House Offset Amendments to Appropriations
Bills: Procedural Considerations

Sandy Streeter
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
July 5, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL31055
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Summary
One of the most common methods for changing spending priorities in appropriations bills on the
House floor is through offset amendments. House offset amendments generally change spending
priorities in a pending appropriations measure by increasing spending for certain activities (or
creating spending for new activities not included in the bill) and offsetting the increase with
funding decreases in other activities in the bill. Offset amendments are needed to avoid the
Congressional Budget Act 302(f) and 311(a) points of order enforcing certain spending ceilings
affecting regular appropriations bills, continuing resolutions (CRs), and supplemental
appropriations measures (supplementals). In addition, amendments to general appropriations bills
that would increase total spending provided in the bill must be entirely offset.
Two types of House offset amendments are considered in the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union (Committee of the Whole): clause 2(f) and reachback (or fetchback)
amendments. As provided under House Rule 21, clause 2(f) offset amendments consist of two or
more amendments considered together (or en bloc) that would change amounts by directly adding
text or changing text in the body of the bill. Taken as a whole the amendment does not increase
the amount of funding in the pending bill. Such amendments (1) must provide offsets in both new
budget authority and outlays, (2) can only include language transferring appropriations in the bill,
and (3) may contain certain unauthorized appropriations.
Reachback offset amendments are generally offered at the end of the bill and change funding
amounts in the pending bill by reference. These amendments (1) must provide offsets in new
budget authority, but not necessarily outlays; (2) may add new appropriations (and spending set
asides within certain restrictions); (3) cannot include unauthorized appropriations; and (4) may
provide across-the-board spending reductions as offsets.
Parliamentary rules governing consideration of offset amendments may be suspended or waived,
typically by House adoption of a special rule, but also by unanimous consent.
The significant advantages of clause 2(f) amendments over reachback amendments are that clause
2(f) amendments may contain certain unauthorized appropriations and are typically considered
before reachback amendments, sometimes limiting offset opportunities for reachback
amendments. The main advantages of reachback amendments are they may add new
appropriations and include across-the-board spending reductions.

Congressional Research Service

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Parliamentary Context................................................................................................................. 2
Spending Ceilings and Offset Amendments ........................................................................... 2
Additional Requirement for Amendments to General Appropriations Bills............................. 3
Appropriations Measures: Selected Content .......................................................................... 4
Lump-Sum and Line-Item Appropriations ....................................................................... 4
Funding Set Asides ......................................................................................................... 4
Types of Offset Amendments ...................................................................................................... 5
Clause 2(f) Offset Amendments............................................................................................. 5
Must Offset Both Budget Authority and Outlays.............................................................. 7
Can Only Include Language Transferring Appropriations ................................................ 8
May Contain Certain Unauthorized Appropriations ......................................................... 8
Exempt from a “Demand for a Division of the Question” ................................................ 9
Reachback Offset Amendments........................................................................................... 10
Must Offset Budget Authority, But Not Necessarily Outlays.......................................... 10
May Add New Appropriations (and Set Asides)............................................................. 11
May Not Include Unauthorized Appropriations ............................................................. 12
Must Be Drafted to Avoid a “Demand for a Division of the Question” ........................... 12
May Provide Across-the-Board Spending Reductions as Offsets.................................... 12
Procedural Considerations......................................................................................................... 13
Opportunities to Waive Parliamentary Rules........................................................................ 13
Selected Procedural Advantages of Clause 2(f) Amendments............................................... 13
May Include Unauthorized Appropriations .................................................................... 13
Considered Earlier ........................................................................................................ 14
Selected Procedural Advantages of Reachback Amendments ............................................... 14
May Add New Lump-Sum Appropriations or Set asides ................................................ 14
May Provide Across-the-Board Cuts in Spending .......................................................... 14
May Not Necessarily Have to Offset Outlays ................................................................ 14
May Exceed Supplemental Appropriations Bill’s Total Spending Levels........................ 14

Tables
Table 1. Distribution of Outlays .................................................................................................. 7
Table 2. Budget Authority, Spendout Rate, and Outlays ............................................................... 8

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 15
Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 15

Congressional Research Service

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Introduction
One of the most common methods for redistributing spending priorities in appropriations bills on
the House floor is through offset amendments. House offset amendments generally change
spending priorities in a pending appropriations measure by increasing spending for certain
activities (or creating spending for new activities not included in the bill) and offsetting the
increase(s) by decreasing or striking funding for other activities in the bill. For example, an
amendment increasing funding for one agency funded in the bill by $3 million and decreasing
funding for another agency by the same amount in the same bill would be an offset amendment.
These amendments may transfer funds between two activities or among several activities. In
addition, certain offset amendments may reduce funding with across-the-board spending
reductions.
Representatives use offset amendments for a variety of reasons. Four are to (1) ensure that
proposals increasing funding for certain activities in any appropriations measure1 do not violate
parliamentary rules enforcing certain spending ceilings; (2) comply with the prohibition against
increasing total spending in a general appropriations bill;2 (3) garner support for efforts to reduce
funding for certain activities by transferring those funds to popular programs; and (4) provide a
focal point for discussion of a particular issue.
This report is an introduction to selected House rules and practices governing the consideration of
offset amendments to appropriations measures considered in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union (or Committee of the Whole).3 Issues analyzed below are the
parliamentary context providing the need for offset amendments; two types of offset amendments,
clause 2(f) and reachback (or fetchback) offset amendments, including procedural factors
regarding each; and mechanisms waiving House rules. The report concludes with highlights on
the procedural advantages of each offset amendment type.
It is important to note that this report is not an official statement of House procedures. The House
Parliamentarian advises the presiding officer on procedural issues regarding offset amendments
and other matters. While this report provides useful background information, it should not be

1 There are three major types of appropriations measures: regular appropriations bills, supplemental appropriations
measures (or supplementals), and continuing resolutions. Of the three types, regular appropriations bills generally
provide most of the funding (either as separate acts or in omnibus acts). Supplemental appropriations measures (or
supplementals) generally increase funding for selected activities previously funded in the regular bills, although
recently supplementals have also provided funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Continuing resolutions (or CRs)
generally extend funding for agencies, if any regular appropriations bill does not become law by the beginning of the
federal fiscal year. Appropriations acts are characteristically annual and funding generally expires at the end of a
federal fiscal year. The federal fiscal year begins on October 1 and ends the following September 30.
2 General appropriations bills are regular appropriations bills and supplemental measures providing funding to two or
more agencies.
3 Clause 3 of House Rule XVIII, requires that appropriations measures be considered in the Committee of the Whole
before the House votes on passage of the measures; however, continuing resolutions are typically considered in the
House. (For more information on considering measures in the House or the Committee of the Whole, see CRS Report
95-563, The Legislative Process on the House Floor: An Introduction, by Christopher M. Davis; and CRS Report
RL32200, Debate, Motions, and Other Actions in the Committee of the Whole, by Bill Heniff Jr. and Elizabeth
Rybicki.)
Congressional Research Service
1

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

considered a substitute for consultation with the Parliamentarian on specific procedural problems
and opportunities.
Parliamentary Context
Offset amendments are needed to ensure amendments increasing funding for certain activities in a
regular appropriations bill, supplemental appropriations bill, or continuing resolution4 do not also
cause spending ceilings associated with the annual budget resolution to be exceeded.
Additionally, a separate order of the House prohibits amendments increasing the total spending
level in a general appropriations bill.
Spending Ceilings and Offset Amendments
Under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, as amended (or
Congressional Budget Act),5 Congress typically considers an annual budget resolution each
spring.6 These measures are under the jurisdiction of the House and Senate Budget Committees.
Each budget resolution establishes, in part, total new budget authority7 and outlay ceilings for
federal government activities for the upcoming fiscal year. Once these figures are finalized, the
new budget authority and outlays are allocated among the House committees with jurisdiction
over spending, and each committee is given specific spending ceilings (referred to as the 302(a)
allocations
).8 The House Appropriations Committee receives separate allocations for
discretionary and direct spending;9 and, in turn, subdivides their 302(a) allocations among their
12 appropriations subcommittees,10 providing each subcommittee with their spending ceilings
(302(b) subdivisions). In the case of the appropriations committee, these allocations are only
established for the upcoming fiscal year, because appropriations measures are annual.

4 The House typically agrees to prohibit floor amendments to continuing resolutions, a notable exception was
consideration of H.R. 1 (112th Cong.), Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011.
5 2 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. For rules regarding the spending ceilings and points of order discussed in this section, see 2
U.S.C. §§ 633 and 642. For more information, see CRS Report 97-684, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An
Introduction
, by Sandy Streeter; and CRS Report 97-865, Points of Order in the Congressional Budget Process, by
James V. Saturno.
6 In cases in which Congress delays completion of the annual budget resolution (or does not adopt one), each chamber
may adopt a deeming resolution (see CRS Report RL31443, The “Deeming Resolution”: A Budget Enforcement Tool,
by Megan Suzanne Lynch).
7 Congress provides spending to agencies in the form of budget authority, which does not represent cash provided to, or
reserved for, agencies. Instead, the term refers to authority provided by federal law to enter into contracts or other
financial obligations that will result in immediate or future expenditures (or outlays) involving federal government
funds. Most appropriations are a form of budget authority that also provide legal authority to make the subsequent
payments from the Treasury.
8 The terms 302(a) and 302(b) allocations refer to sections 302(a) and 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act (both
under 2 U.S.C. § 633).
9 Congress divides budget authority and outlays into two categories: discretionary and direct (or mandatory) spending.
Discretionary spending is controlled by annual appropriations acts, which are under the jurisdiction of the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations. Direct spending is controlled by legislative acts under the jurisdiction of the
authorizing committees although the authority to finance these obligations may be included in appropriations acts. Such
direct spending, as well as all discretionary spending, is included in the annual appropriations measures.
10 Each House appropriations subcommittee has jurisdiction over a single regular appropriations bill.
Congressional Research Service
2

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Two Congressional Budget Act points of order, 302(f) and 311(a) points of order, enforce selected
spending ceilings.11 First, the 302(f) point of order prohibits, in part, floor consideration of any
committee-reported appropriations measure and related amendments12 providing new budget
authority for the upcoming fiscal year that would cause the applicable 302(a) or 302(b)
allocations of new budget authority for that fiscal year to be exceeded. In effect, the application of
this point of order on appropriations legislation is generally limited to discretionary spending. If,
for example, the 302(b) subdivision in new discretionary budget authority for a fiscal year is $24
billion and the reported bill would provide the same amount for the same fiscal year, any
amendment proposing an increase in new discretionary budget authority for activities in the bill
(or creating new discretionary budget authority) would violate the 302(f) point of order. An offset
amendment, however, that also includes a commensurate decrease in new discretionary budget
authority for activities in the bill would not violate the rule.
The second rule, the 311(a) point of order, prohibits, in part, floor consideration of any
committee-reported appropriations measure and related amendments providing new budget
authority for the upcoming fiscal year that would cause the applicable total budget authority and
outlay ceilings in the budget resolution for that fiscal year to be exceeded.13 As the amounts of all
the spending measures considered in the House accumulate, they could potentially reach or
exceed these ceilings. This point of order would typically affect the last spending bills to be
considered, such as supplemental appropriations measures or the last regular appropriations bills.
If a Representative raises a point of order that an amendment violates either rule and the presiding
officer sustains the point of order, the amendment falls.
Appropriations measures considered on the House floor are typically at or just below the level of
the subcommittee’s 302(b) subdivision and, in some cases, the committee’s 302(a) allocation and
the total spending ceiling as well.
Additional Requirement for Amendments to General
Appropriations Bills

On January 5, 2011, the House adopted H.Res. 5 (112th Congress), which included a new separate
order,14 section 3(j). During consideration of general appropriations bills in the Committee of the
Whole, section 3(j) of H.Res. 5 (referred to as section 3(j) in this report), in part, prohibits
consideration of amendments to such a bill that would provide a net increase in budget authority
in the bill, as reported or amended.15 This prevents a Representative from using any difference
between the pending bill and the spending ceilings associated with the annual budget resolution to

11 The 302(f) and 311(a) points of order refer to sections 302(f) and 311(a) of the Congressional Budget Act (see 2
U.S.C. § 633 and 642).
12 Both the 302(f) and 311(a) rules also apply to conference reports to appropriations measures.
13 This rule, however, exempts appropriations measures and related amendments, that would not also cause the 302(a)
allocation to be exceeded. This is referred to as the Fazio exception.
14 A separate order is a provision that is not a part of the House Standing Rules, but is provided under the rulemaking
authority of the House.
15 Section 3(j) also allows Members to offer amendments transferring appropriations in a regular appropriations bill to a
spending reduction account, which is required in each regular appropriations bill. No other type of amendment to this
account is allowed.
Congressional Research Service
3

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

increase spending in the bill. Such a difference could occur if the reported bill is lower than the
ceilings or an amendment(s) is adopted that reduces budget authority in the bill.
If a Representative raises a point of order that an amendment violates the section 3(j) point of
order and the presiding officer sustains the point of order, the amendment falls.
Appropriations Measures: Selected Content
The structure of appropriations measures has a direct impact on the form of offset amendments.
Regular appropriations bills and supplementals generally include several lump-sum and line-item
appropriations, so that adding a new appropriation or increasing funding for an appropriation in
the bill typically requires an offset. The procedural necessity of an offset for a funding set asides
within a lump-sum appropriation is dependent on the structure of the appropriation in the bill.
Lump-Sum and Line-Item Appropriations
Regular appropriations bills and supplemental appropriations measures generally contain
numerous unnumbered paragraphs. Most paragraphs provide a lump-sum amount (usually an
appropriation) for similar programs, projects, or activities, such paragraphs are referred to as
lump-sum appropriations. A few paragraphs may provide an appropriation for a single program or
project, referred to as a line-item appropriation.16 Most appropriations correspond to a unique
budget account.
The total net spending levels provided in an appropriations bill includes all lump-sum and line-
item appropriations, rescissions,17 and other provisions affecting spending. An amendment
increasing a lump-sum or line-item appropriation as well as adding a new appropriation to a
general appropriations bill would violate section 3(j) unless it was accompanied by a
commensurate offset regardless of the level of spending in the measure. In addition,
appropriations bills initially considered on the House floor are typically near or at the level of the
subcommittee’s 302(b) subdivision and, in some cases, particularly supplementals, the
committee’s 302(a) allocation and the total spending ceilings as well. An amendment increasing a
lump-sum or line-item appropriation, therefore, could increase the amount of funding in the bill
causing it to exceed these ceilings, so that it typically requires an offset.
Funding Set Asides
Within a lump-sum appropriation, separate amounts are sometimes included in the bill that set
aside spending for specified programs, projects, or activities (for purposes of this report, they are
referred to as funding set asides).

16 Each large agency, whether under a department or independent, are typically funded by several appropriations. All
programs, projects, and activities under a small agency may be funded with a single lump-sum appropriation.
17 “A rescission is legislation enacted by Congress that cancels the availability of budget authority previously enacted
before the authority would otherwise expire.” Government Accountability Office, A Glossary of Terms Used in the
Federal Budget Process
(or A Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process), GAO-05-734SP, Washington,
DC, September 2005, p. 85, http://www.gao.gov/.
Congressional Research Service
4

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

An amendment proposing to increase (or create) a funding set aside in a lump-sum appropriation
that has been entirely set aside in the bill would procedurally require a commensurate offset. In
the example below, the three set asides total $200,000,000, which is the total lump-sum amount.
An amendment proposing an increase in any of the three set asides that does not include an offset
in one of the other set asides would require an increase of the lump-sum amount.
For necessary expenses, including salaries and related expenses, of the Executive Office for
YYY, to implement program activities, $200,000,000, of which $100,000,000 is for the
yellow program, $50,000,000 for the green program, and $50,000,000 for the blue program.
By contrast, certain set aside amendments would not increase lump-sum amounts. If a bill
contains a lump-sum amount with no set asides, for example, an amendment designating part (or
all) of the funds for a particular purpose would not increase spending. In cases in which the lump-
sum appropriation includes a set aside(s) that does not affect the entire amount, an amendment
setting aside only the remaining funds or a portion of those funds would also not increase
spending. If enacted, the effect of either case would be reductions in funding for activities that
were not set aside in order to accommodate funding in the bill that was specified as set asides. To
avoid such reductions, amendments may include offsets from other appropriations in the bill.
Types of Offset Amendments
There are two types of offset amendments, clause 2(f) and reachback (or fetchback) amendments,
available during consideration of regular and supplemental appropriations bills in the Committee
of the Whole. Clause 2(f) refers to clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI, which establishes some of the
parliamentary procedures governing the consideration of such amendments.18
Clause 2(f) Offset Amendments
Clause 2(f) offset amendments consist of two or more amendments considered together (or en
bloc)19 that would change amounts by directly adding text or changing text in the body of the bill;
as opposed to reachback offset amendments, which are generally offered at the end of the bill,
that change funding amounts by reference. The clause 2(f) offset amendment transfers
appropriations among objects20 in the pending bill and, taken as a whole, does not cause the bill to
exceed the total new budget authority or outlay levels already provided in the bill.

18 Clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI: “During the reading of an appropriation bill for amendment in the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union, it shall be in order to consider en bloc amendments proposing only to transfer
appropriations among objects in the bill without increasing the levels of budget authority or outlays in the bill. When
considered en bloc under this paragraph, such amendments may amend portions of the bill not yet read for amendment
(following disposition of any points of order against such portions) and are not subject to a demand for division of the
question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.” U.S. Congress, House, Constitution, Jefferson’s Manual, and
Rules of the House of Representatives, 111th Congress
(or House Manual), 110th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Doc. 110-162
(Washington: GPO, 2009), sections 1042.
19 Under the clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI, amendments are allowed to be considered en bloc. Other amendments may
generally not be considered en bloc unless by unanimous consent or pursuant to the terms of a special rule. House
Practice
, chapter 2, section 30.
20 Objects would include accounts or activities, programs, or projects within an account.
Congressional Research Service
5

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

An example of a clause 2(f) offset amendment follows. This amendment would have decreased
the lump-sum appropriation for the Bureau of the Census, Periodic Censuses and Programs
account by $10 million; increased the lump-sum appropriation for the Office of Justice Programs,
State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance account by $10 million; and increased a set aside
within the latter appropriation for Southwest Border Prosecutor Initiative by the same amount.
Page 6, line 23, after the dollar amount insert “(reduced by $10,000,000).”
Page 42, line 8, after the dollar amount insert “(increased by $10,000,000).”
Page 43, line 8, after the dollar amount insert “(increased by $10,000,000).”21
These offset amendments typically change a spending level by inserting after the amount a
parenthetic increase or decrease (see example above). Under House rules, an amendment
generally cannot amend text previously amended.22 Changing a monetary figure by a parenthetic
increase or decrease placed after the amount text, rather than changing the amount text, however,
is allowed.23
Under House rules, clause 2(f) offset amendments must be offered when the first portion of the
bill to be amended is pending; but, in practice, they may be offered at other times if no Member
objects. In Committee of the Whole, appropriations bills are generally read for amendment
sequentially by paragraph. After the reading clerk reads or designates a paragraph, the presiding
officer entertains any points of order against that paragraph, and then Members may propose
amendments to it. After the clerk has designated or begun reading the next paragraph,
amendments to the former paragraph are not in order.24
Prior to consideration of a proposed clause 2(f) offset amendment, the presiding officer asks if
any Member wants to raise a point of order against any provision the en bloc amendment would
change. If a point of order against such a provision is sustained, the provision is stricken from the
bill and is thus no longer amendable. Therefore, the offset amendment would fall as well, unless
appropriately modified or amended by unanimous consent.
There are four additional procedural implications to be kept in mind regarding clause 2(f) offset
amendments that are discussed below. These amendments (1) must offset any increase in both
budget authority and outlays, (2) can only include language transferring appropriations, (3) may
contain certain unauthorized appropriations, and (4) are exempt from a “demand for a division of
the question.”

21 Representative Capito, remarks in the House, Congressional Record (daily edition), vol. 153 (July 25, 2007), p.
H8435. The amendment was offered to the FY2008 Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bill.
22 House Manual, section 469.
23 House Practice, chapter 2, section 42.
24 During consideration of appropriations measures, the Committee of the Whole may agree by unanimous consent to
open the bill for amendment at any point a portion of the bill, such as several paragraphs or a title. Such an agreement
eliminates the requirement that amendments be proposed to the specified portion of the bill in sequential order.
Congressional Research Service
6

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Must Offset Both Budget Authority and Outlays
Under clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI, any spending increases in a clause 2(f) offset amendment
must be offset by commensurate reductions in both new budget authority and outlays. The 302(f)
point of order enforcing 302(a) and 302(b) allocations and section 3(j) only apply to budget
authority.25 The spending increases and decreases contained in an offset amendment must be
provided in the same fiscal year, the year of the pending appropriations bill.
Offset amendments providing equal increases and decreases in new budget authority might not
produce equal amounts of outlays in the same fiscal year. The amount of resulting outlays may
vary among different accounts, because the length of time needed to complete the activities
funded may differ. It takes less time to purchase office supplies than to complete construction of
an aircraft. For example, in Table 1, the distribution of outlays from $20 million in new budget
authority varies between two accounts.
Table 1. Distribution of Outlays
(in millions of dollars)
Account
FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 Total
Operating Expenses
18
2


20
Construction
2 2 8 8
20
Source: Table compiled by the Congressional Research Service.
Based on historical spending practices, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) each year
estimates the speed at which outlays from each appropriation will occur, referred to as the
spendout rates (or outlay rates). A spendout rate is the rate at which budget authority is expected
to be spent (outlays) in a fiscal year.26 In Table 1, the FY2012 spending rate for the operating
expenses account is 90%, whereas the rate for the construction account is 10%.
The varying spendout rates of appropriations sometimes complicate efforts to increase budget
authority. In Table 2, increasing FY2012 budget authority for an operating expenses account by
$20 million produces $18 million in outlays. Decreasing a construction account by the same
amount in budget authority, however, produces only $2 million in outlays. Under this scenario,
reductions in three accounts produce the $18 million in outlays needed to fund the $20 million
budget authority increase in operating expenses. By contrast, increasing the construction account
by $20 million in budget authority would be easier since only $2 million in outlays would be
required.

25 The 311(a) point of order enforces total new budget authority and outlays.
26A Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process, p. 91.
Congressional Research Service
7

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Table 2. Budget Authority, Spendout Rate, and Outlays
(in millions of dollars)
Budget Authority
FY2012 Budget
Spendout Rate for
Authority
FY2012
FY2012 Outlays
Increase
Operating Expenses
20
90%
18
Offsets
Construction
20
10
2
Government Assistance Program
20
20
4
Security
20
60
12
Total
60 18
Source: Table compiled by the Congressional Research Service.
Representatives (or their staff) routinely ask CBO to estimate the budgetary impact of their clause
2(f) offset amendments. A CBO estimate is required because, while the chair of the House Budget
Committee has the authority to score amendments subject to the spending points of order,27 the
chair relies on CBO’s determinations.
Can Only Include Language Transferring Appropriations
Clause 2(f) offset amendments are, in part, amendments “proposing only to transfer
appropriations among objects in the bill”28 by directly changing dollar amounts. Provisions that
would not be considered “transferring appropriations” include adding a new lump-sum
appropriation or spending set aside, changing the amount of a rescission, providing an across-the-
board spending reduction, or reaching back to provisions in the bill the House has already
considered.
May Contain Certain Unauthorized Appropriations
Clause 2(a) of House Rule XXI, generally prohibits unauthorized appropriations in certain
committee-reported appropriations bills and amendments to such bills.29 Certain amendments,
such as clause 2(f) offset amendments, however, may increase the level of funding for certain
unauthorized appropriations already in the bill.
Under clause 2(a), appropriations must generally be authorized by prior enactment of legislation
concerning a program (or an agency, account, project, or activity). An “[a]uthorization for a
program may be derived from a specific law providing authority for that particular program or
from a more general existing law—‘organic law’—authorizing appropriations for such

27 The Congressional Budget Act, section 312(a) ( 2 U.S.C. § 643), gives authority for scoring amendments subject to
the 302(f) and 311(a) points of order to the House Budget Committee, and clause 4 of House Rule XXIX clarifies that
the chair of the committee may provide such authoritative guidance.
28 Clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI.
29 House Manual, section 1036.
Congressional Research Service
8

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

programs.”30 Authorizations of subsequent appropriations may be permanent or they may be
multi-year or annual, expiring at the end of a specific time period.
The rule prohibits floor consideration of appropriations for a program whose authorization has
expired or whose budget authority exceeds the ceiling authorized, if any. Appropriations violating
these restrictions are unauthorized appropriations.31
Appropriations bills frequently include unauthorized appropriations. Such appropriations are
allowed to remain in an appropriations bill when the House adopts a special rule waiving points
of order against the appropriation; or, less frequently, when no one raises a point of order against
it.32 Under House precedents, a germane amendment that merely perfects an unauthorized
appropriation permitted to remain in the bill is allowed.33 An example would be an amendment
that would only increase the unauthorized amount and would do it by either amending the amount
text or by inserting a parenthetical increase after the amount (such as an en bloc clause 2(f) offset
amendment). A scenario providing the stages of action:
1. An authorization act provided an authorization of appropriations of $2 million for
program yellow through FY2011; as of the close of FY2011, the authorization
had expired.
2. Subsequently, an FY2012 regular appropriations bill provides an unauthorized
appropriation of $2 million for program yellow.
3. The House adopts a special rule waiving clause 2(a) of House Rule XXI, against
all provisions in the bill, allowing the above appropriation to remain.
4. A clause 2(f) offset amendment parenthetically increasing the unauthorized
appropriation by $1 million for program yellow is allowed.
Although clause 2(f) offset amendments may increase unauthorized appropriations, they remain
subject to budget authority and outlay offset requirements of clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI.
A clause 2(f) amendment may not propose to increase an “authorized appropriation” in an
appropriations bill beyond the authorized level.34 For example, if an authorization act included a
$2 million authorization for FY2012 and the regular appropriations bill provided the full amount,
an offset amendment increasing the amount would be prohibited.
Exempt from a “Demand for a Division of the Question”
Under clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI, these amendments are not subject to a “demand for a
division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.”35 That is, a Member

30 House Practice, chapter 4, section 12.
31 Unauthorized appropriations for works and projects in progress are allowed. This prohibition applies to general
appropriations bills. Because continuing resolutions are not considered general appropriations bills, they may include
unauthorized appropriations. House Manual, section 1044.
32 Prior to consideration of a regular or supplemental appropriations bill, the House typically adopts a special rule
waiving, in part, this rule for the entire bill or the entire bill with selected exceptions.
33 House Practice, chapter 4, section 69.
34 House Manual, section 1063a.
35 Clause 2(f) of House Rule XXI.
Congressional Research Service
9

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

cannot demand separate consideration of two or more provisions in such en bloc amendments,
and instead the House must consider the amendment as a whole.36
Reachback Offset Amendments
Reachback (or fetchback) offset amendments add a new section (or title), typically at the end of an
appropriations measure, that reaches back to change amounts previously considered by
reference.37 For example, the following amendment inserted a new section at the end of the
committee-reported FY2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education regular
appropriations bill (H.R. 3043, 110th Congress):
Title VI—Additional General Provisions
Sec. 601. The amounts otherwise provided by this Act are revised by reducing the amount
made available for the “Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration,
Training and Employment Services”, by increasing the amount made available for the
“National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute”, and by increasing the amount
made available for the “National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke” by $49,000,000, $10,000,000, and $10,000,000, respectively.38
Prior to adoption of section 3(j) of H.Res. 5 (112th Congress), reachback amendments to general
appropriations bills could have been offered even if they increased spending provided in the bill
as long as they did not violate the 302(f) and 311(a) points of order.
Reachback amendments
• must offset budget authority, but not necessarily outlays;
• may add new lump-sum appropriations and set asides, subject to certain
restrictions;
• may not include unauthorized appropriations;
• must be drafted to avoid a demand for a division of the question; and
• may provide across-the-board spending reductions as offsets.
Must Offset Budget Authority, But Not Necessarily Outlays
Under the 3(j) and 302(f) points of order, only budget authority offsets are needed; but the 311(a)
point of order applies to both new budget authority and outlays. Generally, the most restrictive
points of order are 3(j) and 302(f) enforcing the 302(b) subdivisions, both enforcing only budget
authority. Furthermore, only the last spending measures considered for a fiscal year, such as

36 For more information on a “demand for a division of the question,” see “Must Be Drafted to Avoid a ‘Demand for a
Division of the Question’” under reach back amendments below; House Manual, clause 5 of House Rule XVI.
37 In cases in which the amount has already been amended, reachback amendments do not violate House rules
prohibiting amendments that would amend text previously amended, because reachback amendments change amounts
by reference, as opposed to changing the text.
38 Representative Garrett, remarks in the House, Congressional Record (daily edition), vol. 153, July 19, 2007, p.
H8131. The House adopted the amendment by voice vote on July 19, 2007.
Congressional Research Service
10

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

supplementals or the last regular bills, are likely to violate the 311(a) point of order. For
reachback amendments, budget authority offsets are generally the primary procedural concern.
Opponents of a reachback amendment may, however, raise the lack of outlay offsets as a concern
for policy reasons. They might also argue that the resulting outlay increases might present a
procedural problem for the bill in the Senate or in conference.39
In the case of reachback amendments that also provide sufficient new budget authority reductions
to offset any outlay increases, Representatives (or their staff) routinely ask CBO to estimate the
outlay effect of their amendments.40 The spending increases and decreases contained in an offset
amendment must be provided in the same fiscal year, the year of the pending appropriations bill.
May Add New Appropriations (and Set Asides)
Reachback amendments may contain new appropriations and set asides for certain activities not
already included in the bill. Such new appropriations and set asides must be germane to the bill.
Under clause 7 of House Rule XVI,41 all amendments must be germane to the pending bill. That
is, they may not add new subject matter to the bill. Reachback amendments offered at the end of
the bill must be germane to the bill, while those offered at the end of a title must be germane to
the title. Regular appropriations measures generally have broad subject matter, which may
provide flexibility for reachback amendments.
Set asides may, however, violate a House rule prohibiting legislation on a general appropriations
bill (or legislation). Clause 2(b) of House Rule XXI prohibits legislation in committee-reported
general appropriations bills and clause 2(c) prohibits legislation in amendments to those
measures.42 For purposes of this rule, legislation refers to any provision in a general
appropriations bill or related amendment that changes existing law, such as proposals amending
or repealing existing law, or creating new law. The following are examples of legislative
language: abolishing a department, agency, or program; providing, changing, limiting, or waiving
an authorization; or amendments proposing new rescissions in the appropriations bill.43
One of the guiding principles in interpreting this prohibition is that an amendment designating
funds may not interfere with an executive branch official’s statutory authority, for example, they
may not significantly alter the official’s discretion. Such language changes existing law and is,
therefore, prohibited. For example, if an authorization law provides an agency head with the
authority to make decisions allocating funds within a particular lump-sum appropriation, an
amendment proposing a new set aside would alter the agency head’s authority and would, thus, be
out of order.

39 For more information on Senate and conference procedures, see CRS Report 97-684, The Congressional
Appropriations Process: An Introduction
, by Sandy Streeter; and CRS Report 97-865, Points of Order in the
Congressional Budget Process
, by James V. Saturno.
40 See “Must Offset Both Budget Authority and Outlays” under clause 2(f) offset amendments above.
41 House Manual, clause 7 of House Rule XVI.
42 House Manual, clause 2(b) and (c) of House Rule XXI.
43 While the House Appropriations Committee may report rescissions, amendments may not include them.
Congressional Research Service
11

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Where a new set aside would violate the rules, an amendment sponsor frequently does not include
the set aside in the amendment; instead, the sponsor merely discusses it in terms of intent and
expectation during debate on the amendment. This approach is used to avoid the point of order
against the amendment. The amendment’s sponsor may also urge conferees to include the set
aside in any subsequent conference report.
May Not Include Unauthorized Appropriations
Under clause 2(a) of House Rule XXI, new appropriations and set asides included in amendments
must be proposed for authorized purposes. All new set asides must also be proposed to authorized
lump-sum appropriations.44
In contrast to clause 2(f) offset amendments, reachback amendments may not increase
unauthorized appropriations permitted to remain in the bill because they do not change the text of
the bill. The section added by a reachback amendment is considered adding a further
unauthorized appropriation, as opposed to merely perfecting the text.45
Must Be Drafted to Avoid a “Demand for a Division of the Question”
Under clause 5 of House Rule XVI,46 a Member may demand separate consideration of two or
more individual portions of an amendment if each portion identified, when standing alone, is a
separate, substantive proposition and is grammatically separate “... so that if one proposition is
rejected a separate proposition will logically remain.”
Because reachback amendments are potentially subject to a demand for a division of the question,
if the presiding officer rules that an amendment is divisible, each divided portion of the
amendment would be considered separately and subject to separate debate and amendment, as
well as a separate vote.
Members often demand a division of the question on an amendment in order to more easily defeat
one or more of the portions of an amendment separately. For example, a majority of Members
might be opposed to the portion of an offset amendment that decreases funds for a particular
program. One of them might demand a division of question that, if granted, would allow a
separate vote on the funding decrease portion of the amendment. Even if the amendment as a
whole was not subject to a point of order, once one portion is defeated the remainder may be
subject to the section 3(j) or Congressional Budget Act points of order.
May Provide Across-the-Board Spending Reductions as Offsets
Reachback amendments may include as an offset across-the-board spending cuts, while clause
2(f) amendments may only directly change amounts in the bill.

44 House Manual, clause 2(a) of House Rule XXI.
45 House Manual, section 1058. For an explanation of unauthorized appropriations, see “May Contain Certain
Unauthorized Appropriations” under clause 2(f) offset amendments above.
46 House Manual, clause 5 of House Rule XVI.
Congressional Research Service
12

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Procedural Considerations
Parliamentary rules may be suspended or waived in order to consider offset amendments that
violate these rules, typically by House adoption of a special rule. However, this approach has
been used infrequently.
There are certain procedural advantages of clause 2(f) amendments over reachback amendments
as well as vice versa.
Opportunities to Waive Parliamentary Rules
There are generally three limited opportunities to suspend or waive the rules governing
consideration of an offset amendment: (1) if no one raises a point of order the rules would
implicitly be waived; (2) if the House adopts a special rule explicitly waiving points of order
against the amendment; or (3) if the House agrees by unanimous consent to waive the rules.
Otherwise, if the presiding officer sustains a point of order against an amendment for violating
the parliamentary rules previously discussed, the amendment falls.
First, House rules are not generally self-enforcing. A Representative must raise a point of order
that an amendment violates a specific rule. If no one opposes an amendment, a point of order
does not have to be raised.
Second, under current practice, the House Rules Committee usually reports a special rule setting
additional procedural parameters for the consideration of appropriations measures. The House
typically adopts the special rule and then considers the particular appropriations measure pursuant
to it. If an offset amendment would violate one or more parliamentary rules, the sponsor may ask
the Rules Committee to include a waiver protecting the amendment from the point(s) of order.
Special rules generally do not provide special protection for offset amendments to appropriations
bills.
Third, a Member might ask to consider an amendment violating the rules by unanimous consent.
A single Member, however, can prevent such consideration by simply objecting to the unanimous
consent request.
To attain their policy objectives, sponsors of offset amendments generally select either a clause
2(f) or reachback amendment and work within the rules governing their consideration.
Selected Procedural Advantages of Clause 2(f) Amendments
May Include Unauthorized Appropriations
Appropriations bills typically include some unauthorized appropriations. Generally, the House
Rules Committee reports a special rule adopted by the House, waiving the prohibition against
unauthorized appropriations for most or all unauthorized appropriations in a reported bill. Clause
2(f) amendments can increase those unauthorized appropriations allowed to remain. Reachback
amendments, however, can only increase authorized appropriations in the bill to their authorized
level (if there is one).
Congressional Research Service
13

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

In some cases, entire bills or significant portions of bills have consisted of unauthorized
appropriations. As a result, reachback amendments could not increase those amounts. For
example, many of the lump-sum appropriations provided in the committee-reported regular
defense appropriations bills have typically been unauthorized because of the timing of
consideration of the annual defense authorization bill. The House has adopted special rules
regarding each bill waiving the application of clause 2 of House Rule XXI. As a result, clause 2(f)
amendments to those bills were in order, while reachback amendments were limited to the few, if
any, authorized appropriations.
Considered Earlier
The timing of clause 2(f) amendments is sometimes an advantage over reachback amendments
since clause 2(f) amendments are offered earlier in a bill’s consideration. By the time reachback
amendments are considered, there may be fewer politically appealing offset options available.
Amendments, including clause 2(f) amendments may have already been adopted that reduced the
account a reachback amendment sponsor selected for offsets. The account might be reduced so
low that there is no support for further reductions.
Selected Procedural Advantages of Reachback Amendments
May Add New Lump-Sum Appropriations or Set asides
Reachback amendments may add new lump-sum appropriations and set asides within certain
restrictions, while clause 2(f) amendments are limited to transferring appropriations among
objects already in the bill.
May Provide Across-the-Board Cuts in Spending
Reachback amendments may include as an offset an across-the-board spending cut, while clause
2(f) amendments may only directly change amounts in the bill.
May Not Necessarily Have to Offset Outlays
Another limited advantage of reachback amendments is that for most appropriations bills,
reachback amendments must offset only new budget authority. Clause 2(f) amendments must
offset both new budget authority and outlays. In practice, however, this advantage of reachback
amendments over clause 2(f) amendments is limited because, in order to garner political support
for reachback amendments, sponsors sometimes provide offsets in both budget authority and
outlays.
May Exceed Supplemental Appropriations Bill’s Total Spending Levels
Reachback amendments can exceed a supplemental appropriations bill’s (or CR’s) total spending
level, while clause 2(f) amendments cannot. This advantage is limited, however, since by the time
supplementals are considered, the previously considered regular appropriations bills have
generally reached the 302(b) subdivisions, 302(a) allocations, and total spending ceilings.
Congressional Research Service
14

House Offset Amendments to Appropriations Bills: Procedural Considerations

Author Contact Information

Sandy Streeter

Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
sstreeter@crs.loc.gov, 7-8653

Acknowledgments
The author is grateful to the following individuals for their advice: Ira Forstater, House Office of the
Legislative Counsel; Thomas J. Wickham, House Office of the Parliamentarian; and James V. Saturno,
Congressional Research Service.

Congressional Research Service
15