For the TOP infrastructure grants program, the Bush Administration requested
zero funding for this program in FY2005 and did not request any funding for
FY2006. The House did not approve any finding for this program in its consideration
of the NTIA appropriations for FY2006. However, the Senate approved a restoration
of funding for this program, consistent with funding levels before FY2005. Many
Senators contend that this program is vital for supporting pilot, merit-based grants
to connect those parts of the United States still not connected to the Internet.

---

CRS-28
National Technical Information Service14
Following the National Technical Information Act (P.L. 100-519), as amended
in 1992 by the American Technology Preeminence Act (P.L. 102-245), congressional
policymakers did not appropriate any funding for the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS) for FY2006. Instead, funding for NTIS continues to be drawn from
NTIS’ Revolving Fund, established by the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations
Act for FY1993 (P.L. 102-395). In part, due to NTIS’ efforts to develop new
products and limit spending, NTIS achieved a positive net income of $508,000 for
FY2004. This compares with a positive net income of $10,000 for FY2003, $1.346
million for FY2002, and $2.290 million for FY2001.
The NTIS is part of the Technology Administration at the Department of
Commerce. The NTIS was established within the Department of Commerce in 1970,
although its origins can be traced back to World War II with the creation of the
Publications Board in 1945. The Publications Board collected classified scientific
and technical information related to the war effort to be considered for release to the
general public. These functions were formalized in 1950 with the establishment of
the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information within the Bureau
of Standards, which were later transferred to the newly created NTIS in 1970.
According to its website [http://www.ntis.gov/], NTIS serves as “the federal
government’s central source for the sale of scientific, technical, engineering, and
related business information by or for the U.S. government and complementary
materials from international sources.” Its mission is to support “the nation’s
economic growth and job creation by providing access to information that stimulates
innovation and discovery.” The NTIS claims to hold approximately 3 million
government information products, with 600,000 of these documents available
through its online searchable database. In addition, NTIS offers a variety of fee-
based services to federal agencies. These services include, but are not limited to,
distribution of information products, support services, web development, multimedia
production, and custom research services.
The advent and rapid growth of and electronic and multimedia publishing both
challenges and affirms the role of NTIS. On the one hand, the growth of the Internet
and electronic documents has been attributed, in part, to a decline in NTIS sales as
more documents become available online at no charge from other sources. In
addition, the emergence of a range of new information brokers raises the question of
whether or not the services NTIS provides are redundant and/or directly compete
with those provided by private sector companies. On the other hand, the dynamic
nature of online content means that websites and their content can move location or
even disappear without notice. Moreover, even in the case of websites that are well
established and relatively consistent in maintaining content, there is no guarantee that
online materials will be archived or remain available indefinitely. In contrast, part
of NTIS’ responsibilities include maintaining a “permanent repository” of
information.
14 This section was written by Jeffrey W. Seifert, Analyst in Information Science and
Technology Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-29
Bureau of the Census15
To fund the Bureau of the Census in FY2006, President Bush requested a total
of $877.4 million: $220 million for salaries and expenses, and $657.4 million for
periodic programs, including the decennial census. The total request exceeded the
FY2005 enacted amount of $744.8 million (after rescissions) by $132.6 million.
Much of the increase was due to accelerated planning for the 2010 census. The
Bureau anticipates a redesigned short-form census, to be answered by all U.S.
households. Also, the Bureau intends to replace the census long form with the
American Community Survey (ACS), which collects data annually from a sample of
households.
The request for the 2010 census faces challenges in FY2006, as it did in
FY2005. During consideration of FY2005 Commerce, Justice, and State, the Federal
Judiciary, and Related Agencies’ appropriations (H.R. 4754, 108th Congress), the
House defeated an amendment by Representative Hefley to eliminate that year’s
funding for the short-form census. Mr. Hefley deemed the effort to redesign the short
form excessively expensive. Also defeated was an amendment by Representative
Paul that sought to prohibit the use of FY2005 funds for the American Community
Survey. Mr. Paul expressed concern, recurrent among various Members of Congress,
that the ACS constitutes an unwarranted invasion of respondents’ privacy
(Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 150, July 7, 2004, pp. H5279-H5280,
H5292-H5293, H5318).
For FY2006, the House Appropriations Committee recommended that the
Census Bureau receive $832.2 million, $45.1 million below the Administration’s
request. Of the total amount recommended, $208 million ($12 million less than
requested) was for salaries and expenses; $624.2 million ($33.1 million less than
requested) was for periodic programs. The committee’s recommended amount for
the re-engineered short-form census was $213.8 million and for the ACS, $169.9
million. During House consideration of H.R. 2862, however, Representative Baird
proposed an amendment to cut $10 million from the committee-recommended
FY2006 salaries and expenses account and another $10 million from funds for short-
form census redesign. Viewing certain Census 2000 promotional activities as having
been wasteful, re-engineering the short-form census as an “awfully expensive
revision,” and efforts to fight crime (especially drug-related crime) as the more urgent
priority, Representative Baird proposed that the $20 million diverted from the Census
Bureau be equally divided between the Department of Justice’s Drug Enforcement
Administration and Community Oriented Policing Services program. Despite
opposition from House Appropriations Subcommittee on Science, the Departments
of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies Chairman Wolf,
subcommittee ranking Member Mollohan, and Government Reform Subcommittee
on Federalism and the Census Chairman Turner, the Baird amendment won approval
on a roll-call vote (260-168, with five Members not voting; Roll No. 248)
(Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 78, June 14, 2005, pp. H4458, H4469).
15 This section was written by Jennifer D. Williams, Government and Finance Division.

---

CRS-30
The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended, and the full Senate
approved, $727.4 million for the Census Bureau in FY2006, $150 million less than
the Administration requested. In the Senate-passed bill, the salaries and expenses
account would receive $183 million ($37 million below the request); periodic
programs would receive $544.4 million ($113 million short of the request). The
appropriation for each of these accounts would be less than in FY2005. Under
salaries and expenses, the committee expressed particular concern that the Bureau’s
reports on manufacturing, general economic statistics, and foreign trade statistics be
maintained and issued in a timely manner. Under periodic programs, the committee
recommended $390 million for the decennial census, designating not less than $79.8
million of this amount for the Master Address File/Topologically Integrated
Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) System. The Bureau relies
on MAF/TIGER to direct census questionnaires to the correct housing units. The
amount of ACS funding was not broken out separately. The committee noted its
support for the Bureau’s efforts to maximize the accuracy and cost effectiveness of
the 2010 census, and encouraged the Bureau to minimize the number of expensive
in-person visits to housing units for non-response followup.
In a “Statement of Administration Policy” released September 8, 2005, shortly
before the Senate acted on H.R. 2862, the Office of Management and Budget
observed about the Senate’s impending $150 million (17%) reduction in the request
for the Census Bureau:
This reduction would suspend the American Community Survey, increase the
lifecycle cost of the 2010 Census by over $1 billion, and lead to a less accurate
Census. Timely and accurate Census data are necessary for decision makers at
every level of government for budgetary and planning purposes, and in recovery
efforts for crisis situations. The bill also would jeopardize the accuracy of the
national income accounts and lead to the elimination of important economic data
s e r i e s . ( S t a t e m e n t a v a i l a b l e a t
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/sap/109-1/hr2862sap-s.pdf].)
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office16
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) examines and approves
applications for patents on claimed inventions and administers the registration of
trademarks. It also assists other federal departments and agencies protect American
intellectual property in the international marketplace. The USPTO is funded by user
fees paid by customers that are designated as “offsetting collections” and subject to
spending limits established by the Appropriations Committee. In the
Administration’s FY2006 budget request, $1.703 billion in budget authority is
provided for the USPTO, 9.5 % above the current fiscal year. The Office is to have
“full access” to all fees collected in FY2006. H.R. 2862, as passed by both the House
and the Senate, also provides $1.703 billion for the USPTO. The Senate version of
the bill directs that $500,000 be utilized for the National Intellectual Property Law
Enforcement Coordinating Council (see p. 21 for more on NIPLECC).
16 This section was written by Wendy Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology,
Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-31
For FY2005, the Omnibus Appropriations Act gave the USPTO the authority
to spend $1.545 billion. A major portion of this funding was to be from fees
collected under existing statutory authority. In addition, Title VIII of the Omnibus
Appropriations Act created a new (temporary) fee structure that was expected to
generate an additional $219 million in FY2005. This budget authority represented
a 27% increase over that provided in FY2004.
Beginning in 1990, appropriation measures have limited the ability of the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office to utilize the full amount of fees collected in each fiscal
year. This is an area of controversy. Opponents of this approach argue that agency
operations are supported by payments for services that must be financed in the year
the expenses are incurred. Proponents of current methods maintain that the fees are
necessary to help balance the budget and the amount of fees appropriated back to the
USPTO are sufficient to cover operating costs.
Technology Administration/Office of the Under Secretary
of Technology17
The Technology Administration and the Office of the Under Secretary of
Technology in the Department of Commerce advocates national policies that foster
technology development to stimulate economic growth, conducts technology
development and deployment programs, and disseminates technological information.
The Office of the Under Secretary for Technology also manages and supervises the
activities of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National
Technical Information Service.
The President’s FY2006 budget requested $4.2 million for the Office of the
Under Secretary for Technology. This figure is 35% below the $6.5 million
appropriated in FY2005. H.R. 2862, as passed by both the House and the Senate
funds the Office at $5.6 million, 14% below the current fiscal year.
National Institute of Standards and Technology18
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a laboratory of
the Department of Commerce. The organization’s mandate is to increase the
competitiveness of U.S. companies through appropriate support for industrial
development of pre-competitive generic technologies and the diffusion of
government-developed technological advances to users in all segments of the
American economy. NIST research also provides the measurement, calibration, and
quality assurance techniques that underpin U.S. commerce, technological progress,
improved product reliability, manufacturing processes, and public safety.
17 This section was written by Wendy Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology,
Resources, Science, and Industry Division.
18 This section was written by Wendy Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology,
Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-32
The President’s FY2006 budget requested $532 million in funding for NIST, a
24% decrease from FY2005 due primarily to an absence of support for the Advanced
Technology Program (ATP) and a significant cut in financing for the Manufacturing
Extension Partnership (MEP). Included in the total figure is $426.3 million for the
Scientific and Technology Research and Services (STRS) account which covers
primarily the internal R&D activities of the laboratory. This amount is 12.5% above
the current fiscal year (and includes $5.7 million for the Baldrige National Quality
Program). MEP would be funded at $46.8 million, 56% below FY2005 support. The
construction budget would be $58.9 million.
H.R. 2862, as passed by the House, would provide $548.7 million for NIST,
21% below current funding. The STRS account would receive $397.7 million, 5%
more than FY2005 but 6.7% below the President’s request. Financing for MEP
would total $106 million, a decrease of 1.4% from the current fiscal year and over
twice the Administration’s budget request. There is no funding for ATP.
Construction activities would receive $45 million.
The version of H.R. 2862 passed by the Senate funds NIST at $844.5 million,
almost 21% above the FY2005 budget. Included in this amount is $399.9 million for
the STRS account (incorporating $7.2 million for the Quality Program), an increase
of 5.6% over current funding. MEP would receive $106 million. Support for ATP,
absent from both the President’s budget request and the House-passed bill, would
total $140 million, 2.6% more than the financing provided in FY2005. Financing for
the construction budget would total $198.6 million, more than double the current
figure. The construction funding is over three times that proposed by the
Administration and more than four times that included in the House version of the
bill.
For FY2005, the Omnibus Appropriations Act, P.L. 108-447, provided the NIST
with $699.2 million (after a mandated 0.8% across-the-board rescission and a 0.54%
rescission from Commerce, Justice, State discretionary accounts). This amount was
12.5% above FY2004 funding. Internal research and development under the STRS
account received $378.8 million (including funding for the Baldrige National Quality
Program), almost 12% over the previous fiscal year. The Manufacturing Extension
Partnership was funded at $107.5 million, an increase of 178% that brought support
for the program up to pre-FY2004 levels. The Advanced Technology Program was
financed at $136.5 million (20% below FY2004) and the construction budget
received $72.5 million. The legislation also rescinded $3.9 million of unobligated
balances from prior year funds in the ATP account.
Continued support for the Advanced Technology Program has been a major
funding issue. ATP provides “seed financing,” matched by private sector investment,
to businesses or consortia (including universities and government laboratories) for
development of generic technologies that have broad applications across industries.
Opponents of the program cite it as a prime example of “corporate welfare,”
whereby the federal government invests in applied research activities that, they
emphasize, should be conducted by the private sector. Others defend ATP, arguing
that it assists businesses (and small manufacturers) in developing technologies that,
while crucial to industrial competitiveness, would not or could not be developed by
the private sector alone. While Congress has maintained support for the Advanced

---

CRS-33
Technology Program, the initial appropriation bills passed by the House since
FY2002 failed to provide funding for ATP. While support again was provided in the
FY2005 appropriations legislation, it is 20% below the earlier fiscal year.
The budget for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, another extramural
program administered by NIST, was an issue during the FY2004 appropriations
deliberations. While in the recent past, congressional support for MEP remained
constant, the Administration’s FY2004 budget request, the initial House-passed bill,
and the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act substantially decreased federal
funding for this initiative reflecting the President’s recommendation that
manufacturing extension centers “...with more than six years experience operate
without federal contribution.” However, P.L. 108-447 restored financing for MEP
in FY2005 to the level that existed prior to the 63% reduction taken in FY2004.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 19
NOAA is the largest agency of the Department of Commerce (DOC) in terms
of funding and for FY2006 would accounts for about 61% of DOC’s budget request
of $5.8 billion (not including $3.7 billion in new funding requested for the
President’s “Economic Development Challenge”). On February 6, 2005, President
Bush requested $3.58 billion for NOAA for FY2006. At a February 7, 2005 budget
briefing, NOAA’s Administrator stated that the agency would be one of few for
which the President is seeking discretionary funding increases for FY2006. On June
16, 2005, the House appropriated $3.38 billion for the agency in H.R. 2862
(amended). On June 23, 2005, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended
a total of $4.47 billion for NOAA in H.R. 2862, as amended by the committee. On
September 13, the Senate voted for an additional $5.8 million for the National
Weather Service, resulting in a total of $4.48 billion for NOAA. H.R. 2862, as
amended by the Senate, is now awaiting conference.
The President’s Budget. The President’s request for FY2006 was $210
million, or 6.2%, more than the $3.37 billion he requested for FY2005. (See Table
4, below.) Even so, the FY2006 request is $330 million, or 8.4%, less than the
FY2005 appropriation of $3.91 billion. Funding requested by the President for
NOAA’s five Operations, Research and Facilities (ORF) line offices, the Office of
Program Planning and Integration (OPPI), and Program Support for FY2006 was
$2.44 billion. Also, $965.1 million was requested for the Procurement, Acquisition,
and Construction (PAC) account. A net sum of $85 million was requested for
NOAA’s Other Accounts, including a $2 million decrease for U.S. fishery
obligations, $90 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF) and
$3 million from the Coastal Zone Management Fund (CZMF) transferred to ORF.20
19 This section was prepared by Wayne A. Morrisey, Science and Technology Information
Analyst, Resources, Science, and Industry Division.
20 For further information on NOAA’s FY2006 budget, see CRS Report RS22109, The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Budget for FY2006: President’s
Request, Congressional Appropriations, and Related Issues, by Wayne A. Morrissey)

---

CRS-34
Administration Concerns. For FY2006, President Bush proposed savings
of $427.0 million in discretionary funding (compared with FY2005 appropriations)
through NOAA-wide program terminations. However, the President also requested
increases to procure satellite hardware, ecosystems activities, completion of
construction of a third authorized fisheries research vessel, and procurement of a
fourth. The largest ORF program termination was for the National Ocean Service
(NOS) Ocean Health Initiative. The largest PAC program termination was for NOS
collective land acquisition and construction projects funded under the Coastal and
Estuarine Land Conservation Program (CELCP). President Bush identified all of the
NOAA programs he proposed for termination as unauthorized earmarks.
House Appropriations. On June 16, 2005, the House passed H.R. 2862
(amended), Science, State, Justice, Commerce and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2006 (hereafter, SSJC Appropriations) and appropriated $3.38 billion for
NOAA. The House Appropriations Committee had recommended $3.43 billion in
total for NOAA. (See H.Rept. 109-118, June 10, 2005.) This amount is nearly $150
million, or 4.2%, less than the President’s request for NOAA for FY2006 of $3.58
billion, and about $480 million, or 12.3%, below the FY2005 House appropriation
(after a 0.8% rescission) of $3.91 billion. The House committee recommended $2.44
billion for the ORF account; $936 million for the PAC account; and a net sum of $46
million for NOAA’s Other Accounts. Because of negative balances in NOAA’s
fisheries accounts, the $50 million recommended for PCSRF was effectively
decreased by $4 million. Also, the committee recommended a transfer of $77 million
from the interagency PDAF account, and $3 million from the CZMF to ORF. NOAA
was authorized to use $19 million derived from previous fiscal year deobligations.
H.Amdt. 260 to H.R. 2862, agreed to on June 14, 2004, reduced ORF appropriations
recommended by the House committee by $50 million, providing $3.38 billion for
FY2006.21
Bush Administration Statement. On June 14, 2005 OMB released a
statement on SSJC Appropriations for FY2006. The statement indicated President
Bush’s support for passage of H.R. 2862, as reported by the House (H.Rept. 109-
118). It also urged the House to provide the funding that was requested for NOAA
climate research activities and key ocean and coastal programs, including funding for
a fourth fishery research vessel, protected species, and fisheries research and
management programs.
Senate Version of H.R. 2862. On September 13, 2005, the full Senate
passed H.R. 2862 (amended) approving S.Amdt. 1656, which provided an additional
$5.8 million for the NWS ORF account and a total of $4,481.8 million for NOAA.
The added funding would create 43 new full-time equivalent positions for the
National Hurricane Center for hurricane watches. Earlier, on June 23, 2005, the
Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a total of $4,476.0 million for
NOAA. The Senate approved total of 4.48 billion is $1.1 billion, or 33%, more than
21 H.Amdt. 260 to H.R. 2862 sponsored by Rep. Dreier (CA). In floor debate, Rep.
Mollohan reported that the reduction in ORF funding would be applied as follows: NOS-$8
million, NMFS-$12 million, OAR-$7 million, NWS-$14.9 million, NESDIS-$3 million; and
Program Support-$5 million. Congressional Record, Jun. 14, 2005: H4464-5.

---

CRS-35
that appropriated by the House; $901 million, or 27%, more than the FY2006
request; and $574 million, or 14.6%, more than the FY2005 appropriation. The
Senate Committee recommended $3.21 billion for ORF; $1.20 billion for PAC; and
a net sum of $78.0 million for NOAA’s other accounts, which includes $90 million
for PCSRF, $3 million in transfers from the CZMF to ORF, and a cut of $9 from
Fisheries Finance programs. It also $666.2 million for NOAA-wide implementation
of the President’s Ocean Action Plan (OAP) based on recommendations of the U.S.
Oceans Commission. That amount is $147.1 million more than appropriated for
programs that were in FY2005, but categorized differently in FY2006, and $306
million more than the amount requested for OAP by the President for FY2006.
Second Bush Administration Statement on H.R. 2682 (Amended).
On September 8, 2005, in a “Statement of Administration Policy,” President Bush
expressed concern that the total appropriation level recommended by the Senate
Appropriations Committee [and approved by the Senate] for NOAA, inclusive of
funding to implement the President’s “Ocean Action Plan” exceeded the FY2006
request by $890 million.
Table 4. NOAA Budget Request and Appropriations
($millions)
Senate
5 Line Offices, Pgm.
FY2005
P.L.
FY2006
H.R.
Amdt.
Support, and OPPI
Req.
108-447a,b
Req.
2862c
H.R.
2862d
1. National Ocean Service (NOS)
378.8
544.4
394.2
374.2
610.5
2. NOAA Fisheries (NMFS)
623.2
668.8
625.5
544.6
763.7
3. NOAA Research (OAR)
350.2
406.0
361.7
319.3
470.1
4. National Weather Service (NWS)e
749.2
699.1
744.8
744.2
778.6
5. NOAA Satellites (NESDIS)
149.0
176.9
154.0
155.3
180.4
Program Support
220.4
345.4
342.0
355.4
402.5
Office of Planning & Pgm. Integrat.
2.0
2.5
2.0
0.0 0.0
Offsets (transfers/deobligations)
(95.0)
(49.6)
(93.0)
(95.9)
3.0
Total Ops, Res., & Fac. (ORF)
2,377.8
2,793.5
2,531.2
2,397.1
3,208.8
Total Proc., Acq. & Constr. (PAC)
898.5
1,036.1
965.1
936.0
1,195.0
Other Accounts/PCSRF/CZMF
94.2
78.3
85.0
46.0
78.0
NOAA Total
$3,373.5
$3,907.9
$3,581.3
$3,379.1
$4,481.8
Source: Compiled by CRS from FY2005 and FY2006 congressional appropriations documents.
Notes:
a. P.L. 108-447 figures reflects a 0.80% across the board rescission leveled on CJS appropriations for
FY2005.
b. NOAA received emergency supplemental appropriations for FY2005 of $38 million for the NWS,
including $24 million for ORF, and $14 million for PAC. These amounts are not included in

---

CRS-36
the FY2005 appropriation, House appropriations, or Senate Appropriations Committee
recommendations.
c. Funding recommendations reported by the House Appropriations Committee for SSJC
Appropriations, FY2006, (H.Rept. 109-118, June 10, 2005). (See footnote 16.)
d. Funding recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee (S.Rept. 109-88 on H.R. 2862,
June 23, 2005).
e. In response to Hurricane Katrina Senate figure includes $5.8 million for 43 full-time equivalent
positions at the National Hurricane Center as proposed in S.Amdt. 1656 and approved by the
Senate on September 13, 2005.
Related Budget Issues. Other factors could potentially affect NOAA’s
FY2006 budget outcome.22 These include the following:
! What additional funding might be provided to NOAA/NWS in the
aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, being that 2005 is the most active
hurricane season since 1933. (See Note e., above.)
! Whether NOAA would be able to sustain its present mission after
the House reduced its budget by $540 million, or 13.8 percent; and
! Whether the Senate and the House can reach agreement on funding
for the “Ocean Commission Initiative” and restore funding for a
number of programs cut by the House in FY2006, as well as
recommended for termination by the President.
! Whether Congress chooses to fund international tsunami warning
efforts and other ocean environment observation goals intended to
be met through development of the Administration-backed Global
Environmental Observation System of Systems (GEOSS).
! Whether NOAA and partners NASA and DOD can meet deployment
schedules for the National Polar Orbiting Environmental Satellite
System (NPOESS), and develop ground-based systems architecture
for a 2010 launch target; and
! Whether Congress will act on pending legislation to authorize all of
NOAA’s programs and activities under a single legal authority,
otherwise known as an organic act.
Related Legislation
H.R. 50 (Ehlers)
Would amend present law to re-establish the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration in the Department of Commerce, reorganize the administration of
NOAA, and place within NOAA: (1) the National Weather Service; (2) programs to
support operations of ongoing data collection and direct services and products
regarding satellite, observations, and coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes information; (3)
programs to conduct and support research and education and the development of
technologies relating to weather, climate, and the coasts, oceans, and Great Lakes;
22 For more information on OPC recommendations and President’s Action Plan for NOAA,
see CRS Issue Brief IB10132, Ocean Commissions: Ocean Policy Review and Outlook, by
Eugene H. Buck, et al. On a possible NOAA organic act, see CRS Report RS22109, by
Wayne Morrissey. On tsunami warning systems and funding, see CRS Report RL32739,
Tsunamis: Monitoring, Detection, and Early Warning Systems, by Wayne Morrissey.

---

CRS-37
and (4) a Science Advisory Board. Introduced January 4, 2005, referred to House
Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards on February 10, 2005.
H.R. 337 (Maloney)
Would amend present law to make the term of office of the Director of the
Census five years and require that the Director of the Census report directly to the
Secretary of Commerce. House Committee on Government Reform on Jan 25, 2005.
H.R. 449 (Camp)
Would establish the position of Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Job
Retention and Creation to gather information about economic development
assistance. Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on February
1, 2005.
H.J.Res. 53 (Miller-MI)
Proposes to amend the U.S. Constitution to provide for apportioning the House
of Representatives on the basis of the number of U.S. citizens, not persons, in each
state. If the amendment went into effect, the decennial census short form would have
to include a question about citizenship. Introduced June 9, 2005, and referred to the
House Committee on the Judiciary.
S. 14 (Stabenow)
Would amend present law to: (1) revise and extend the requirement that the U.S.
Trade Representative identify and report on trade expansion priorities; and (2)
establish the position of Chief Enforcement Negotiator. Also would provide
assistance to workers in areas negatively affected by international trade. Referred to
the Committee on Finance on January 24, 2005.
S. 50 (Inouye)
Would attempt to strengthen the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s tsunami detection, forecast, warning, and mitigation program.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on January
24, 2005, which ordered S. 50 to be reported as an original measure on February 2,
2005.
S. 148 (McCain)
Would amend the Professional Boxing Safety Act of 1996 (15 U.S.C. 6301 et
seq.) to establish the United States Boxing Commission as a commission within the
Department of Commerce and provide regulations for the sport and industry of
boxing. Referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation on January 25, 2005.
Related CRS Products
CRS Report RL32647, Government Advertisement of Tourism: Recent Action and
Long-Standing Controversies, by Kevin R. Kosar.
CRS Report 95-36, The Advanced Technology Program, by Wendy H. Schacht.

---

CRS-38
CRS Report RL31252, State and Local Sales and Use Taxes and Internet Commerce,
by Steven Maguire.
CRS Report RL31293, E-Commerce Statistics: Explanation and Sources, by Rita
Tehan.
CRS Report 97-104, Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview,
by Wendy H. Schacht.
CRS Report 95-30, The National Institute of Standards and Technology: An
Overview, by Wendy H. Schacht.
CRS Report RS21460, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA): A Brief Review of FY2003 Appropriations and the FY2004 Budget, by
Wayne A. Morrissey.
CRS Report RL31832, The Export Administration Act: Evolutions, Provisions, and
Debate, by Ian F. Fergusson.
CRS Report RS20906, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appropriations Process:
A Brief Explanation, by Wendy H. Schacht.
CRS Issue Brief IB91132, Industrial Competitiveness and Technological
Advancement: Debate Over Government Policy, by Wendy H. Schacht.
CRS Report RS21469: The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA): Budget, Programs, and Issues, by Glenn McGloughlin.
CRS Report RL32739, Tsunamis: Monitoring, Detection, and Early Warning
Systems, by Wayne Morrissey.
CRS Issue Brief IB10132, Ocean Commissions: Ocean Policy Review and Outlook,
coordinated by Eugene Buck, et al.
CRS Report RL31438, Patent Administration: Current Issues and Possibilities for
Reform, by John R. Thomas.
CRS Report RL32823, An Overview of the Administration’s Strengthening
America’s Communities Initiative, coordinated by Eugene Boyd.

---

CRS-39
Table 5. FY2006 Funding for the Department of Commerce and
Related Agencies
($ millions in budget authority)
Bureau or
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
H.R. 2862
Senate
Agency
Enacted
Enacted
Request
International
Trade
$378. 1
$388.3
$395.9
$393.9
$396.6
Administration
Bureau of
Industry and
$67.5 $67.5
$77.0
$77.0
$77.0
Security
Economic
Development
$315.3 $284.1
$26.6
$227.6
$524.9
Administration
Economic
Development
—
—
$3,710.0
—
—
Challenge
Minority
Business
$28.6 $2,959.0
$30.7
$30.0
$30.7
Development
Agency
Economic and
Statistical
$74.2 $78.9
$85.3
$80.3
$81.3
Analysis
Bureau of the
$624.2 $744.8
$877.4
$812.2
$727.4
Census
National
Telecommuni-
cations and
$51.1 $38.7
$23.5
$19.7
$57.3
Information
Administration
Patent and
Trademark
($1,222.5) ($1,544.8)
($1,703.0)
($1,703.0)
($1,703.0)
Officea
Technology
$6.3
$6.5
$4.2
$6.5
—
Administration
National
Institute of
$621.5
$699.2
$532.0
$548.7
$844.5
Standards and
Technology
National
Oceanic and
$3,701.0
$3,907.9
$3,581.2
$3,379.0
$4,481.8
Atmospheric
Administration
Departmental
$67.7
$78.7
$106.3
$70.2
$77.4
Management
Other
$8.1
$209.1
—
—
—
Department of
Commerce
$5,943.5
$6,533.1
$9,450.0
$5,645.1
$7,303.9
Subtotal:
U.S. Trade
$41.6 $41.0
$38.8
$44.8
$41.0
Representative

---

CRS-40
Bureau or
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
H.R. 2862
Senate
Agency
Enacted
Enacted
Request
International
Trade
$57.7 $60.8
$65.3
$62.8
$62.8
Commission
National
Intellectual
Property Law
—
$2.0
—
—
— b
Enforcement
Coordination
Council
Related
Agencies
$99.3
$103.8
$104.1
$107.6
$103.8
Subtotal:
Rescission
($100.0)
—
—
($35.0)
—
Title II Total:
$5,942.8
$6,636.9
$9,554.1
$5,752.7
$7,740.7
Sources: P.L. 108-447; U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations,
H.Rept. 109-118, tables at pp. 176-192; and U.S. Senate amendment of H.R. 2862 on
September 15, 2005.
a. The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees. The fees collected,
but not obligated during the current year, are available for obligation in the following
fiscal year, and do not count toward the appropriation totals. Only newly appropriated
funds count toward the annual appropriation totals.
b. Senate bill would have U.S. PTO provide $500,000 for NIPLECC.
Science Agencies
National Aeronautics and Space Administration23
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was created by the
1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act (P.L. 85-568). NASA conducts civilian
space and aeronautics activities. The agency is managed from NASA Headquarters
in Washington, D.C. It has nine major field centers around the country, and a
Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) — the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory — which is operated by the California Institute of Technology. Dr.
Michael Griffin became NASA’s 11th Administrator in April 2005.
NASA is requesting $16.456 billion for FY2006, a 2.4% increase over the
$16.07 billion (adjusted for the rescission) appropriated in the FY2005 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-447). NASA also received $126 million in a FY2005
supplemental (P.L. 108-324) for hurricane relief associated with the 2004 Florida
hurricanes, giving it a total of $16.196 billion for FY2005. The FY2006 request is
a 1.6% increase above that total. Last year, NASA was projected to receive a 4.6%
increase for FY2006. NASA submitted an amended budget request on July 15,
2005. The total for the agency did not change, only how it is distributed within the
agency. The House, and the Senate appropriations committee, acted on the bill prior
23 This section was prepared by Marcia S. Smith, Specialist in Aerospace and
Telecommunications Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-41
to the submission of the budget amendment. Two NASA facilities were damaged by
Hurricane Katrina in August 2005: Stennis Space Center, in Mississippi, near Slidell,
LA, where space shuttle main engines are tested; and the Michoud Assembly Facility,
in New Orleans, LA, where space shuttle external tanks are manufactured (it is
operated for NASA by Lockheed Martin). The facilities themselves received
relatively minor damage, but many workers were displaced. NASA’s preliminary
estimate of the cost to recover from Katrina is $1.1 billion. Whether and how that
may impact NASA’s FY2006 budget is not known at this time. For more on
NASA’s FY2006 budget request, see CRS Report RS22063, The National
Aeronautics and Space Administration: Overview, FY2006 Budget in Brief, and Key
Issues for Congress, by Marcia S. Smith and Daniel Morgan, or CRS Report
RL32988, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's FY2006 Budget
Request: Description, Analysis, and Issues for Congress, by Marcia S. Smith and
Daniel Morgan.
Table 6. NASA’s FY2006 Budget Request
($ millions in budget authority)
FY2006
House
Senate
FY2004
FY2005
Account
Request
Approps
Approps
Actual
Estimate
(amended)
(passed)
(passed)
Science, Aeronautics, and
7,873
*7,681
9,829
9,726
9,761
Exploration (SA&E)
Exploration Capabilities
7,478
*8,358
6,595
6,713
6,603
Inspector General
27
31
32
32
32
Total
15,378
16,070
16,456
16,471
16,396
FY2005 Supp. for 2004
126
hurricanes
Grand Total
15,378
16,196
16,456
16,471
16,396
Source: Figures for FY2004 and FY2005 are from the Office of Management and Budget
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/nasa.html]. The FY2006 figures are from the
amended budget request
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/amendments/amendment_7_15_05.pdf] submitted to
Congress on July 15, 2005. “Grand Total” was added by CRS. Totals may not add due to rounding.
The FY2005 figures reflect NASA’s Initial Operating Plan and are not final. House and Senate
figures are from the reports accompanying H.R. 2862 (H.Rept. 109-118, S.Rept. 109-88).
*The FY2005 figures for SA&E and Exploration Capabilities in this OMB-based table are different
from those in the table in NASA’s FY2006 budget justification because the OMB figures show the
shift of the “Exploration Systems” line item from the Exploration Capabilities account to the SA&E
account.
Debate over NASA’s FY2006 budget request centers on President Bush’s
“Vision for Space Exploration,” announced on January 14, 2004. The President
directed NASA to focus its activities on returning humans to the Moon by 2020, and
someday sending them to Mars and “worlds beyond.” Robotic probes would serve
as pathfinders for human missions, and also be used to continue studies of the
universe (using space-based telescopes, for example). Other countries were invited
to participate. A cost estimate for accomplishing the Vision was not provided,
although NASA later released an estimate of $64 billion (FY2003 dollars) for
returning humans to the Moon, not including the cost of associated robotic probes.

---

CRS-42
Under the President’s proposal, most of the funding for the Vision would come
from redirecting funds from other NASA activities, not new money. Thus, the debate
over the Vision revolves around two major issues: the relative importance of funding
NASA versus other national priorities, and the relative importance of funding the
Vision versus other NASA activities. How much of the FY2006 request is for “the
Vision” is not specified, although a NASA briefing chart identifies $6 billion for
“exploration specific” activities. Another $6.4 billion is requested for the space
shuttle and space station programs — often described as the first steps in the Vision.
The remainder of the budget, $4.1 billion, is labeled “Earth Science, Aero & Others”
(“Aero”is for aeronautics).
In terms of the first issue, supporters of the Vision point to the relatively small
percentage of federal budget authority that is allocated to NASA — 0.7 % in FY2005
— as an indication that it is not a significant factor in the nation’s overall spending.
Skeptics counter that spending more than $16 billion on NASA is a luxury when
many domestic discretionary programs are being cut, and federal R&D spending
overall is not keeping pace with inflation. Regarding the second issue, Vision
proponents argue that NASA should focus on the President’s Vision even though it
may mean cutting back on NASA’s aeronautics, Earth science, and certain space
science activities. Others disagree. The House and Senate appropriations and
authorization committees that oversee NASA all expressed support for the Vision in
their reports on NASA’s funding bills (H.R. 2862, H.R. 3070, S. 1281), but also
concern that NASA should continue to have a balance among its activities, not focus
solely on the Vision. During floor debate on H.R. 3070, a manager’s amendment
was adopted that increased NASA’s authorized funding level for FY2006 to $16.966
billion ($510 million more than the request), with the additional funds designated for
the Vision. That bill also restructures NASA’s budget accounts to separate
“exploration” from “science, aeronautics, and education.” See CRS Report
RL32988, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's FY2006 Budget
Request: Description, Analysis, and Issues for Congress, by Marcia S. Smith and
Daniel Morgan, for details.
The amount of funding that is available for various NASA activities will affect
workforce levels. NASA’s FY2006 budget request assumes that the number of
budgeted civil service full time equivalents (FTEs) will drop by almost 2,500 in the
next year and a half — from 19,227 in FY2005 to 16,738 for FY2007. How to “right
size” NASA, its facilities, and its workforce, and ensure NASA has the necessary
skill mix for the Vision, are among the issues facing Congress. H.R. 3070 as passed
by the House prohibits Reductions in Force (RIFs) or other involuntary separations
(except for cause) at NASA prior to February 16, 2007.
Among the projects that would be terminated sooner than previously planned
are NASA’s space shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) programs. The
President directed that the space shuttle be retired when ISS construction is
completed, expected in 2010. Dr. Griffin has indicated that he intends to terminate
the shuttle in 2010 whether or not ISS construction is completed. Some want to
continue the shuttle until a replacement is available, so that there is no “gap” when
the United States would not have an ability to launch astronauts to the ISS. S. 1281,
the Senate version of the NASA authorization bill, as reported from committee,

---

CRS-43
directs NASA not to retire the shuttle until a replacement is available. The House
bill (H.R. 3070), as passed by the House, is silent on the issue.
The President directed NASA to develop a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to
take crews to Earth orbit by 2014, but its primary purpose is taking them to and from
the Moon. Dr. Griffin wants to accelerate development of the CEV to shorten the
gap between the end of the shuttle program and the CEV’s availability. He explicitly
made ISS crew transport a requirement for the CEV. His predecessor, Mr. Sean
O’Keefe, declined to make such a commitment, wanting to keep CEV focused on its
lunar role. Mr. O’Keefe planned to rely on Russia — one of the partners in the ISS
program — to take U.S. crews to and from the ISS. Russia has indicated that it will
not provide ISS crew transport services to NASA for free after April 2006 when an
existing agreement will be fulfilled, however, and NASA is not permitted to pay
Russia for such services under the Iran Nonproliferation Act (INA, P.L. 106-178 —
see CRS Report RS22072, The Iran Nonproliferation Act and the International
Space Station: Issues and Options, by Sharon Squassoni and Marcia S. Smith). The
Bush Administration submitted a proposed amendment to the INA to Congress in
July 2005 (see CRS Issue Brief IB93017, Space Stations, by Marcia S. Smith), but
some, like Dr. Griffin, feel that the United States should maintain its own ability to
launch astronauts into space in any case. But his decision to set a fixed termination
date for the shuttle is subject to criticism because it may create schedule pressure
similar to that which was cited as a factor in the 2003 space shuttle Columbia
tragedy. Another option is to clearly define exactly how many shuttle missions are
needed to complete the space station, and fly the shuttle until those requirements are
met, whenever that occurs. In the FY2006 appropriations bill, the House and Senate
approved the requested funding level for the shuttle for FY2006 — $4.5 billion. The
authorization bills do not specify a funding level for the shuttle.
As for the ISS, the President directed NASA to restructure the broadly-based
research program it had planned to conduct aboard ISS to support only research
needed to accomplish the Vision. Some want to restore the research program to what
was planned prior to the Vision. S. 1281, the Senate verison of the NASA
authorization bill, as reported from committee, adds funding for ISS research and
makes other changes to augment its research role. H.R. 3070 directs that 15% of the
research funding for the ISS be used for research not related to the Vision. A NASA
budget chart released along with the President’s speech showed NASA completing
its use of the ISS by FY2017. What will happen to it after that time is unclear.
The initial FY2006 request for the ISS was $2.180 billion: $1.857 billion for
construction and operations (including $160 million for ISS Crew/Cargo Services)
and $324 million for research. The amended request moved ISS Crew/Cargo
Services to another part of the NASA budget and reduced the amount for ISS
construction and operations commensurately (although it identified $168 million for
that activity instead of $160 million as was indicated in the original request). In
H.R. 2862, the House cut $10 million from ISS construction and operations, $10
million from ISS Crew/Cargo Services, and $25 million from the account that funds
research on ISS, though it did not specify that the cuts be made to the ISS-related
portion of that account. The Senate cut all $160 million from ISS Crew/Cargo
services. The authorization bills do not identify an amount for the ISS.

---

CRS-44
Another issue is whether or not to send the shuttle to service the Hubble Space
Telescope (see CRS Report RS21767, Hubble Space Telescope: Should NASA
Proceed with a Servicing Mission?, by Daniel Morgan). Two days after the
President’s Vision speech, then-Administrator O’Keefe announced that the shuttle
would not be used to conduct further Hubble servicing missions, citing shuttle safety
concerns in the wake of the February 1, 2003 Columbia tragedy as the primary
reason. Widespread criticism led NASA to explore the possibility of a robotic
servicing mission instead, but a December 2004 report from the National Research
Council concluded that a robotic servicing mission was not likely to succeed in the
time available. In the FY2006 request, NASA requested money only for a deorbit
mission (to ensure that Hubble reenters from orbit without posing danger to
populated areas). At his April 2005 confirmation hearing, however, Dr. Griffin
pledged to revisit the possibility of a shuttle servicing mission after the shuttle
completes its two “Return to Flight” (RTF) missions and its risk factors are better
understood following the post-Columbia modifications. (The first RTF mission was
launched on July 26; see CRS Report RS21408, NASA's Space Shuttle Program: The
Columbia Tragedy, the Discovery Mission, and the Future of the Shuttle, by Marcia
S. Smith, for details.) Meanwhile, he directed NASA engineers to resume planning
for a shuttle servicing mission. The Senate added $250 million for a Hubble
servicing mission in its version of H.R. 2862. The House did not add any funds, but
expressed support for a servicing mission. (H.R. 3070, as passed by the House,
designates $150 million for a Hubble servicing mission.)
National Science Foundation (NSF)24
Agency Mission. The National Science Foundation (NSF) was created by the
National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (P.L. 81-507). The NSF has
the broad mission of supporting science and engineering in general and funding basic
research across many disciplines. The majority of the research supported by the NSF
is conducted at U.S. colleges and universities. In addition to ensuring the nation’s
supply of scientific and engineering personnel, the NSF promotes academic basic
research and science and engineering education across many disciplines. Other
federal agencies, in contrast, support mission-specific research. The NSF provides
support for investigator-initiated, merit-reviewed, competitively selected awards,
stat-of-the-art tools, instrumentation and facilities. Also, NSF provides almost 30%
of the total federal support for science and mathematics education. Support is
provided to academic institutions, industrial laboratories, private research firms, and
major research facilities and centers. While the NSF does not operate any
laboratories, it does support Antarctic research stations, selected oceanographic
vessels, and national research centers. Additionally, the NSF supports university-
industry relationships and U.S. participation in international scientific ventures.
The NSF is an independent agency in the executive branch and under the
leadership of a presidentially appointed Director and a National Science Board (NSB)
composed of 24 scientists, engineers, and university and industry officials involved
in research and education. The NSB and the Director make policy for the NSF. The
24 This section was prepared by Christine M. Matthews, Specialist in Science and
Technology Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-45
Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the NSF has the responsibility of, among
other things, conducting audits and investigations of NSF programs, and promoting
efficiency and effectiveness in NSF programs and operations. The OIG reports
directly to the NSB and Congress.
Table 7. National Science Foundation, FY2004 to FY2006
($ in millions)
FY2004 Actual
FY2005 Estimate
FY2006 Request
Research and
$4,293.3
$4,220.6
$4,333.5
Related Activities
Education and
944.1
841.4
737.0
Human Resources
Major Research
184.0
173.7
250.0
Equipment and
Facilities
Construction
Salaries and
218.9
223.2
269.0
Expenses
National Science
2.2
4.0
4.0
Board
Office of Inspector
9.5
10.0
11.5
General
Total, NSF
$5,652.0
$5,472.8
$5,605.0
Key Budget Issues.
Overview of the FY2006 Budget Request. The NSF has witnessed
considerable growth during a period of constrained research budgets. When
measured in current dollars, its total appropriation increased more than 70.7% in 10
years — FY1996, $3,206.3 million; FY2000, $3,923.4 million; and FY2005,
$5,472.8 million. Even when inflation is taken into account, its growth increased (in
constant FY2004 dollars) by 45.2% during this 10-year period. The FY2006 request
for NSF is $5,605 million, a 2.4% ($132.2 million) increase over the FY2005
estimate of $5,472.8 million. The FY2006 request provides support for several
interdependent priority areas: biocomplexity in the environment ($84 million),
human and social dynamics ($39 million), mathematical sciences ($89 million), and
nanoscale science and engineering ($243 million). Additional priority areas include
those of strengthening core disciplinary research, broadening participation in the
science and engineering workforce, and sustaining organizational excellence in NSF
management practices. An investment of $509 million in cyberinfrastructure will
allow for funding of modeling, simulation, visualization and data storage, and other
communications breakthroughs. NSF anticipates that this level of funding will make
cyberinfrastructure more powerful, stable, and accessible to researchers and educators
through widely shared research facilities. Increasing grant size and duration has been
a long-term priority for NSF. The funding rate for research grants has declined from
approximately 30% in the late 1990s to an estimated 20% in FY2005. In the FY2006

---

CRS-46
request, the NSF will increase the rate to 21%, while maintaining current gains in
award size and duration. NSF recognizes that international research partnerships are
critical to the nation in maintaining a competitive edge, addressing global issues, and
capitalizing on global economic opportunities. To address these particular needs, the
FY2006 request proposes $35 million for the Office of International Science and
Engineering. Additional FY2006 highlights include funding for the National
Nanotechnology Initiative ($343.8 million), investments in Climate Change Science
Program ($196.9 million), continued support for homeland security ($344 million),
and funding for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development
($803.2 million).
Included in the FY2006 request is $4,333.5 million for Research and Related
Activities (R&RA), a 2.7% increase ($112.9 million) over the FY2005 level of
$4,220.6 million. R&RA includes Integrative Activities (IA), and is the source of
funding for the acquisition and development of research instrumentation at U.S.
colleges and universities. The FY2006 request for IA is $134.9 million, a 3.8%
increase ($5 million) over the FY2005 estimate. The Office of Polar Programs is
funded in the R&RA. The FY2006 request transfers responsibility to NSF from the
U.S. Coast Guard for funding the maintenance and operation of polar icebreaking
activities. (NSF will not own the ships, but will be responsible for the operation,
maintenance, and staffing).
The Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) account
is funded at $250 million in FY2006, a 44% increase ($76.4 million) over the
FY2005 level. No new starts are proposed in the FY2006 request. Those projects
receiving support in the FY2006 request are Atacama Large Millimeter Array
Construction ($49.2 million), EarthScope ($50.6 million), IceCube Neutrino
Observatory ($50.5 million), Rare Symmetry Violating Processes ($41.8 million),
and Scientific Ocean Drilling Vessel ($57.9 million).
The FY2006 request for the Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR)
is $737 million, a 12.4% decrease ($104.2 million) from the FY2005 estimate. The
EHR portfolio is focused on, among other things, increasing the technological
literacy of all citizens, preparing the next generation of science, engineering, and
mathematics professionals, and closing the achievement gap in all scientific fields.
Support at the various educational levels in the FY2005 request is as follows:
precollege, $140.8 million; undergraduate, $135 million; and graduate, $155 million.
The request provides $60 million for the President’s Math and Science Partnerships
program (MSP), a 24.4% decrease from the FY2005 estimate. Funding in the
FY2006 request will provide support for ongoing awards, in addition to data
collection, evaluation, knowledge management, and dissemination. No new
partnership awards are proposed in the FY2006 request. Several programs are
directed at increasing the number of underrepresented minorities in science and
engineering — Black Colleges and Universities Programs ($25 million), Tribal
Colleges and Universities Program ($10 million), Louis Stokes Alliances for
Minority Participation ($35 million), and Centers of Research Excellence in Science
and Technology ($18.5 million). Funding for the Experimental Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research (EPSCoR) is $94 million in the FY2006 request, almost level
to the FY2005 estimate.

---

CRS-47
Policy Issues. On February 2, 2004, the NSB released a report that was
mandated by Section 22 of the NSF Authorization Act of 2002. The report addressed
the unmet needs of the agency and determined what infrastructure was needed to
support NSF’s programmatic expansion through FY2007. The recommendations
provided in the report are based on the budget levels contained in the authorization.
The NSB recommended a total investment of $19 billion for the NSF to sustain its
position in science and technology. Rather than spread funding across all programs
and activities, the report suggested to focus on key strategic areas — $1.2 billion for
advanced tools and cyber infrastructure, $1 billion to improve research productivity
and student opportunities, $700 million toward building a competitive workforce,
$200 million for maintaining management excellence, and $200 million to increase
the number and diversity of institutions receiving awards. The FY2006 request for
NSF is 34% below what was recommended in the authorizing legislation. The NSB
contends that increasing the number and length of research awards should be one of
the highest priorities of the agency. However, because of the slight budget increase,
the number of proposals that the agency has been able to fund has dropped from more
than 30% in the late 1990s to an anticipated 21% in the FY2006 budget request.
There has been considerable debate in the academic and scientific community
and in Congress about the management and oversight of major projects selected for
construction and the need for prioritization of potential projects funded in the Major
Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) account. The NSF was
directed to improve its oversight of large projects by developing an implementation
plan that included comprehensive guidelines and project oversight review. One
continuing question focused on the selection process for including major projects in
the upcoming budget cycle. In February 2004, the National Academies released the
congressionally mandated study of the process for prioritization and oversight of
projects in the MREFC account. The report recommended a more open process for
project selection, broadened participation from various disciplines, and well-defined
criteria for the selection process. In May 2005, the NSB approved a report detailing
the new guidelines for the development, review, and approval of major projects —
Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported by the National
Science Foundation. Also at the May 2005 meeting, the NSB approved a facility
plan, describing facilities under construction and those being considered for future
funding. The facility plan is to be made available when final edits identified by the
NSB are completed.
On June 16, 2005, the House Committee on Appropriations passed H.R. 2862,
Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
FY2006 (H.Rept. 109-118). The bill provides a total of $5,643.4 million for NSF in
FY2006, $38.4 million above the Administration’s request and $170.6 million above
the FY2005 estimate. Included in the total is $4,377.5 million for R&RA, $44
million above the request and $156.9 million above the FY2005 level. The EHR
receives $807 million in H.R. 2862, $70 million above the request and $34.4 million
below the FY2005 level. The bill provides $60 million for the MSP. The MREFC
account is funded at $193.4 million, $56.6 million below the request and $19.7
million above the FY2005 estimate.
On September 15, 2005, the Senate passed its version of H.R. 2862 in the
Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Bill, FY2006 (S.Rept. 109-88). The bill

---

CRS-48
provides a total of $5,531 million for the NSF, $74 million below the request and
$112. 4 million below the House allowance. R&RA is funded at $4,345.2 million
in FY2006, $11.7 million above the request, and $35.2 million above the House-
passed version. Support for the MREFC is $193.4 million, $56.6 million below the
Administration’s request, and the same as provided by the House. The Committee
recommends $747 million in FY2006 for EHR, $10 million above the request and
$60 million below the House-passed version. Included in the support for EHR is $64
million for MSP. The Senate report contains language rejecting the Administrations’
request to have the MSP placed entirely in the Department of Education. Conference
has been scheduled.
Table 8. Funding for the Title III Science Agencies
($ millions in budget authority)
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
House
Senate
Bureau or Agency
enacted
enacted
enacted
request
bill
bill
NASA
$15,339.0 $15,378.0
$16,196.4 $16,456.4 $16,471.0 $16,396.0
National Science Foundation
$5,310.0
$5,652.0
$5,472.8
$5,605.0
$5,643.4
$5,531.0
Office of
$5.0
$7.0
$6.3
$5.6
$5.6
$5.6
Science/Technology
Title III House Total:
$20,654.0 $21,037.0
$21,675.5 $22,067.0 $22,120.0
$21,932.6
Title III Senate: Commerce
agencies included in Title III:
$4,630.9
$4,117.4
$3,934.2
$5,320.5
NOAA, NIST.
Title III Senate Total
$26,306.4 $26,184.4 $26,054.2 $27,253.1
Source: U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Committees on Appropriations, CRS estimates.
Related CRS Products
CRS Report 95-307, U.S. National Science Foundation: An Overview, by Christine
Matthews.
CRS Report RL30930, U.S. National Science Foundation: Experimental Program
to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), by Christine Matthews.
CRS Report RS21267, National Science Foundation: Major Research Equipment
and Facility Construction, by Christine Matthews.
CRS Report RS21720, Space Exploration: Issues Concerning the "Vision for Space
Exploration," by Marcia Smith.
CRS Report RS21767, Hubble Space Telescope: Should NASA Proceed with a
Servicing Mission?, by Daniel Morgan.
CRS Report RS22063, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration:
Overview, FY2006 Budget in Brief, and Key Issues for Congress, by Marcia
Smith and Daniel Morgan.
CRS Report RS22072, The Iran Nonproliferation Act and the International Space
Station: Issues and Options, by Sharon Squassoni and Marcia Smith.

---

CRS-49
Department of State and International
Broadcasting25
Background
The State Department, established on July 27, 1789 (1 Stat.28; 22 U.S.C. 2651),
has a mission to advance and protect the worldwide interests of the United States and
its citizens. The State Department supports the activities of more than 50 U.S.
agencies and organizations operating at 260 posts in 180 countries. Currently, the
State Department employs approximately 30,000 people, about 60% of whom work
overseas. As covered in Title IV, the State Department funding categories include
administration of foreign affairs,
international operations,
international
commissions, and related appropriations, such as international broadcasting. The
enacted FY2005 appropriation for Title IV was $8.766 billion (reflecting the two
rescissions in the law). Typically, more than three-fourths of State’s budget is for
Administration of Foreign Affairs (about 78% in FY2005), which consists of salaries
and expenses, diplomatic security, diplomatic and consular programs, technology,
and security/maintenance of overseas buildings.
The Foreign Relations Authorization for FY1998-1999 (P.L. 105-277) provided
for the consolidation of the foreign policy agencies. As of the end of FY1999, the
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) and the United States Information
Agency (USIA) were abolished, and their budgets and functions were merged into
the Department of State.
Security issues have remained a top priority since the August 7, 1998 terrorist
attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa. An immediate response was a $1.56 billion
supplemental enacted by the end of that year. In November 1999, the Overseas
Presence Advisory Panel reported its findings on embassy security needs and
recommendations. Also in November 1999, Congress authorized (P.L. 106-113)
$900 million annually for FY2000 through FY2004 for embassy security spending
within the embassy security, construction and maintenance (ESCM) account, in
addition to worldwide security funds in the diplomatic and consular programs
(D&CP) account.
After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack, Congress passed emergency
supplemental funds (P.L. 107-38 and P.L. 107-117) which included a total of $254.9
million for counter-terrorist and emergency response activities within the Department
of State and $47.9 million for international broadcasting. In addition, Congress
passed an FY2002 supplemental (H.R. 4775; P.L.107-206) which provided $303
million for the Department of State and $15.1 million for international broadcasting.
The 108th Congress voted for three supplemental appropriations — P.L. 108-11 and
P.L. 108-106 and P.L. 108-287 — which provided a combined total of $1.3 billion
for the Department of State and international broadcasting. (For an account-by-
25 This section was written by Susan B. Epstein, Specialist in Foreign Affairs and Trade,
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.

---

CRS-50
account presentation, see CRS Report RL31370, State Department and Related
Agencies: FY2005 Appropriations and FY2006 Request, by Susan B. Epstein.)
The United States contributes in two ways to the United Nations and other
international organizations: (1) voluntary payments funded in the Foreign Operations
Appropriations bill and (2) assessed contributions included in the Commerce, Justice,
and State Appropriations measure. Assessed contributions are provided in two
accounts, international peacekeeping (CIPA) and contributions to international
organizations (CIO). Following a period of dramatic growth in the number and
costs of U.N. peacekeeping missions during the early 1990s, a trend that peaked in
FY1994 with a $1.1 billion appropriation, funding requirements declined in
subsequent years. The FY2000 enacted appropriation for CIO was $885 million,
$500 million for international peacekeeping, and $351 million for U.S. arrearage
payments to the U.N. if certain reform criteria were met. Only $100 million of the
appropriated arrearage payments had been released because the reforms had not been
implemented. After the United States lost its seat on the U.N. Human Rights
Commission in 2001, the Foreign Relations Authorization bill added a provision
(Sec. 601, H.R. 1646) that would have restricted payment of $244 million of U.S.
arrearage payments to the U.N. until the United States regained its seat. After the
September 11th attacks, however, Congress passed S. 248 (P.L. 107-46) which
authorized arrearage payments to the U.N. (For more detail, see CRS Issue Brief
IB86116, U.N. System Funding: Congressional Issues, by Vita Bite). The FY2005
enacted levels (reflecting the two rescissions) amounted to $1,166.2 million for CIO
and $483.5 million for CIPA.
International broadcasting, which had been a primary function of the USIA
prior to 1999, is now carried out by an independent agency referred to as the
Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The BBG includes the Voice of America
(VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Cuba Broadcasting, Radio Free
Asia (RFA), Radio Free Iraq, Radio Free Iran and the newly-authorized Radio Free
Afghanistan. In FY2002 the BBG began a pilot project to create a new Middle East
Radio Network (MERN) by reallocating base funds. The emergency supplementals
passed in 2001, 2002, and 2003 included funding for expanded broadcasting by VOA
and RFE/RL to Muslim audiences in and around Afghanistan and the creation of
Radio Free Afghanistan. In 2003, the BBG initiated a satellite Middle East
Television Network (MTN) called Alhurra. The BBG’s FY2005 appropriation was
$591.6 million (reflecting rescissions).
FY2006 Funding Issues — Administration of Foreign Affairs
The Administration of Foreign Affairs makes up the bulk of the State
Department budget — 78% in the FY2005 State Department enacted funds. The
Administration’s FY2006 request for State’s Administration of Foreign Affairs seeks
$6,766.1 million, 6.5% above the FY2005 enacted level of $6,362.2 million. In
addition, the President submitted an FY2005 supplemental request one week after
submitting his FY2006 budget request. It includes $1,425.2 million for accounts
under the Administration of Foreign Affairs. The House-passed SSJC bill (H.R.
2862) provides $6,699.4 million or $76.7 million less than the Administration request
for the Administration of Foreign Affairs FY2006 budget. The House provided less
than requested for the Diplomatic and Consular Programs account, the Educational

---

CRS-51
and Cultural Exchanges account, and the Embassy Security Construction &
Maintenance account. The House amounts were subsequently reduced to total
$6,640.3 million. The Senate passed its version of H.R. 3057 which includes
$6,733.9 million for the Administration of Foreign Affairs.
Diplomatic & Consular Programs (D&CP). D&CP primarily covers
salaries and expenses, hiring, diplomatic expenditures, cost of living and foreign
inflation, as well as exchange rate changes. The FY2006 request of $4,472.6 million
represents an increase of more than 7% as compared to the $4,172.2 million funding
level enacted for FY2005. This funding level request includes $689.5 million for
worldwide security upgrades, as compared to $649.9 million in the FY2005
appropriation. The D&CP funding request also includes $327.9 million, as compared
to $320 million in the FY2005 budget, designated only for public diplomacy. In
addition, the President’s FY2005 supplemental request includes $767.2 million for
D&CP to pay for operational and security costs for U.S. Missions in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and for startup costs for State’s new Office of the Coordinator for
Reconstruction and Stabilization. The House passed $4,436.6 million or $36 million
less than was requested for D&CP in FY2006. The House total includes $689.5
million for worldwide security up\grades and $340 million for public diplomacy
programs. The Senate-passed State-Foreign Operations bill contains $4,444.6
million for D&CP, including $328 million for public diplomacy and $689.5 million
for worldwide security upgrades.
Embassy, Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM). ESCM
provides funding for embassy construction, repairs, leasing of property for embassies
and housing facilities at overseas posts. The FY2006 request of $615.8 million is
just 2% above the FY2005 enacted level of $603.5 million; however, the FY2005
supplemental request includes an additional $658 million under ESCM for
constructing the new embassy compound in Baghdad, and other purposes. The
House bill includes $603.5 million (the same as the FY2005 enacted level) for
regular ESCM in FY2006. The Senate version of H.R. 3057, as reported out of
committee included $603.8 million for regular ESCM funds in FY2006; however a
Senate floor amendment reduced this account to $598.8 million in the Senate-passed
bill.
Worldwide Security Upgrades. Ever since the bombings of two U.S.
embassies in eastern Africa in August 1998, Congress has appropriated additional
money within both D&CP and ESCM for increasing security. The funds in D&CP
for worldwide security upgrades are primarily for ongoing expenses due to the
upgrades that took place after 1998, such as maintaining computer security,
maintaining bullet-proof vehicles, ongoing salaries for perimeter guards, etc.
Worldwide security upgrades in ESCM are more on the order of bricks-and-mortar-
type expenses. The FY2006 request for upgrades within D&CP totals $689.5 million
— nearly $40 million above the enacted level for FY2005. The FY2006 request for
worldwide security funding within ESCM amounts to $910.2 million, about $10
million more than the FY2005 enacted level. The combined total request for State’s
worldwide security upgrades is $1,599.7 million.
The House passed $910.2 million for worldwide security upgrades for FY2006.
Combined with the worldwide security upgrades in the D&CP account, this totals

---

CRS-52
$1,599.7 million, the same as the Administration had requested. The Senate provides
$900.2 million for embassy security upgrades, or a combined total of $1,589.7
million for worldwide security upgrades in FY2006.
Educational and Cultural Exchanges. This line item includes programs
such as the Fulbright, Muskie, and Humphrey academic exchanges, as well as the
international visitor exchanges and some Freedom Support Act and SEED programs.
The Administration’s FY2006 request was for $430.4 million, about 21% more than
the FY2005 enacted level of $355.9 million. The Administration request includes
more than $180 million for programs targeted toward Muslim populations.
H.R. 2862 provides $410.4 million (about $20 million below the request, but
$54.5 million above the FY2005 enacted level) for exchange programs in FY2006.
H.R. 3057, as passed by the Senate, contains $440.2 million for exchanges in
FY2006.
Capital Investment Fund (CIF). CIF was established by the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act of FY1994/95 (P.L. 103-236) to provide for purchasing
information technology and capital equipment which would ensure the efficient
management, coordination, operation, and utilization of State’s resources. In
FY1997 the CIF budget was $24.6 million. The FY2006 request is for $133 million,
comparable to FY2005 funding if both the CIF and the Centralized Information
Technology Modernization Program are combined.
The House-passed bill had provided $128.3 million for FY2006, comparable to
the level of the technology funds for FY2005, but $4.7 million below the President’s
request. That later was reduced to $69.1 million. The Senate bill includes $58.9
million for CIF and $74.1 million for a new account started in FY2005 —
Centralized Information Technology Modernization Program.
International Commissions
The International Commissions account includes the U.S.-Mexico Boundary and
Water Commission (IBWC), the International Fisheries Commissions (IFC), the
International Joint Commission (IJC), the International Boundary Commission (IBC),
and the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC). The IBWC ‘s
mission is to apply rights and obligations assumed by the United States and Mexico
under numerous treaties and agreements, improve water quality of border rivers, and
resolve border sanitation problems. The mission of the IFC is to recommend to
member governments conservation and management measures for protecting marine
resources. The IJC’s mission is to develop and administer programs to help the
United States and Canada with water quality and air pollution issues along their
common border. The IBC is obligated by the Treaty of 1925 to maintain an effective
boundary line between the United States and Canada. And, established by the North
American Free Trade Agreement, the BECC’s main purpose is to help local states
and communities to develop solutions to environmental problems along the U.S.-
Mexico border. The FY2006 funding request of $70.3 million represents an increase
of 11% over the $63.3 million enacted in FY2005. The FY2006 requested increase
reflects wage and inflation increases, as well as continuation or expansion of
ongoing projects.

---

CRS-53
As passed by the House, the SSJC bill provides $63.8 million for FY2006,
slightly more than the FY2005 enacted level, but $6.5 million less than requested.
The House bill would provide $3 million less than requested for the International
Boundary and Water Commission, the United States and Mexico — $1.7 million less
for salaries and expenses than was requested and $1.3 million less for construction;
also $379,000 less than requested for American Sections, and $3.1 million less than
requested for the International Fisheries Commissions.
The Senate-passed State-Foreign Operations bill contains a total of $70 million
for International Commissions. This amount includes $28.7 million for the
International Boundary and Water Commission, the United States and Mexico (the
same as requested and $1.7 million more than the House); $5.3 million for
construction (the same as the House); $10.4 million for the American Sections,
International Commissions ($.9 million more than the House level); and $25.6
million for International Fisheries Commissions ($3.6 million above the House
level).
International Organizations and Conferences
The International Organizations and Conferences account consists of two line
items: U.S. Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) and U.S.
Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA). The FY2006 request
seeks $2,332 million for the overall account, up nearly 41% over the FY2005 level
of $1,649.7 million, including rescissions.
Contributions to International Organizations (CIO). The CIO supports
U.S. membership in numerous international and multilateral organizations that
transcends bilateral relationships and covers issues such as human rights,
environment, trade, and security. The FY2006 request level for this line item is
$1,296 million, 11.2% above the $1,166 million enacted level of FY2005. The
request would satisfy full funding needs of U.S. assessed contributions to the 47
international organizations.
The House had passed $1,166.2 million for FY2006, which was the same as the
Fy2005 enacted level, but $130.3 million below the President’s request.
Subsequently, that amount was reduced to $1,144.3 million. The Senate passed its
bill with $1,166.2 million for this account.
Contributions to International Peacekeeping (CIPA). The United States
supports multilateral peacekeeping efforts around the world through payment of its
share of the U.N. assessed peacekeeping budget. The President’s FY2006 request of
$1,035.5 million represents an increase of 114.2% from the FY2005 enacted level of
$483.5 million. In addition, the emergency FY2005 supplemental contains a request
for $780 million which represents the amount for new peacekeeping missions voted
for by the Administration in the U.N. Security Council in 2004.
H.R. 2862, as passed by the House, provides $1,035.5 million for CIPA in
FY2006, the same as the FY2006 request. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 3057
provides the same amount.

---

CRS-54
Related Appropriations
Related appropriations include those for The Asia Foundation, the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED), and the East-West and North-South Centers. The
Administration’s FY2006 request for related appropriations totals $104.9 million —
5.3% over the FY2005 enacted level of $100 million. The House passed a total of
$66.9 million, reducing both the FY2005 enacted and the President’s request for this
account by about one-third. As passed in the Senate, H.R. 3057 includes $51.7
million for related appropriations in FY2006.
The Asia Foundation. The Asia Foundation (TAF) is a private, nonprofit
organization that supports efforts to strengthen democratic processes and institutions
in Asia, open markets, and improve U.S.-Asian cooperation. It receives both
government and private sector contributions. Government funds for the Foundation
are appropriated and pass through the Department of State. In 2004 The Asia
Foundation had said it would increase its private sector fund-raising efforts and
expected to raise about $4.5 million in private funds in FY2005. Private funds in
FY2004 amounted to $3 million and now TAF projects private sector donations in
FY2005 to be $4 million. The FY2006 request of $10 million is a 22% reduction
over the FY2005 enacted funding level of $12.8 million. The organization states that
the $10 million request is necessary for the rising demands related to: 1) the front-
line countries of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Indonesia, 2) the tsunami, and 3) the
large Muslim population in Asia. The House-passed bill agrees with the President’s
FY2006 request for this account. The Senate version of H.R 3057 provides $15
million for The Asia Foundation in FY2006.
National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The National Endowment
for Democracy is a private, nonprofit organization established during the Reagan
Administration that supports programs to strengthen democratic institutions in more
than 80 countries around the world. NED proponents assert that many of its
accomplishments are possible because it is not a U.S. government agency. NED’s
critics claim that it duplicates government democracy promotion programs and could
be eliminated, or could be operated entirely through private sector funding. The
FY2006 request is for $80 million, the same level as was requested for FY2005. The
final enacted level for FY2005, however, was $59.2 million due to congressional
interest in increasing funding for the Small Business Administration (SBA). NED’s
35.1% increase requested over the FY2005 funding level would go toward programs
in Muslim countries, Sudan, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, among other
activities.
The House passed a total of $50 million for NED’s FY2006 budget. The House
report notes that NED had not followed the past direction provided by the
appropriations committee on creating a specific institute in Africa and has failed to
provide funding for coordinating groups advocating for victims of human rights
abuses. The Senate-passed bill provides $8.8 million for NED in its State
Department appropriations title, but also provides another $80 million for NED under
a new Democracy Fund in Title III of H.R. 3057, nearly $9 million more than the
President’s request.

---

CRS-55
East-West and North-South Centers. The Center for Cultural and
Technical Interchange between East and West (East-West Center), located in
Honolulu, Hawaii, was established in 1960 by Congress to promote understanding
and cooperation among the governments and peoples of the Asia/Pacific region and
the United States. The FY2006 request for the East-West Center was $13 million,
a 32.3% decline from the FY2005 enacted level of $19.2 million. The House passed
$6 million, less than half of what the President requested and $13.2 million below the
FY2005 enacted level. The Senate passed $20 million for the East-West center.
The Center for Cultural and Technical interchange between North and South
(North-South Center) is a national educational institution in Miami, Florida, closely
affiliated with the University of Miami. It promotes better relations, commerce, and
understanding among the nations of North America, South America and the
Caribbean. The North-South Center began receiving a direct subsidy from the
federal government in 1991; however, it has not received a direct appropriation since
FY2000.
The International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue Trust
Fund. The conferees added language in the FY2004 conference agreement for the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2004 to establish a permanent trust fund for the
International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue. The act provided $6.9
million for perpetual operations of the Center which is to be located in Istanbul,
Turkey. Despite the fact that the Administration did not request any FY2005 funding
for this Center, Congress provided $7.3 million for it in FY2005. The
Administration is requesting to spend $.8 million of interest and earnings from the
Trust Fund for program funding in FY2006. The House bill includes no funding for
this account. A Senate floor amendment increased funding for this account by $5
million over the committee-recommended level, providing a total of $7 million for
the Center in FY2006.
International Broadcasting
International Broadcasting, which had been a primary function of the U.S.
Information Agency (USIA) prior to 1999, now falls under an independent agency
referred to as the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The BBG includes the
Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Cuba
Broadcasting, Radio Sawa, Radio Farda, and Radio Free Asia (RFA). In addition to
the ongoing international broadcasting activities, the Administration initiated a new
U.S. Middle East Television Network — Alhurra.
The BBG’s FY2006 funding request totals $651.9 million, 10.2% above the
FY2005 level of $591.5 million. The FY2006 request includes $603.4 million for
broadcasting operations, $10.9 million for capital improvements, and $37.7 million
for Broadcasting to Cuba.
H.R. 2862, as passed by the House, provides a total of $630.9 million for
international broadcasting, $21.1 million below the President’s request, but $32
million above the current-year enacted funding. The House level includes $168.3
million for VOA, $76.2 million for RFE/RL, $27.9 million for Cuba Broadcasting,
and $30.0 million for Radio Free Asia. In addition, the House bill provides $10.9

---

CRS-56
million for Capital Improvements and $13.5 million for moving RFE/RL employees
and equipment into a new facility in FY2008.
In the Senate, H.R. 3057 provides $651.9 million for international Broadcasting,
including $37.6 million for Cuba Broadcasting.
In addition to the FY2006 funding request, the President included broadcasting
money in his FY2005 supplemental request, sent to Congress a week after the
FY2006 budget. In the supplemental, the President sought $2.5 million for
Broadcasting Capital Improvements to upgrade transmitting systems in Tajikistan.
Another $4.8 million in the supplemental request is for additional funds, beyond the
FY2006 request, for VOA, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks, and the
International Broadcasting Bureau. The enacted emergency supplemental (P.L. 109-
13) provided those funding levels.
Related Legislation
S. 600 (Lugar)/H.R. 2601 (Smith). A bill to authorize appropriations for the
Department of State and international broadcasting activities. In addition, the Senate
bill contains provisions on the Peace Corps, and foreign assistance programs for
fiscal years 2006 and 2007. The Senate bill was introduced March 10, 2005, referred
to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and reported by the Committee the same
day. (S.Rept. 109-35). The Senate bill received floor action April 6, 2005. The
House bill was introduced May 24, 2005; committee markup was held June 8, 9,
2005. House floor action occurred on July 19 and 20. The measure was passed by
the House July 20 (351-78).
Related CRS Products
CRS Report RL33000, Foreign Relations Authorization, FY2006 and FY2007: An
Overview, by Susan B. Epstein.
CRS Report RL31370, State Department and Related Agencies: FY2005
Appropriations and FY2006 Request, by Susan B. Epstein.
CRS Report RL32919, Foreign Operations (House)/State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs (Senate): FY2006 Appropriations, by Larry Nowels and
Susan B. Epstein.
CRS Issue Brief IB86116, U.N. System Funding: Congressional Issues, by Vita Bite.

---

CRS-57
Table 9. Funding for the Department of State and International
Broadcasting
($ millions in budget authority)
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005 FY2006
House
Senate
Bureau or Agency
enacted enacted b enacted c request
bill
bill
Administration of Foreign
$5,987.1 $7,007.2 $6,362.4 $6,776.1
$6,640.3
$6,733.9
Affairs
International Organizations
$1,529.7 $1,694.9 $1,649.7 $2,332.0
$2,179.8
$2,201.7
and Conferences
International Commissions
$57.1
$57.1 $63.3
$70.3
$63.8
$70.0
Related Appropriations
$70.9
$78.0
$100.0
$104.7
$66.9
$51.7
Subtotal: State Department a
$7,644.8 $8,837.2 $8,174.7 $9,283.3
$8,950.7
$9,057.3
International Broadcasting
$533.8
$591.5
$591.5
$651.9
$630.9
$651.9
Title IV Total
$8,178.6 $9,428.7 $8,766.9 $9,935.2
$9,581.6
$9,709.2
Source: U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations.
a. In addition to appropriations, State has authority to spend certain collected fees from
machine readable visas, expedited export fees, etc. The amount for such fees for
FY2004 is estimated at $687.5 million and for FY2005 the enacted level is $661.5
million, the request for FY2006 is $672.1 million.
b. FY2004 numbers include the emergency supplemental (P.L. 108-106 and P.L. 108-287)
and reflect both rescissions in the Consolidated Appropriation Act of FY2004, P.L.
108-199.
c. FY2005 numbers reflect the two rescissions in the Consolidated Appropriation Act of
FY2005, P.L. 108-447.
Independent Agencies
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)26
The EEOC enforces laws banning employment discrimination based on race,
color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. The Commission’s workload has
increased substantially since it was created under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, due to passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Civil
Rights Act of 1991 as well as to employees’ greater awareness of their rights.
The Administration requested an FY2006 appropriation of $331.2 million for
the EEOC, an increase of $4.4 million from the $326.8 million (including
rescissions) provided by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 108-447).
Notably, $33 million would be devoted to payments for Fair Employment Practices
Agencies (FEPAs), which are state and local bodies with which the agency has work-
sharing agreements to address workplace discrimination within their jurisdictions.
This is the amount of payments to FEPAs to which Congress has, in prior years,
raised the EEOC’s request. As well as a $441,000 increase for state and local
26 This section was prepared by Linda Levine, Specialist in Labor Economics, Domestic
Social Policy Division.

---

CRS-58
contracts, the Commission asked for an additional $5.5 million to cover the staff’s
total compensation and an additional $400,000 to cover rental (including security)
payments. The EEOC would reduce general operating expenses (e.g., printing,
reproduction, postage, and travel) by $977,000 and information technology
expenditures by $1 million to offset the aforementioned increases.
The House and Senate, following the Appropriations Committees’
recommendations, would provide the EEOC with the level of funding the
Administration requested ($331.2 million, including $33 million for FEPAs). H.R.
2862 includes prior year language prohibiting the Commission from repositioning,
restructuring, or reorganizing without advance notification of the Committee.
S.Rept. 109-88 further directs the Commission to submit to Congress — before
implementation of any repositioning, restructuring, or reorganization plan — a
comprehensive analysis (conducted for each district, field, area, and local office) of
current investigations and enforcement levels, and the full impact of such plan on all
core services. It also specifies that a repositioning plan should neither reduce the
salary of EEOC employees nor the number of officers or employees serving as
mediators, investigators, or attorneys at any Commission office. In addition, H.Rept.
109-118 requires the agency to continue submitting quarterly reports on projected and
actual spending levels by function and to highlight any changes due to repositioning
activities.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)27
The Federal Communications Commission, created in 1934, is an independent
agency charged with regulation and interstate and foreign communication of radio,
television, wire, cable, and satellite. The FCC performs four major functions:
spectrum allocation, creating rules to promote fair competition and protect consumers
where required by market conditions, authorization of service, and enforcement.
Among its responsibilities are licensing of communications operators; interpretation
and enforcement of rules, regulations, and authorizations regarding competition;
publication and dissemination of consumer information services; and management
and allocation of the use of the electromagnetic spectrum. The FCC obtains the
majority of its funding through the collection of regulatory fees pursuant to Title I,
section 9 of the Communications Act of 1934; therefore, its direct appropriation is
considerably less than its overall budget.
The Bush Administration requested $304,057,000 for the FY2006 FCC budget,
with $4,823,000 in direct appropriations and $299,234,000 derived from offsetting
fee collections. The FCC’s FY2005 budget was $281,098,000.
The House of Representatives passed a budget of $289,771,000 for the salaries
and expenses of the FCC. Of that amount, $288,771,000 would be derived from
offsetting fee collections, with a direct appropriation of $1,000,000. The
recommendation allows:
27 This section was written by Patty Figliola, Specialist in Telecommunications and Internet
Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division.

---

CRS-59
! Up to $4,000 for official reception and representation expenses
! Purchase of uniforms and acquisition of vehicles
! Special counsel fees
! Collection of $288,771,000 in section 9 fees
! Fees in excess of $288,771,000 to be available in FY2007.
The Senate passed a budget of $297,370,000 for the salaries and expenses of the
FCC. Of that amount, $296,370,000 would be derived from offsetting fee
collections, with a direct appropriation of $1,000,000. The recommendation
maintains the limitation of $85,000,000 in auction proceeds that may be used for
competitive bidding programs. The recommendation includes the following:
! $9,900,000 for land and structure
! $500,000 for improvement and care of grounds and repair to
buildings
! $4,000 for official reception and representation expenses
! Purchase and hire of motor vehicles
! Special counsel fees.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)28
For FY2006, the Administration is requesting a program level of $211 million
for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), an increase of slightly more than $5.5
million or 2.7 percent over current funding. The House-passed bill provides the FTC
with $211 million for FY2006, which is $6.7 million above the current year funding
and the same as the Administration’s request. For its part, the Senate followed the
recommendation of the Appropriations Committee which set funding for the agency
for FY2006 at the $211 million level. Of the amounts provided, $116 is from Hart-
Scott-Rodino pre-merger filing fees and $23 million from Do-Not-Call fees. The
total amount of direct appropriations for FY2006 is therefore $72 million.
Last year (FY2005), the Administration requested 205.4 million for the agency.
The House approved a program level of $203.4 million, an increase of $17.9 million
over FY2004 funding. The Senate Appropriations Committee, for its part,
recommended $207.7 million for FY2005. The conference agreement provided the
FTC with $205.4 million (the same as requested). More specifically, of the amounts
provided, $101 million is coming from fees for Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger
notification filings, $21.9 million from Do-Not-Call provisions of the Telemarketing
Sales Rule, and Congress has provided a direct appropriation of $82.5 million.
More specifically for FY2006, the Administration is requesting that the program
level of $211 million for the FTC be funded by$72 million from the General Fund
of the U.S. Treasury and offsetting collections from two sources: $116 million from
fees for Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger notification filings; and $23 million from fees
28 This section was written by Bruce Mulock, Specialist in Government and Business,
Government and Finance Division.

---

CRS-60
sufficient to implement and enforce new Do-Not-Call provisions of the
Telemarketing Sales Rule.
The FTC, an independent agency, is responsible for enforcing a number of
federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. In recent years the FTC has used pre-
merger filing fees collected under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act to mostly or entirely
fund its operations. By way of an historical footnote, for FY2000 through FY2002,
zero ($0) direct appropriations were required since the entire program level was
covered by a combination of fees and prior year collections.
Legal Services Corporation (LSC)29
The LSC is a private, non-profit, federally-funded corporation that provides
grants to local offices which, in turn, provide legal assistance to low-income people
in civil (non-criminal) cases. The LSC has been controversial since its incorporation
in the early 1970s, and has been operating without authorizing legislation since 1980.
There have been ongoing debates over the adequacy of funding for the agency, and
the extent to which certain types of activities are appropriate for federally funded
legal aid attorneys to undertake. In annual appropriations laws, Congress
traditionally has included legislative provisions restricting the activities of LSC-
funded grantees, such as prohibiting any lobbying activities or prohibiting
representation in certain types of cases.
P.L. 108-447, the consolidated appropriations for FY2005, among other things
continued funding for the LSC at a level of $335.3 million. The LSC FY2005
appropriation of $335.3 million includes $316.6 million for basic field programs and
required independent audits; $13.0 million for management and administration; $1.3
million for client self-help and information technology; $2.6 million for the inspector
general; and $1.8 million in grants to offset losses stemming from the 2000 census-
based reallocations. It also included existing provisions restricting the activities of
LSC grantees. In addition, it allows the LSC to spend up to $1 million of prior-year
funding balances for a school student loan repayment pilot program. P.L. 108-447
also authorized a 0.8% across-the-board government-wide rescission and an
additional 0.54% uniform rescission applicable only to funding for the Commerce,
Justice, State, and Related Agencies appropriation (which includes the LSC), thereby
lowering the FY2005 LSC appropriation to $330.8 million.
For FY2006, the Bush Administration requested $318.3 million for the LSC.
This is $12.5 million (almost 4%) below the FY2005 LSC appropriation (after the
rescissions). The FY2006 budget request for the LSC includes $299.2 million for
basic field programs and required independent audits, $13.4 million for management
and administration, $3.5 million for client self-help and information technology, and
$2.2 million for the Office of the Inspector General. The budget request also
includes existing provisions restricting the activities of LSC grantees.
29 This section was prepared by Carmen Solomon-Fears, Specialist in Social Legislation,
Domestic Social Policy Division.

---

CRS-61
On June 16, 2005, the House passed the Appropriations Committee’s
recommended funding level of $330.8 million for the LSC for FY2006 (H.R. 2862;
see H.Rept. 109-118). This is the same amount as the LSC FY2005 appropriation
after the rescissions; and $12.5 million above the Bush Administration‘s FY2006
budget request for the LSC. The House appropriation for the LSC includes $313.7
million for basic field programs and required independent audits, $12.8 million for
management and administration, $1.8 million for client self-help and information
technology, and $2.5 million for its Office of the Inspector General. The House bill
also includes existing provisions restricting the activities of LSC grantees.
Moreover, the House bill includes text that encourages the LSC to proceed with the
planned pilot loan repayment assistance plan for attorneys (no funding) and advises
the LSC to reduce its rent for its office space (by eliminating some office space and
negotiating a more competitive cost per square foot).
On June 23, 2005, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $324.5
million for the LSC for FY2006 (S.Rept. 109-88). The Committee’s
recommendation is $6.3 million below the FY2005 LSC appropriation and $6.3
million above the Administration’s FY2006 budget request for the LSC. The Senate
Committee recommendation includes existing provisions restricting the activities of
LSC grantees. On September 15, 2005, the Senate passed an amended version of the
Appropriation Committee’s recommendation. It includes $358.5 million for the LSC
for FY2006 (of which $8 million is for basic field programs providing legal
assistance to victims of Hurricane Katrina). (S.Amdt. 1659 to H.R. 2862 introduced
by Senator Harkin on September 9th increased LSC funding from $324.5 million to
$358.5 million.)
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)30
The SEC administers and enforces federal securities laws to protect investors
from fraud and to maintain fair and orderly markets. The SEC's budget is set through
the normal appropriations process, but funds for the agency come from fees on sales
of stock, new issues of stocks and bonds, corporate mergers, and other securities
market transactions. When these fees are collected, they go to a special offsetting
account available to appropriators, not to the Treasury's general fund.
For FY2005, the Administration requested $913.0 million, an increase of 13%
over FY2004. The House and Senate both approved the amount requested by the
Administration. The Conference Committee approved the $913.0 million, but that
was to include $56 million in prior-year unobligated balances. Thus, the new
appropriation for FY2005 was $856 million, to be covered by current-year fee
collections.
The Administration's request for FY2006 is $888.1 million, a decrease of 2.7%
from FY2005. Of that total, $25.0 million will be from prior-year unobligated
balances, and the remaining $863.1 will come from offsetting fee collections. Thus,
no direct appropriation will be necessary.
30 This section was prepared by Mark Jickling, Specialist in Public Finance, Government and
Finance Division.

---

CRS-62
The House approved an amount equal to the request: $888.1 million, of which
$25.0 million is to come from prior-year unobligated balances, and the remainder
from current year fee collections.
The Senate also approved the requested amount of $888.1 million (including the
$25.0 million from prior-year balances), with the entire amount to be derived from
fee collections.
Small Business Administration (SBA)31
For FY2005, the Administration requested a total appropriation of $678.4 million for
the Small Business Administration (SBA), a reduction of $32.9 million, or about
4.6%, from the agency’s current funding level. The FY2005 request includes $326.3
million for Salaries and Expenses (S&E). The House approved $742.8 million, $31.5
million more than the agency’s FY2004 appropriation. The House-approved FY2005
appropriation included $315.4 million for S&E, which was $10.9 million less than
the President’s Budget recommendation and approximately $7 million less than its
FY2004 appropriation. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a total
FY2005 appropriation of $761.9 million, including $357.7 million for S&E.
During the debate on the FY2005 CJS bill several amendments were adopted
on the House floor, including one by Chairman of the Small Business Committee,
Donald A. Manzullo, which would have provided a $79 million subsidy for the
SBA’s 7(a) loan program.
The conference report provides the SBA with $579.5 million for FY2005,
including $322.3 million for S&E. While this is substantially less than the
Administration requested — and the House and Senate recommended — it is not will
not result in a reduction in the agency’s guaranteed loan program levels. It is not
clear, however, what the economic effect will be. Proponents for making the
agency’s largest guaranteed loan program — the so-called 7(a) program — “self-
funding”maintain that the subsidy costs for the programs can be offset by charging
slightly higher fees to borrowers and lenders. Opponents express worry that shifting
cost burdens to lenders will reduce the number of lenders willing to participate in the
program. It may be that only time will tell.
For FY2004, the President’s budget request had included $797.9 million for the
SBA. The House approved $745.6 million for the agency, which would have been
roughly a 1.9% increase over the FY2003 amount. The House-approved version
included $326.6 million for S&E, about $33.6 million below the Administration
request. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended and the Senate
approved $751.7 million for the agency, including $332.4 million for S&E. The
conference agreement provided the SBA with a total appropriation of $711.3 million
for FY2004, including recisions.
31 This section was written by Bruce Mulock, Specialist in Government and Business,
Government and Finance Division.

---

CRS-63
The SBA is an independent federal agency created by the Small Business Act
of 1953. Although the agency administers a number of programs intended to assist
small firms, arguably its three most important functions are to guarantee —
principally through the agency’s Section 7(a) general business loan program —
business loans made by banks and other financial institutions; to make long-term,
low-interest loans to small businesses that are victims of hurricanes, earthquakes,
other physical disasters, and acts of terrorism; and to serve as an advocate for small
business within the federal government.
State Justice Institute (SJI)32
The State Justice Institute (SJI) is a private, nonprofit corporation that makes
grants to state courts and funds research, technical assistance, and informational
projects aimed at improving the quality of judicial administration in state courts
across the United States. Under the terms of its enabling legislation, SJI is authorized
to present its request directly to Congress, apart from the President’s budget. SJI
requested $5 million for FY2006, compared with $2.6 million appropriated for
FY2005. By contrast, the Bush administration’s FY2006 budget request, like its
budgets for the previous three years, proposed eliminating federal funding for the
institute altogether. As recommended by its Appropriations Committee, the House,
in passing H.R. 2862, has approved $2 million in FY2006 funding for the institute.
The Senate, on the other hand, has approved $5 million, the same amount as
requested by its Appropriations Committee, and as requested by the Institute.
In reporting H.R. 2862, the House Appropriations Committee (in H.Rept. 109-
118, p. 154) stated that it understood that SJI “has been unable to generate stable
sources of non-Federal funding” and that the SJI has contacted bar associations and
court organizations as possible alternative sources of funding. However, the
committee noted, “these groups are not inclined to contribute to operations of the SJI
beyond providing matching grant funds for individual projects.” For this reason, the
committee said, it has continued to recommend funding for SJI even though the
President’s FY2006 request did not. The committee commended SJI for beginning
to work with the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) on issues
involving state courts and encouraged SJI to continue to seeking funds from OJP
grant programs. (In addition to SJI’s FY2005 appropriation of $2.6 million, funds
transferred from OJP increased total funding available to SJI in FY2005 to $3.4
million.)
In reporting its version of H.R. 2862, the Senate Appropriations Committee (in
S.Rept. 109-88) noted simply that SJI was created in 1984 “to further the
development and adoption of improved judicial administration in State courts.”
Over the past four fiscal years, Congress has approved funding for SJI at a level
significantly below previous levels. For FY1999, 2000, and 2001, SJI received an
annual appropriation of $6.85 million, compared with $3.0 million in both FY2002
and FY2003, $2.2 million in FY2004, and $2.6 million in FY2005. For their part,
32 This title was written by D. Steven Rutkus, Specialist in American National Government,
Government and Finance Division.

---

CRS-64
conferees for the CJS appropriations bills in the last four fiscal years have
encouraged the institute to obtain funds from sources other than Congress. In
response to specific directives from conferees for the FY2002 and FY2003 CJS bills,
SJI explored the availability of support from private donors, state and local agencies,
state and local bar associations, and state court systems, but was unable to secure
funding from any of them.
For FY2004 and FY2005, conferees on the CJS bill suggested a somewhat
different approach, encouraging SJI to apply for funding from programs in the
Department of Justice (DOJ) which support state court programs. Accordingly,
during the last two fiscal years, pursuant to an agreement between SJI and DOJ, the
latter has transferred $1.2 million to the institute to support state court projects
educating judges about rape, sexual assault, and other violence against women.
Although Congress, as noted, has scaled back the appropriations level for SJI
in recent years, it has, in a separate action, authorized multi-year funding for SJI at
a significantly higher level. On September 30, 2004, the Senate, by unanimous
consent, passed H.R. 2714 (State Justice Institute Reauthorization Act of 2004),
authorizing $7 million in funding for SJI annually for FY2005 through FY2008. In
October 2004, the House agreed to the Senate-amended version of H.R. 2714, and
the bill was signed by the President into law (P.L. 108-372). Earlier, in its report on
H.R. 2714 (H.Rept. 108-285, p. 2), the House Judiciary Committee endorsed SJI’s
continued operation. “Sustaining the Institute’s operations,” the committee said,
... is necessary because the states, as a practical matter, devote the great majority
of their judicial funding to address personnel, construction, and maintenance
needs. They simply lack the resources to develop programs that improve the
administrative efficiency and overall productivity of their courts.
SJI serves a Federal interest precisely because it makes state courts more
efficient. State courts are the primary fora in which the vast majority of lawsuits
are resolved. In fulfilling that mission, state courts address Federal constitutional
and statutory issues every day....
In sum if litigants largely resolve their legal differences at the state level —
including those that involve Federal issues — then Congress promotes a Federal
interest by supporting SJI.
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom33
The Commission on International Religious Freedom was created by the
International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-292) as a federal government
commission to monitor religious freedom abroad and to advise the President, the
Secretary of State, and Congress on promoting religious freedom and combating
intolerance in other countries. For FY2005, the Administration requested $3.0
million for the commission and H.R. 4754 as passed by the House included that
amount. The House Appropriations Committee in its report commended the
33 This section was written by Vita Bite, Specialist in International Relations, Foreign
Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.

---

CRS-65
commission for its efforts to promote religious freedom and urged the commission
and the State Department to continue work on developing an Index on Religious
Freedom that may be used to assess progress within regions and in specific countries.
The Senate Appropriations Committee in reporting S. 2809 (S.Rept. 108-344) did not
include any funds for the commission. As finally enacted as part of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, P.L.108-447, $3.0 million was appropriated for the
commission. The conference agreement also included language allowing the
commission to procure temporary services for a study of the right to freedom of
religion in North Korea.
For FY2006, the Administration requested $3.0 million for the commission.
Sec. 808 of S. 600, the Foreign Relations Authorizations for FY2006 and 2007, as
introduced included $3.0 million for the commission for FY2006 and such sums as
may be necessary for FY2007and the House measure, H.R. 2601, as agreed to by the
House Committee on International Relations authorized $3.3 million for each of
fiscal years 2006 through 2011. H.R. 2862, as passed by the House, appropriated
$3.2 million for the commission for FY2006. In its report (H.Rept. 109-118) the
Appropriations Committee urged the commission and the State Department to
continue work on developing an Index on Religious Freedom. The Senate
Appropriations Committee report (S.Rept. 109-96) recommends $1 million for this
account in FY2006.
U.S. Institute of Peace34
The U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) was established in 1984 by the U.S. Institute
of Peace Act, Title XVII of the Defense Authorization Act of 1985 (P.L. 98-525).
USIP’s mission is to promote international peace through such activities as
educational programs, conferences and workshops, professional training, applied
research, and facilitating dialogue in the United States and abroad. Prior to the
FY2005 budget, USIP funding came from the Labor, HHS appropriation. In the
FY2005 budget process, it was transferred to the Commerce, Justice, State and
related agencies appropriation primarily for relevancy reasons. The FY2003 actual
budget was $16.3 million and the FY2004 estimate is $17.1 million. Also in
FY2004, USIP received $10 million within the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan
(P.L. 108-106) and a $3 million grant from the Department of State to facilitate the
Philippines peace process. Congress enacted $121.9 million for the Institute of Peace
in FY2005. In addition to its appropriation of $23 million, it received $100 million
(before rescission) for facility construction (CAA, Div. J, Sec.118).
For the FY2006 request, the organization is requesting $21.85 million. The
House bill (H.R. 2862) provides $22.9 million for USIP for FY2006. The Senate
State, Foreign Operations Appropriation bill (H.R. 3057) provides $21.9 million for
USIP in FY2006.
34 This section was written by Susan B. Epstein, Specialist in Foreign Affairs and Trade,
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.

---

CRS-66
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights35
The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), established by the Civil
Rights Act of 1957, investigates allegations of citizens that they were denied the right
to vote based on color, race, religion, or national origin; studies and gathers
information on legal developments constituting a denial of the equal protection of the
laws; assesses federal laws and policies in the area of civil rights; and submits reports
on its findings to the President and Congress when the Commission or the President
deem it appropriate.
With passage of H.R. 2862 on September 15, 2006, the Senate would provide
$9 million in FY2006 for the Commission on Civil Rights, the same funding level
that the House approved and slightly below the President’s budget request.
On June 23, 2005, the Senate CJS Appropriations Committee had reported out
H.R. 2862 (S.Rept. 109-88). The Senate CJS Committee recommended FY2006
appropriations of $9 million for the Commission on Civil Rights, $25,000 above
FY2005 funding level and $96,000 below the President’s FY2006 request. On June
16, 2005, the House passed H.R. 2862, which would provide FY2006 appropriations
of $9 million for the Commission. For FY2006, President Bush requests $9.1 million
for the Commission. For the Commission on Civil Rights, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 108-447) provided $9.1 million, the same amount
requested by the Administration. In FY2004, the Commission received an
appropriation of $9 million.
Both the House and Senate CJS Appropriations Committee reports addressed
financial and management problems at the Commission. Senate CJS Committee
report language expressed concern over the Commission’s “insolvency and
documented financial mismanagement.” It urged the Commission to continue to
enact reform and to prepare two written reports by September 30, 2005 and January
3l, 2006 on the implementation of GAO recommendations. The House CJS
Appropriations Committee report (H.Rept. 109-118) language instructed the
Commission to rectify the financial management problems of the Commission and
to prepare a report describing proposed structural and management changes for the
Commission no later than September 15, 2005.
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom36
The Commission on International Religious Freedom was created by the
International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-292) as a federal government
commission to monitor religious freedom abroad and to advise the President, the
Secretary of State, and Congress on promoting religious freedom and combating
intolerance in other countries. For FY2005, the Administration requested $3.0
35 This section was written by Garrine P. Laney, Analyst in Social Legislation, Domestic
Social Policy Division.
36 This section was written by Vita Bite, Specialist in International Relations, Foreign
Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.

---

CRS-67
million for the commission and H.R. 4754 as passed by the House included that
amount. The House Appropriations Committee in its report commended the
commission for its efforts to promote religious freedom and urged the commission
and the State Department to continue work on developing an Index on Religious
Freedom that may be used to assess progress within regions and in specific countries.
The Senate Appropriations Committee in reporting S. 2809 (S.Rept. 108-344) did not
include any funds for the commission. As finally enacted as part of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, P.L.108-447, $3.0 million was appropriated for the
commission. The conference agreement also included language allowing the
commission to procure temporary services for a study of the right to freedom of
religion in North Korea.
For FY2006, the Administration requested $3.0 million for the commission.
Sec. 808 of S. 600, the Foreign Relations Authorizations for FY2006 and 2007, as
introduced included $3.0 million for the commission for FY2006 and such sums as
may be necessary for FY2007and the House measure, H.R. 2601, as agreed to by the
House Committee on International Relations authorized $3.3 million for each of
fiscal years 2006 through 2011. H.R. 2862, as passed by the House, appropriated
$3.2 million for the commission for FY2006. In its report (H.Rept. 109-118) the
Appropriations Committee urged the commission and the State Department to
continue work on developing an Index on Religious Freedom. The Senate
recommends $1 million for this account in FY2006.
U.S. Institute of Peace37
The U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) was established in 1984 by the U.S. Institute
of Peace Act, Title XVII of the Defense Authorization Act of 1985 (P.L. 98-525).
USIP’s mission is to promote international peace through such activities as
educational programs, conferences and workshops, professional training, applied
research, and facilitating dialogue in the United States and abroad. Prior to the
FY2005 budget, USIP funding came from the Labor, HHS appropriation. In the
FY2005 budget process, it was transferred to the Commerce, Justice, State and
related agencies appropriation primarily for relevancy reasons. The FY2003 actual
budget was $16.3 million and the FY2004 estimate is $17.1 million. Also in
FY2004, USIP received $10 million within the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan
(P.L. 108-106) and a $3 million grant from the Department of State to facilitate the
Philippines peace process. Congress enacted $121.9 million for the Institute of Peace
in FY2005. In addition to its appropriation of $23 million, it received $100 million
(before rescission) for facility construction (CAA, Div. J, Sec.118). For the FY2006
request, the organization is requesting $21.85 million. The House bill (H.R. 2862)
provides $22.9 million for USIP for FY2006. The Senate State, Foreign Operations
Appropriation bill (H.R. 3057) provides $21.9 million for USIP in FY2006.
37 This section was written by Susan B. Epstein, Specialist in Foreign Affairs and Trade,
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.

---

CRS-68
Related CRS Products
CRS Report 96-649, Small Business Administration: Overview and Issues, by Bruce
K. Mulock.
CRS Report RS20418, Funding for Major Civil Rights Enforcement Agencies, by
Garrine Laney.
CRS Report RS20204, Securities Fees and SEC Pay Parity, by Mark Jickling.
CRS Report 95-178, Legal Services Corporation: Basic Facts and Current Status,
by Carmen Solomon-Fears.
CRS Report RL32589, The Federal Communications Commission: Current Structure
and its Role in the Changing Telecommunications Landscape, by Patty Figliola.
Related Legislation
H.R. 230 (Sweeney)
To amend the Small Business Act to direct the Administrator of the Small
Business Administration to establish a program to provide regulatory compliance
assistance to small business concerns, and for other purposes. Reported by Small
Business Committee (H.Rept. 109-208).
H.R. 527 (Brady) S. 139 (Kerry)
Vocational and Technical Entrepreneurship Development Act of 2005 - Amends
the Small Business Act to direct the Administraton of the Small Business
Administration to establish a program under which the Administrator shall make
grants to, or may enter into cooperative agreements with, State small business
development centers to provide, on a statewide basis, technical assistance to
secondary schools, or to post-secondary vocational or technical schools, for the
development and implementation of curricula designed to promote vocational and
technical entrepreneurship. H.R. 527 reported by the Small Business Committee on
July 28, 2005 (H.Rept. 108-207)
H.R. 2982 (Wynn)
To require the Federal Communications Commission to reorganize the bureaus
of the Commission in order to better carry out their regulatory functions. Introduced
and referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce on June 17, 2005.

---

CRS-69
Table 10. FY2006 Funding for CJS Related Agencies
($ millions in budget authority)
FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2006 FY2006
Bureau or Agency
enacted
enacted
request
House
Senate
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
$9.1
$9.0
$9.1
$9.0
$9.0
U.S. Commission on International
Religious Freedom a
$3.0
$3.0
$3.0
$3.2
$1.0
Equal Employment Opportunity
$324.9
$326.8
$331.2
$331.2
$331.2
Commission (EEOC)
Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) b
$1.0
$1.0
$4.8
$1.0
$1.0
Federal Trade Commission
$50.4
$81.4
$72.0
$72.0
$72.0
Legal Services Corporation
$335.3
$330.8
$318.3
$330.8
$358.5
Securities and Exchange
Commissionc
$691.5
$844.6
$863.1
$863.1
$863.1
Small Business Administration
$711.3 $1,500.8
$593.0
$655.3
$621.6
State Justice Instituted
$2.2
$2.6
$0.0 $2.0
$5.0
U.S. Institute of Peacea
$27.1
$121.9
$21.9
$22.9
$21.9
Other e
$14.2
$13.1
$12.9
$15.6
$4.0
Total Title V
$2,170.0 $3,235.0 $2,229.3 $2,306.1 $2,288.3
Source: U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Committees on Appropriations; CRS estimates.
a. Senate funding for these agencies are through the State/Foreign Operations Appropriations bill.
They are not included in the Senate total for this table.
b. The FCC is partially funded by offsetting fee collections.
c. The SEC is fully funded by transaction fees and securities registration fees.
d. Under the terms of its enabling legislation, the State Justice Institute (SJI) is authorized to present
its budget request directly to Congress. While the President’s FY2006 budget proposed nothing
for SJI, the Institute requested $5.0 million for itself.
e. “Other” includes agencies receiving appropriations of $3.0 million or less in FY2005. These
agencies include the Commission for the Preservation of American Heritage Abroad;
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; Antitrust Modernization Commission; the
Marine Mammal Commission; the Congressional/Executive Commission on China; the National
Veterans Business Development Corp; the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review
Commission; U.S. Senate-China Interparliamentary Group, and the HELP Commission are
funded by the House SSJC bill. Of these, only the Antitrust Modernization Commission; the
National Veterans Business Development Corp; and the Marine Mammal Commission are
funded through the Senate CJS bill.

---

CRS-70
Appendix. SSJC/CJS Appropriations by Department, FY2006
($ millions in budget authority)
FY2006
FY2006
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2006
Bureau or Agency
House-
Senate-
Enacted
Enacted
Request
Enacted
passed
passed
Title I: Department of Justice
General Administration
$1,316.6
$1,424.3
$1,977.3
$1,834.8
$1,860.0
Legal Activities
$3,078.5
$3,180.9
$3,331.3
$3,327.4
$3,239.0
Interagency Law Enforcement
$550.6
$553.5
$661.9
$506.9
$440.2
Federal Bureau of Investigation
$4,590.7
$5,145.6
$5,701.2
$5,761.2
$5,296.0
Drug Enforcement Administration
$1,584.5
$1,631.2
$1,694.2
$1,716.2
$1,649.1
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
$827.3
$878.5
$1,043.6
$923.6
$923.7
Federal Prison System
$4,811.2
$4,779.8
$4,755.1
$4,969.1
$4,889.6
Office of Justice Programs
$3,164.9
$2,993.1
$1,568.8
$2,319.9
$2,584.5
Other
$26.0
$25.5
$11.4
$400.8
$320.4
Rescission
($100.0)
—
($62.0)
Title I Total:
$19,850.3
$20,612.3
$20,682.8
$21,759.9
$21,202.5
Title II: Department of Commerce and Related Agencies
International Trade Administration
$378.1
$388.3
$395.9
$393.9
$396.6
Bureau of Industry and Security
$67.5
$67.5
$77.0
$77.0
$77.0
Economic Development
$315.3
$284.1
$26.6
$227.6
$524.9
Administration
Minority Business Development
$28.6
$29.5
$30.7
$30.0
$30.7
Agency
Economic and Statistical Analysis
$74.2
$78.9
$85.3
$80.3
$81.3
Economic Development Challenge
$3.710.0
Grant
Bureau of the Census
$624.2
$744.8
$877.4
$812.2
$727.4
National Telecommunications and
$51.1
$38.7
$23.5
$19.7
$57.3
Information Administration
Patent and Trademark Officea
($1,222.5)
($1,544.8)
($1,703.0)
($1,703.3)
($1,703.3)
Technology Administration
$6.3
$6.5
$4.2
$6.5
—
National Institute of Standards and
$621.5
$699.2
$532.0
$548.7
$844.5
Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
$3,701.0
$3,907.9
$3,581.2
$3,379.0
$4,481.8
Administration
Departmental Management
$67.7
$78.7
$106.3
$70.2
$77.4
Other
$8.1
$209.1
—
—
—
Department of Commerce Subtotal:
$5,943.5.
$6,533.1
$9,450.0
$5,645.1
$7,298.9
U.S. Trade Representative
$41.6
$41.0
$38.8
$44.8
$41.0
International Trade Commission
$57.7
$60.8
$65.3
$62.8
$62.8
National Intellectual Property Law
—
$2.0
—
—
—
Enforcement Coordinating Council
Related Agencies Subtotal:
$99.3
$103.8
$104.1
$107.6
$103.8
Rescission
($100.0)
($35.0)
—
Title II Total:
$5,942.8
$6,636.9
$9,554.1
$5,752.7
$7,402.7

---

CRS-71
FY2006
FY2006
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2006
Bureau or Agency
House-
Senate-
Enacted
Enacted
Request
Enacted
passed
passed
Title III: Science
NASA
$15,378.0
$16,196.4
$16,456.4
$16,471.0
$16,396.0
National Science Foundation
$5,652.0
$5,472.8
$5,605.0
$5,643.4
$5,531.0
Exec Office of the President
$7.0
$6.3
$5.6
$5.6
$5.6
Title III Total:
$21,037.0
$21,675.5
$22,067.0
$22,120.0
$21,932.6
Title IV: Department of State
Administration of Foreign Affairs
$7,007.2
$6,362.4
$6,776.1
$6,640.3
$6,733.9
International Organizations and
$1,694.9 $1,649.7
$2,332.0
$2,179.8.
$2,201.7
Conferences
International Commissions
$57.1 $63.3
$70.3
$63.8
$70.0
Related Appropriations
$78.0
$100.0
$104.9
$66.9
$51.7
Subtotal: State Departmentb
$8,837.2
$8,175.4
$9,283.3
$8,950.7
$9,057.3
International Broadcasting
$591.5
$591.5
$651.9
$630.9
$651.9
Title IV Total
$9,428.7
$8,766.9
$9,935.2
$9,581.6
$9,709.2
Title V: Related Agencies
Commission on Civil Rights
$9.1
$9.0
$9.1
$9.0
$9.0
U.S. Commission on International
Religious Freedom c
$3.0
$3.0
$3.0
$3.2
$1.0
Equal Employment Opportunity
$324.9
$326.8
$331.2
$331.2
$331.2
Commission (EEOC)
Federal Communications
Commission (FCC)d
$1.0
$1.0
$4.8
$1.0
$1.0
Federal Trade Commission
$50.4
$81.4
$72.0
$72.0
$72.0
Legal Services Corporation
$335.3
$330.8
$318.3
$330.8
$358.5
Securities and Exchange
Commissione
$691.5
$844.6
$863.1
$863.1
$863.1
Small Business Administration
$711.3
$1,500.8
$593.0
$655.3
$621.6
State Justice Institutef
$2.2
$2.6
—
$2.0
$5.0
U.S. Institute of Peace c
$27.1
$121.9
$21.9
$22.9
$21.9
Otherg
$14.2
$13.1
$12.9
$15.6
4.0
Total Title V
$2,170.0
$3,235.0
$2,229.3
$2,306.1
$2,288.3
Title VII: Rescissionsg
Total Title VII Rescissions
($307.2)
($271.1)
($52.2)
($222.0)
($196.5)
Grand Total (in Bill)sh
($42,242.0)
$60,655.5
$64,416.2
$61,517.2
$52,826.1
Source: U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Committees on Appropriations; CRS estimates.
Notes:
a. The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees. The fees collected, but not obligated during the
current year, are available for obligation in the following fiscal year, and do not count toward the appropriation totals.
Only newly appropriated funds count toward the annual appropriation totals.
b. In addition to appropriations, State has authority to spend certain collected fees from machine readable visas, expedited
export fees, etc. The amount for such fees for FY2004 is estimated to be $687.5 million and the FY2005 appropriation
includes $661.5 million in fee collections.
c. Senate funding for these agencies are through the State/Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. They are not included in the Senate
total for this table.

---

CRS-72
d. The FCC is partially funded by fee collections.
e. The SEC is fully funded by transaction fees and securities registration fees.
f. Under the terms of its enabling legislation, the State Justice Institute (SJI) is authorized to present its budget request
directly to Congress. While the President’s FY2006 budget proposed nothing for SJI, the Institute requested $5.0
million for itself.
g. “Other” includes agencies receiving appropriations of $3.0 million or less in FY2005. These agencies include the Commission for the
Preservation of American Heritage Abroad; Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; Antitrust Modernization
Commission; the Marine Mammal Commission; the Congressional/Executive Commission on China; the National Veterans Business
Development Corp; the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission; U.S. Senate-China Interparliamentary Group, and
the HELP Commission are funded by the House SSJC bill. Of these, only the Antitrust Modernization Commission; the National
Veterans Business Development Corp; and the Marine Mammal Commission are funded through the Senate CJS bill and reflected
in the Senate total. The others are funded by the State/Foreign Operations Appropriations legislation.
g. Rescissions are listed for informational purposes. Grand total does not reflect rescissions.
h. Senate Grand total does not reflect State or State-related agency appropriations. These totals are subject to revision.

---