Order Code RL30343
Continuing Resolutions: FY2008 Action and
Brief Overview of Recent Practices
Updated January 9, 2008
Sandy Streeter
Analyst in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Continuing Resolutions: FY2008 Action and
Brief Overview of Recent Practices
Summary
Most of the operations of federal departments and agencies are funded each year
through the enactment of several regular appropriations acts. Since these bills are
annual, expiring at the end of the fiscal year, regular bills for the subsequent fiscal
year must be enacted by October 1. Final action on some of the regular
appropriations bills, however, are typically delayed beyond the deadline. When this
occurs, the affected departments and agencies are generally funded under temporary
continuing appropriations acts until the final funding decisions become law. Because
continuing appropriations acts are, for the most part, enacted in the form of joint
resolutions, such acts are referred to as continuing resolutions (or CRs).
CRs may be divided into two categories — those that provide interim (or
temporary) funding and those that provide funds through the end of the fiscal year.
Interim continuing resolutions provide funding until a specific date or until the
enactment of the applicable regular appropriations acts, if earlier. Full-year
continuing resolutions provide funding in lieu of one or more regular appropriations
bills through the end of the fiscal year.
Over the past 35 years, the nature, scope, and duration of continuing resolutions
gradually expanded and, then, contracted. From the early 1970s through 1987, CRs
gradually expanded from interim funding measures of comparatively brief duration
and length to measures providing funding through the end of the fiscal year. The
full-year measures included, in some cases, the full text of one or more regular
appropriations bills and contained substantive legislation (i.e., provisions under the
jurisdiction of committees other than the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees). Since 1987, continuing resolutions have generally been interim
funding measures with little substantive legislation.
Over the years, delay in the enactment of regular appropriations measures and
CRs after the beginning of the fiscal year has led to periods during which
appropriations authority has lapsed. Such periods generally are referred to as funding
gaps.
Because congressional and presidential action on all 12 of the FY2008 regular
appropriations measures were not completed until almost three months after the start
of the fiscal year, Congress adopted and the President signed four CRs that
sequentially extended funding for the outstanding bills from October 1, 2007, through
December 31, 2007. The four laws follow: P.L. 110-92; P.L. 110-116, Division B;
P.L. 110-137, and P.L. 110-149. All except one CR were separate acts, the second
CR was included in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2008.
Contents
FY2008 Continuing Resolutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Initial FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-92) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Second FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-116, Division B) . . . . . . 4
Third FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-137) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Fourth FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-149) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Recent Practices Regarding Continuing Resolutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
History and Recent Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Types of Continuing Resolutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Substantive Legislative Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Funding Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
For Additional Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Congressional Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
CRS Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Budget and Appropriations Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
FY2008 Regular Appropriations Bills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Other Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
List of Tables
Table 1. Action on FY2008 Continuing Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 2. Regular Appropriations Bills Enacted by Deadline and
Continuing Resolutions, FY1977-FY2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Continuing Resolutions: FY2008 Action and
Brief Overview of Recent Practices
Most of the operations of federal departments and agencies are funded each year
through the enactment of several regular appropriations acts, recently ranging from
11 to 13 regular acts. For FY2008, there are 12 regular appropriations acts. Since
these bills are annual, expiring at the end of the fiscal year,1 regular bills for the
subsequent fiscal year must be enacted by October 1. However, final action on
several regular appropriations bills is typically delayed beyond the deadline. When
this occurs, the affected departments and agencies are generally funded under
temporary continuing appropriations acts until the final spending decisions become
law. Because continuing appropriations acts are, for the most part, enacted in the
form of joint resolutions, such acts are referred to as continuing resolutions (or CRs).
This report is divided into two segments. The first segment provides the most
recent developments on and selected provisions of the FY2008 CRs. The second
segment provides information on the history of CRs; the nature, scope, and duration
of CRs during the past 35 years; the types of CRs that have been enacted; and an
overview of those instances when spending has lapsed and a funding gap has
resulted.
FY2008 Continuing Resolutions
Most Recent Developments
Because congressional and presidential action on all 12 of the FY2008 regular
appropriations measures were not completed until almost three months after the start
of the fiscal year, Congress adopted and the President signed four CRs that
sequentially extended funding for the outstanding bills from October 1, 2007, through
December 31, 2007. The initial FY2008 CR (P.L. 110-92)2 continued funding from
October 1, 2007, through November 16, 2007. Congress added the next funding
extension, through December 14, 2007, to the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 2008, in conference (P.L. 110-116, Division B).3 The last two FY2008
1 The fiscal year of the federal government begins on October 1 and ends the following
September 30.
2 121 Stat. 989.
3 121 Stat. 1295, 1341.
CRS-2
continuing resolutions (P.L. 110-1374 and P.L. 110-1495) sequentially extended
funding through December 21 and 31, respectively. For congressional and
presidential action on FY2008 continuing appropriations, see Table 1.
Action on the FY2008 regular appropriations bills was completed on December
26, 2007, when the President George W. Bush signed the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161).6 This act funds 11 of the 12 FY2008
regular appropriations bills. Previously, on November 13, 2007, the President signed
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-116).
Table 1. Action on FY2008 Continuing Appropriations
Committee
Conference Report
Conference
Approval
House
Senate
Approval
Public
Measure
Report
Passage
Passage
Law
Filed
House
Senate
House
Senate
09/26/07
09/27/07
09/29/07
H.J.Res. 52
—
—
404-14
94-1
—
—
—
P.L. 110-92
H.R. 3222,
11/06/07
11/08/07
FY2008 Defense
H.Rept.
11/08/07
Voice
11/13/07
Appropriations Act
—
—
—
—
110-434a
400-15
Vote
P.L. 110-116
12/13/07
12/13/07
12/14/07
H.J.Res. 69
—
—
385-27
UCb
—
—
—
P.L. 110-137
12/19/07
Voice
12/19/07
12/21/07
H.J.Res. 72
—
—
Vote
UCb
—
—
—
P.L. 110-149
a. The continuing resolution was not included in H.R. 3222 as approved by the House or Senate Committees on Appropriations or as passed
by either chamber. The conference committee added it to the conference report, see Division B.
b. The Senate adopted the continuing resolution, without amendment, by unanimous consent. That is, a unanimous consent request was
proposed to adopt the measure and since no Senator objected, the resolution was adopted.
4 121 Stat. 1454.
5 121 Stat. 1819.
6 121 Stat. 1844.
CRS-3
Initial FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-92)
This CR extended budget authority7 for accounts8 associated with the FY2008
regular appropriations bills generally through November 16, 2007, or until enactment
of FY2008 regular measure(s), if earlier.
Under the resolution, separate funding rates were provided for discretionary and
mandatory spending.9 It continued entitlements and other mandatory payments that
were funded in the FY2007 appropriations acts as well as the Food Stamp program
at spending levels that maintained existing program levels under current law. This
was generally designed to provide additional funding, if needed, to continue current
services for eligible beneficiaries. Spending levels could have been increased to
accommodate, for example, increased costs due to an unexpected increase in
beneficiaries.
This act continued discretionary spending for accounts associated with all the
FY2007 regular appropriations bills (11 bills)10 at funding levels provided in specific
FY2007 appropriations acts: two FY2007 regular appropriations acts and the FY2007
7 Congress funds federal activities by providing agencies with budget authority, instead of
cash. Budget authority refers to authority provided by law to enter into financial obligations
requiring either immediate or future expenditures (or outlays) of government funds.
Congress may make budget authority for specified activities available for obligation for only
a single fiscal year, specified multi-years, or indefinitely. An appropriation is a type of
budget authority that not only provides authority to make financial obligations for specified
activities, but also provides authority to make payments from the Treasury for those
activities.
8 The basic unit of a regular or supplemental appropriations act is the account. Under these
acts, funding for each department and large independent agency is distributed among several
accounts. Each account, generally, includes similar programs, projects, or items, such as a
“research and development” account or “salaries and expenses” account. For small
agencies, a single account may fund all of the agency’s activities. These acts typically
provide a lump-sum amount for each account. A few accounts include a single program,
project, or item, which the appropriations acts fund individually.
9 Congress divides budget authority and the resulting outlays into two categories:
discretionary and mandatory (or direct) spending. Discretionary spending is controlled by
annual appropriations acts, which are under the jurisdiction of the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations. Mandatory spending is controlled by legislative acts under
the jurisdiction of the authorizing committees (principally, the House Committee on Ways
and Means and Senate Committee on Finance). All discretionary spending and some
mandatory spending are included in the annual appropriations measures. For more
information, see CRS Report 97-684, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An
Introduction, by Sandy Streeter.
10 There were 11 FY2007 regular appropriations bills and there are 12 FY2008 regular
appropriations bills. In early 2007, the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations
reorganized their subcommittee structures, providing 12 appropriations subcommittees. The
number of regular appropriations bills generally reflects the number of appropriations
subcommittees, since typically each bill is under the jurisdiction of a single House and
Senate appropriations subcommittee. An exception in the House occurred, when the full
committee had jurisdiction over one FY2006 and FY2007 regular bill.
CRS-4
omnibus full-year CR.11 Last year, 2 of the 11 FY2007 regular appropriations bills
became law individually: Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act,
2007 (P.L. 109-29512) and Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2007
(FY2007 Defense Appropriations Act, P.L. 109-28913). The FY2008 CR continued
funding at spending levels provided in these acts and included the additional funds
for costs associated with military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan included in the
FY2007 Defense Appropriations Act (so-called “bridge funds”).
The initial FY2008 CR also continued funding levels provided in the omnibus
Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (FY2007 CR, P.L. 110-514).
This act funded accounts associated with the remaining nine FY2007 regular
appropriations bills through September 30, 2007. The FY2007 CR continued
funding at levels provided in applicable FY2006 regular appropriations acts.
Numerous FY2006 funding levels were, however, modified in the FY2007
resolution.
Under the FY2008 CR, funding levels for civilian personnel compensation and
benefits in each department and agency could have been increased to levels necessary
to avoid a furlough of civilian government employees. Before the funds could be
increased, the applicable department or agency must have taken all necessary actions
to reduce or defer non-personnel-related administrative expenses.
A separate appropriation of $5.2 billion for FY2008 was provided for Mine
Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles. The funds were to be used to continue
technological research and development as well as to procure, sustain, transport, and
field such vehicles.
Under this CR, funds were made available under terms and conditions provided
in the applicable FY2007 regular appropriations acts. For example, a provision in
a FY2007 regular appropriations act prohibiting the use of funds in an account for a
specified activity or project may have been in effect. Departments and agencies
could not use funds provided in this CR to start or resume any project or activity for
which funds or authority were not available during FY2007.
Second FY2008 Continuing Resolution
(P.L. 110-116, Division B)
This act amended the initial FY2008 continuing resolution. It extended funding
four weeks, from November 17 through December 14, 2007.
11 For information on full-year CRs, see “Types of Continuing Resolutions” below.
12 120 Stat. 1355.
13 120 Stat. 1257.
14 121 Stat. 8.
CRS-5
Under this act, additional spending was provided for specified activities,
including $6.4 billion designated as emergency spending.15 The emergency funds
were in addition to spending provided in the initial CR and were distributed as
follows:
! $3 billion to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s
Community Development Fund for the Road Home program in
Louisiana to assist homeowners affected by Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita;
! $2.9 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s
(Department of Homeland Security) disaster relief fund for
continued and anticipated disaster response and relief efforts for
FY2008; and
! $500 million to the Forest Service (Department of Agriculture) and
Bureau of Land Management (Department of the Interior) for
emergency wildland fire suppression, wildfire risk reduction,
recovery, and reconstruction activities in response to the 2007
wildfire season.
In lieu of the amount provided in the initial CR, this act provided $1.025 billion in
non-emergency funds for the Bureau of the Census to prepare for the 2010 decennial
census and the economic censuses. Finally, this act changed funding levels in the
initial CR for Department of Veterans Affair’s accounts to levels equal to the
President’s FY2008 budget request.16
Third FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-137)
This act simply extended funding through December 21, 2007.
Fourth FY2008 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-149)
Under this public law, funding was continued through December 31, 2007.
15 Under the FY2008 budget resolution, S.Con.Res. 21, spending designated as emergency
funds is exempt from congressional budget process points of order that enforce spending
ceilings. (For more information emergency spending and the points of order, see CRS
Report RS21035, Emergency Spending: Statutory and Congressional Rules, by James V.
Saturno.)
16 U.S. Congress, Conference Committees, 2007, Making Appropriations for the Department
of Defense for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2008, and for Other Purposes,
conference report to accompany H.R. 3222, H.Rept. 110-434, 110th Cong., 1st sess.
(Washington: GPO, 2007), p. 487.
CRS-6
Recent Practices Regarding
Continuing Resolutions
Background
Under the U.S. Constitution and federal law, no funds may be drawn from the
U.S. Treasury or obligated by federal officials unless appropriated by law.17
Traditionally, most of the operations of federal departments and agencies are funded
each year through separate enactment of several regular, annual appropriations acts.18
Because these measures expire at the end of the fiscal year, the regular appropriations
bills for the subsequent fiscal year must be enacted by October 1. However, final
action on one or more regular appropriations bills is typically delayed beyond the
deadline (for data on the FY1977-FY2008 period, see Table 2). When this occurs,
the affected departments and agencies are generally funded under temporary
continuing appropriations acts until the final funding decisions are enacted. Because
continuing appropriations acts typically are enacted in the form of joint resolutions,
such acts are referred to as continuing resolutions (or CRs).
History and Recent Trends
Continuing resolutions date from at least the late 1870s, and have been a regular
part of the annual appropriations process for over 50 years. In fact, with the
exception of three fiscal years (FY1989, FY1995, and FY199719), at least one
continuing resolution has been enacted for each fiscal year since FY1954. (It is
important to note that while Congress enacted two FY1977 CRs, these acts did not
temporarily fund any FY1977 regular appropriations bills20 since they became law
17 Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution, and 31 U.S.C. 1341. A major exception to
this concept is contract authority. Congress enacts legislation providing an agency with
authority to make obligations (budget authority). After the obligations are made, Congress
provides the appropriations providing the authority to make the payments in another law
(typically, an appropriations act). Such appropriations funding is not considered budget
authority.
18 For almost 35 years (1971-2004), Congress considered 13 regular appropriations bills
each year. Due to reorganizations of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
in 2005 (109th Cong.) and, again, in 2007 (110th Cong.), the number of regular bills changed.
During the 109th Congress, there were 11 House regular bills and 12 Senate bills. In each
session, the Senate combined two regular bills, resulting in 11 regular appropriations acts
for each year. At the beginning of the 110th Congress, the number of regular appropriations
in both chambers became 12. (For more information, see CRS Report RL31572,
Appropriations Subcommittee Structure: History of Changes from 1920-2007, by James V.
Saturno.)
19 In the first two instances, all 13 regular appropriations bills were enacted individually on
or by the deadline. In the last instance, the deadline was met by adding five regular bills to
a sixth bill, forming an omnibus appropriations act, and enacting seven bills individually.
20 The CRs generally funded specified unauthorized activities that had not been included in
the regular appropriations acts.
CRS-7
on or by the deadline.) From FY1978 through FY2008, Congress enacted on average
four CRs per year (for detailed information, see Table 2).
During the past 35 years, the nature, scope, and duration of CRs expanded and,
then, generally contracted. From the early 1970s through 1987, CRs gradually
expanded from interim funding measures of comparatively brief duration and length
to measures providing funding in lieu of one or more regular appropriations bills
through the end of the fiscal year (referred to as full-year continuing resolutions).
The full-year measures included, in some cases, the full text of one or more regular
appropriations bills and contained substantive legislation (i.e., provisions under the
jurisdiction of committees other than the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees). Since 1987, continuing resolutions have generally been interim
funding measures with little substantive legislation.
Until the early 1970s, continuing resolutions principally were limited in scope
and duration, and rarely exceeded a page or two in length. They were used almost
exclusively to provide interim funding at a minimum, formulaic level, and contained
few provisions unrelated to the interim funding.
Beginning in the early 1970s, conflict between the President and Congress over
major budget priorities, triggered in part by rapidly increasing deficits, greatly
increased the difficulty of reaching final agreement on regular appropriations acts.
This conflict led to protracted delay in their enactment. Continuing resolutions,
because they historically have been viewed as “must-pass” measures in view of the
constitutional and statutory imperatives, became a major battleground for the
resolution of budgetary and other conflicts. Consequently, the nature, scope, and
duration of CRs began to change.
Continuing resolutions began to be used to provide funds for longer periods, and
occasionally for an entire fiscal year, when agreement on one or more regular acts
could not be reached. Further, CRs became vehicles for substantive legislative
provisions unrelated to interim funding, as it became clear that in some years CRs
would be the most effective means to enact such provisions into law. These trends
culminated in FY1987 and FY1988, following a period of persistently high deficits
and sustained conflict over how to deal with them. For those two years, CRs
effectively became omnibus appropriations measures for the federal government,
incorporating all of the regular appropriations acts for the entire fiscal year as well
as a host of substantive legislation covering a broad range of policy areas.21
21 P.L. 99-591, 100 Stat. 3341 and P.L. 100-202, 101 Stat. 1329.
CRS-8
Table 2. Regular Appropriations Bills Enacted by Deadline and
Continuing Resolutions, FY1977-FY2008
Party in Control
Regular
Fiscal
Presidential
of Congress
Appropriations Bills
CRs
Year
Administration
Enacted
Approved by or Enacted
Senate
House
on October 1
in CRs
1977
Gerald Ford
Democrats
Democrats
13
0
(2a)
1978
Jimmy Carter
Democrats
Democrats
9
1
3
1979
5
1
1
1980
3
3
2
1981
1
5
2
1982
Ronald Reagan
Republicans Democrats
0
4
4
1983
1
7
2
1984
4
3
2
1985
4
8
5
1986
0
7
5
1987
0
13
5
1988
Democrats
0
13
5
1989
13
0
0
1990
George H.W. Bush Democrats
Democrats
1
0
3
1991
0
0
5
1992
3
1
4
1993
1
0
1
1994
William Clinton
Democrats
Democrats
2
0
3
1995
13
0
0
1996
Republicans Republicans
0
0b
13
1997
(13)c
0
0
1998
1
0
6
1999
1
0
6
2000
4
0
7
2001
2
0
21
2002
George W. Bush
Democratsd Republicans 0
0
8
2003
Republicanse
0
0f
8
2004
3
0
5
2005
1
0
3
2006
2
0
3
2007
1
9
4
2008
Democrats
Democrats
0
0
4
Sources: U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Appropriations, Budget Estimates,
Etc., 94th Congress, 2nd session - 104th Congress, 1st session (Washington: GPO, 1976-1995). U.S.
Congress, House, Calendars of the U.S. House of Representatives and History of Legislation, 104th
Congress, 1st session - 108th Congress, 2nd session (Washington: GPO, 1995-2006).
a. Although all 13 FY1977 regular appropriations bills became law on or by the deadline, two CRs
were enacted. These CRs generally provided funding for certain unauthorized activities that had
not been included in the regular appropriations acts.
b. An FY1996 continuing resolution (P.L. 104-99) provided full-year funding for the FY1996 foreign
operations regular bill; however, the continuing resolution provided that the foreign operations
measure be enacted separately (P.L. 104-107). It is excluded from the amount.
c. The deadline was met by adding five regular bills to a sixth regular bill, forming an omnibus
appropriations act, and enacting seven bills individually.
d. On June 6, 2001, the Democrats became the majority in the Senate. By that time, the Senate
Appropriations Committee had not reported any FY2002 regular appropriations measures.
e. The Democrats were the majority in the Senate in 2002, during initial consideration of the 13
FY2003 regular appropriations bills and final action on two of the regular bills. The
CRS-9
Republicans were the majority in 2003, during which final action on the remaining 11 FY2003
regular bills occurred.
f. One measure (P.L. 108-7) originated as a continuing resolution, but in conference it was converted
into an omnibus appropriations resolution.
From FY1988 through FY1995, Congress and the President generally operated
under multi-year deficit reduction agreements achieved through budget summits. For
the FY1991-FY1995 period, an enforcement mechanism (referred to as
sequestration)22 was established. From FY1988 through FY1995, there was a period
of relative agreement on overall budget priorities and, therefore, agreements on
regular appropriations acts came more readily. CRs, when necessary, generally were
more limited, contained far less substantive legislation, and were used mainly to
provide interim funding for relatively brief periods.
Since FY1996, the conflicts have generally resumed. Although the enforcement
mechanisms remained in effect from FY1996 through FY2002,23 conflict within
Congress and between Congress and the President on funding and policy issues
generally delayed action on regular appropriations bills. Beginning in FY1996 (and
continuing through FY2001) there were significant conflicts between the Democratic
President and the newly-elected Republican-controlled Congress. From FY2002
through FY2008, there were conflicts within Congress and between Congress and the
President (George W. Bush), which delayed action on the regular bills.
Instead of resolving these differences in expanded continuing resolutions,
Congress and the Administration generally resolved them in omnibus regular
appropriations bills (or in separate appropriations bills). Omnibus regular
appropriations bills were generally developed by attaching outstanding regular
appropriations bills and substantive legislation to another regular appropriations bill
in conference.
The change in the type of legislative vehicle for omnibus appropriations
measures from full-year continuing resolutions to conference reports on regular
appropriations bills was based, at least in part, on political and procedural
considerations. Procedurally, for example, the use of conference reports ensured that
floor consideration of certain amendments to regular appropriations bills could be
avoided. In both the House and Senate, conference reports are not amendable. Some
regular bills either were pulled before floor action was completed or were never
considered on the floor. By attaching these measures to a conference report on
another regular bill, action on the amendments was avoided. Politically, for example,
conference reports have been used limit tardiness complaints. To ensure all the
22 The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388-573, 1388-574)
established spending ceilings for discretionary spending for each fiscal year (FY1991-
FY1995). If appropriations measures were enacted that in total exceeded the spending
ceilings, the act provided for an automatic across-the-board reduction in discretionary
spending to eliminate the additional spending (referred to as sequestration).
23 Two acts extended the spending ceilings originally established in the Budget Enforcement
Act of 1990. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-66, 107 Stat. 312,
683) extending the ceilings through FY1998 and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L.
105-33, 111 Stat. 251) extended the limits through FY2002.
CRS-10
FY1997 regular appropriations bills became law by the October 1 deadline, five
FY1997 regular bills were attached to a sixth FY1997 regular bill in conference.
This action obviated the need for a continuing resolution.
Since FY1996, CRs, when needed, have generally continued to provide interim
funding for short periods of time and have included little substantive legislation. A
major exception occurred with the final FY2007 continuing resolution,24 which
extended funding for nine FY2007 regular appropriations bills through September
30, 2007.
Types of Continuing Resolutions
Continuing resolutions generally can be divided into two categories — interim
and full-year continuing resolutions.25
Interim (or partial) continuing resolutions provide temporary funding until a
specific date or until the enactment of the applicable regular appropriations acts, if
earlier. Since FY1989, they have remained fairly constant in form and structure. In
contrast to regular and supplemental appropriations acts, interim continuing
resolutions do not generally provide specific amounts for each account. These CRs
provide “such sums as are necessary” to continue funding at specified “rates for
operations” for accounts in bills covered by the resolution. The rates may be set in
various ways, funding levels for accounts in a covered bill have been based on
formulas, such as (1) the lower of the amounts provided in the House-passed version
or Senate-passed version of the bill; or (2) the funding levels available for the
previous fiscal year. Rates may be based on the status of the covered bill(s).
Continuing resolutions frequently provide rates that vary among the bills funded.
In most cases, the rates provided in interim CRs have applied to most activities
covered by a particular regular appropriations act. However, such rates have also
been used to fund specific programs that were not covered by regular appropriations
acts because they were not yet authorized by law or for other reasons.26
Once a temporary continuing resolution is enacted, additional interim
resolutions, if necessary, are enacted to extend the deadline. These subsequent
continuing resolutions sometimes change the funding methods.
A form of interim CR is the long-term continuing resolution, which extends
appropriations for outstanding regular appropriations bills temporarily from one
calendar year into the next, but does not extend funding to the end of the fiscal year.
In cases in which a long-term CR extends funding into a new Congress, new bills
providing funding must be introduced in the new Congress. At the end of a
Congress, all measures that have not been enacted die.
24 P.L. 110-5, 121 Stat. 8.
25 For more information, see CRS Report RL32614, Duration of Continuing Resolutions in
Recent Years, by Robert Keith.
26 See, P.L. 94-473, section 101; 90 Stat. 2065.
CRS-11
Full-year continuing resolutions provide funding in lieu of one or more regular
appropriations bills through the end of the fiscal year. (Table 2 provides the number
of regular bills funded through the end of the fiscal year in continuing resolutions.)
Full-year funding provisions have generally been of three types: (1) full text of the
regular act; (2) language that incorporates regular acts by reference to the latest stage
of congressional action (usually the conference agreement, if one has been reached);
or (3) rates of operations.
Full-year continuing resolutions effectively become regular appropriations acts
for the fiscal year. Further, when continuing resolutions have included the full text
of one or more regular appropriations acts, they also have included all the myriad
general and administrative provisions typically included in regular acts.27
Consequently, they may be hundreds of pages in length, whereas interim resolutions
typically are a few pages or less (in the case of a simple extension of a previous
resolution, perhaps less than half a page).
During consideration of the FY1996 continuing resolutions, Congress also used
a another type of continuing resolution: targeted appropriations. A single continuing
resolution traditionally provides funding for all activities in the outstanding regular
appropriations and generally provides the same expiration date for all these bills. In
January 1996, Congress separated activities from the six outstanding regular bills and
distributed them among three FY1996 continuing resolutions.28 Some of the
activities were full-year funded, while others were temporarily funded.
Since FY1977, Congress has included across-the-board spending reductions in
a few full-year and interim continuing resolutions. The continuing resolutions
generally provided a specific percentage reduction for activities in the specified
regular appropriations bills. The FY1992 full-year continuing resolution,29 for
example, required a 1.5% spending reduction in discretionary spending activities in
the only outstanding FY1992 regular appropriations bill. Another example is the
FY1982 interim continuing resolution,30 that included a 4% across-the-board
reduction, with certain exceptions, for specified FY1982 regular appropriations bills.
A subsequent FY1982 full-year continuing resolution extended this provision
through the end of the fiscal year.
Substantive Legislative Provisions
Substantive legislative provisions (i.e., provisions under the jurisdiction of
committees other than the House and Senate Appropriations Committees) covering
a wide range of subjects also have been included in some continuing resolutions.
Continuing resolutions are attractive vehicles for such provisions because they are
considered must-pass legislation on which the President and Congress eventually
27 See, P.L. 100-202, section 101, 101 Stat. 1329; and of P.L. 99-591, section 101, 100 Stat.
3341.
28 P.L. 104-91, 110 Stat. 7; P.L. 104-92, 110 Stat. 16; and P.L. 104-94, 110 Stat. 25.
29 P.L. 102-266, 106 Stat. 92.
30 P.L. 97-92, 95 Stat. 1183.
CRS-12
must reach agreement. Such provisions have been included both in interim and full-
year continuing resolutions.
House Standing Rules XXI, Clause 2, and XXII, Clause 5, prohibit legislative
provisions or unauthorized appropriations31 in general appropriations measures, but
these restrictions do not apply to continuing resolutions. (The House typically adopts
special rules restricting amendments to continuing resolutions, in part for this
reason.) Comparable Senate restrictions, in Senate Rule XVI, on legislative
provisions and unauthorized appropriations do apply in the case of continuing
resolutions.
Substantive provisions in continuing resolutions have included comprehensive
measures that establish major new policies and amend permanent provisions of law,
such as omnibus crime control legislation (in FY1985). They have also included
narrower provisions focused on temporary or one-time problems, such as providing
a temporary extension of statutory authority to pay for travel and transportation
benefits for family members of military personnel injured during operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan (in FY2005). These provisions vary in length from less than one
page to more than 200 pages (in the case, for example, of the Comprehensive Crime
Control Act of 1984).
Funding Gaps
Over the years, delay in the enactment of regular appropriations measures and
continuing resolutions after the beginning of the fiscal year has led to periods during
which appropriations authority has lapsed. Such periods generally are referred to as
funding gaps. Depending on the number of regular appropriations that have yet to
be enacted, a funding gap can affect either a few departments or agencies or most of
the federal government.
Funding gaps are not a recent phenomenon. In fact, by the 1960s and 1970s,
delay in the enactment of appropriation acts, including continuing resolutions,
beyond the beginning of the fiscal year had become almost routine. Notably,
according to a 1981 GAO report, “most Federal managers continued to operate
during periods of funding gaps while minimizing all nonessential operations and
obligations, believing that Congress did not intend that agencies close down while
the appropriations measures were being passed.”32
On April 25, 1980, Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued a formal opinion
which stated in general that maintaining nonessential operations in the absence of
appropriations was not permitted under the Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341), and
31 Unauthorized appropriations are funds in an appropriations measure for agencies or
programs whose authorization has expired or was never granted, or whose budget authority
exceeds the ceiling authorized (for more information, see CRS Report 97-684, The
Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction, by Sandy Streeter).
32 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Funding Gaps Jeopardize Federal Government
Operations, GAO/PAD-81-31, March 3, 1981, p. i.
CRS-13
that the Justice Department would enforce the criminal sanctions provided for under
the act against future violations.33
In another opinion issued on January 16, 1981, the Attorney General outlined
the activities that could be continued by federal agencies during a funding gap.
Under that opinion, the only excepted activities include (1) those involving the
orderly termination of agency functions; (2) emergencies involving the safety of
human life or the protection of property; or (3) activities authorized by law.34
Activities authorized by law, for example, include funding for entitlement programs,
such as Social Security and Medicare, that are permanently appropriated. In 1990,
the Antideficiency Act was amended to clarify that “the term ‘emergencies involving
the safety of human life or the protection of property’ does not include ongoing,
regular functions of government the suspension of which would not imminently
threaten the safety of human life or the protection of property.”35
Since 1981, whenever delay in the appropriations process has led to periods of
lapsed appropriations, federal agencies and departments lacking appropriations
generally have shut down all nonessential operations and furloughed nonessential
employees (although provisions of law have been enacted to ratify obligations and
pay employees retroactively). During late 1995 and early 1996, there were two
funding gaps — one lasting 21 days and the other lasting six (including weekends).
From 1981 through 1994, there were nine funding gaps, varying in duration from
only one to three days, some of which occurred over weekends. Most of these gaps
occurred after the beginning of the fiscal year, meaning that they were not caused
because of a failure to enact an initial continuing resolution, but because of delay in
enacting a further extension.
On August 16, 1995, Assistant Attorney General Walter Dellinger, in a
memorandum for the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
stated that “the 1981 Opinion continues to be a sound analysis of the legal authorities
respecting government operations when Congress has failed to enact regular
appropriations bills or a continuing resolution to cover a hiatus between regular
appropriations.”36 The 1990 amendment, he maintained, basically served to confirm
the appropriateness of the 1981 opinion.
33 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Memorandum to the
President, April 25, 1980, reprinted in Funding Gaps Jeopardize Federal Government
Operations, App. IV, pp. 63-67.
34 For additional information on the 1981 opinion of the Attorney General, and on the
excepted activities outlined in that opinion, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Principles
of Federal Appropriations Law: Vol. II, GAO/OGC-92-13, December 1992, pp. 6-92 — 6-
99.
35 P.L. 101-508 Section 13213(b), 31 U.S.C. 1342.
36 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Government Operations in the Event
of a Lapse in Appropriations, Memorandum for Alice Rivlin, Director, Office of
Management and Budget, August 16, 1995.
CRS-14
For Additional Reading
Congressional Document
U.S. Congress. House. Committee on the Budget. The Whole and the Parts:
Piecemeal and Integrated Approaches to Congressional Budgeting. Committee
print, prepared for the Task Force on the Budget Process by Allen Schick, 100th
Congress, 1st session. CP-3. Washington: GPO, 1987.
CRS Reports
Budget and Appropriations Process.
CRS Report 97-947, The Appropriations Process and the Congressional Budget Act,
by James V. Saturno.
CRS Report 97-684, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction,
by Sandy Streeter.
CRS Report RS20095, The Congressional Budget Process: A Brief Overview, by
James V. Saturno.
CRS Report RL32614, Duration of Continuing Resolutions in Recent Years, by
Robert Keith.
CRS Report RL30619, Examples of Legislative Provisions in Omnibus
Appropriations Acts, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report RS20348, Federal Funding Gaps: A Brief Overview, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 98-721, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 97-865, Points of Order in the Congressional Budget Process, by James
V. Saturno.
CRS Report RL30339, Preventing Federal Government Shutdowns: Proposals for
an Automatic Continuing Resolution, by Robert Keith.
FY2008 Regular Appropriations Bills.
CRS Report RL34132, Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2008 Appropriations,
by Jim Monke.
CRS Report RL34092, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies: FY2008
Appropriations, William J. Krouse, Edward Vincent Murphy, and M. Angeles
Villarreal.
CRS Report RL33999, Defense: FY2008 Authorization and Appropriations, by Pat
Towell, Stephen Daggett, and Amy Belasco.
CRS-15
CRS Report RL34009, Energy and Water Development: FY2008 Appropriations, by
Carl E. Behrens, Anthony Andrews, David M. Bearden, Nicole T. Carter, Mark
Holt, Nic Lane, Daniel Morgan, Fred Sissine, Jonathan Medalia, and Carol
Glover.
CRS Report RL33998, Financial Services and General Government (FSGG):
FY2008 Appropriations, by Garrett Hatch.
CRS Report RL34004, Homeland Security Department: FY2008 Appropriations, by
Jennifer E. Lake, Blas Nuñez-Neto, Sarah A. Lister, Todd Masse, Alison Siskin,
Chad C. Haddal, Keith Bea, Francis X. McCarthy, Harold C. Relyea, Shawn
Reese, Barbara L. Schwemle, Bart Elias, John Frittelli, Daniel Morgan, and
John D. Moteff.
CRS Report RL34011, Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2008
Appropriations, by Carol Hardy Vincent, Robert Bamberger, David M. Bearden,
M. Lynne Corn, Robert Esworthy, Ross W. Gorte, Marc Humphries, Pervaze
A. Sheikh, David L. Whiteman, Blake Alan Naughton, and Jane A. Leggett.
CRS Report RL34076, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education: FY2008
Appropriations, by Pamela W. Smith.
CRS Report RL34031, Legislative Branch: FY2008 Appropriations, by Ida A.
Brudnick.
CRS Report RL34038, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies: FY2008 Appropriations, by Daniel H. Else, Christine Scott, and
Sidath Viranga Panangala.
CRS Report RL34023, State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2008
Appropriations, by Connie Veillette and Susan B. Epstein.
CRS Report RL34046, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies (THUD): FY2008 Appropriations, by David Randall Peterman
and John Frittelli.
Other Sources
U.S. Government Accountability Office. Funding Gaps Jeopardize Federal
Government Operations. GAO/PAD-81-31. March 3, 1981.
——. Principles of Federal Appropriations Law: Vol. II, 2nd ed. GAO/OGC-92-13.
December1992, chap. 8, “Continuing Resolutions.”