.

Congressional Action on FY2016
Appropriations Measures
Jessica Tollestrup
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
June 19, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R44062

c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Summary
This report provides information on the congressional consideration of the FY2016 regular
appropriations bills. It also discusses the statutory and procedural budget enforcement framework
for FY2016 appropriations. It will address the congressional consideration of FY2016
supplemental and continuing appropriations, if any such consideration occurs.
Budget enforcement for discretionary spending under the congressional budget process has two
primary sources. The first is the discretionary spending limits that are derived from the Budget
Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25). Under current law, the limits for FY2016 are $523.091 billion
for defense spending, and $493.491 billion for nondefense spending. The second source of budget
enforcement is associated with the budget resolution. It imposes limits on both the total spending
under the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committees (referred to as a “302(a) allocation”) as
well as spending under the jurisdiction of each of the Appropriations subcommittees (referred to
as “302(b) suballocations”). Certain spending is effectively not subject to these statutory and
procedural limits, such as spending which is designated as “Overseas Contingency
Operations/Global War on Terrorism” (OCO/GWOT) and “disaster relief.”
Disagreement over the appropriate level of discretionary spending—as well as its distribution
between defense and nondefense activities—has significantly affected the focus of the FY2016
appropriations process. The FY2016 budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 11) that was adopted by
Congress provided a 302(a) allocation for the Appropriations Committees that was consistent
with the statutory discretionary spending limits set in the Budget Control Act. However, the
budget resolution also allowed for those funds to be supplemented by additional OCO/GWOT
spending at a higher level than the amount requested by the President. The House Appropriations
Committee reported its initial 302(b) suballocations on April 29, 2015 (H.Rept. 114-97), and
subsequently revised its suballocations on May 18, 2015 (H.Rept. 114-118). The Senate
Appropriations Committee’s 302(b) suballocations were reported on May 21, 2015 (S.Rept. 114-
55), and later revised on June 10 (S.Rept. 114-61).
As of the date of this report, the House Appropriations Committee has reported nine of the 12
regular appropriations bills for FY2016. The House has considered and passed six of these—the
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2028); the
Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2029);
the Legislative Branch appropriations bill (H.R. 2250); the Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2578); the Transportation, Housing and Urban
Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2577); and the Department of
Defense appropriations bill (H.R. 2685). The Senate Appropriations Committee has reported
seven of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills. On June 18, the Senate rejected a motion to
invoke cloture on the Department of Defense appropriations bill (H.R. 2685) by a vote of 50-45.
No further consideration of appropriations measures has occurred on the Senate floor.
This report will be updated periodically during the FY2016 appropriations process. The next
anticipated update will be on or about July 1, 2015.
For information on the current status of FY2016 appropriations measures, see the CRS
Appropriations Status Table: FY2016, at http://www.crs.gov/Pages/
AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx.
Congressional Research Service
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Discretionary Spending Budget Enforcement ................................................................................. 3
FY2016 Discretionary Spending Limits .................................................................................... 4
FY2016 Statutory Discretionary Spending Limits .............................................................. 4
Levels of Discretionary Spending Proposed in the President’s Budget Submission ........... 7
Levels of Discretionary Spending Assumed by the FY2016 Budget Resolution ................ 7
FY2016 Budget Resolution ....................................................................................................... 7
Regular Appropriations .................................................................................................................. 10
House Action ........................................................................................................................... 10
Committee ......................................................................................................................... 10
Floor .................................................................................................................................. 11
Senate Action ........................................................................................................................... 12
Committee ......................................................................................................................... 12
Floor .................................................................................................................................. 13

Tables
Table 1. Regular Appropriations Bills ............................................................................................. 3
Table 2. FY2016 Statutory Discretionary Spending Limits: Current Law and Proposed
Levels............................................................................................................................................ 6
Table 3. 302(b) Suballocations to the Appropriations Subcommittees of FY2016
Discretionary Budget Authority .................................................................................................... 9
Table 4. FY2016 Regular Appropriations Bills: House Appropriations Committee Action .......... 11
Table 5. FY2016 Regular Appropriations Bills: House Initial Consideration ............................... 12
Table 6. FY2016 Regular Appropriations Bills: Senate Appropriations Committee Action ......... 13

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 13

Congressional Research Service
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Introduction
Congress uses an annual appropriations1 process to provide discretionary spending for federal
government agencies.2 The responsibility for drafting legislation to provide for such spending is
currently divided among 12 appropriations subcommittees in each chamber, each of which is
tasked with reporting a regular appropriations bill to cover all programs under its jurisdiction.
(The titles of these 12 bills, which correspond to their respective subcommittees, are listed in
Table 1 at the end of this section.) The timetable associated with the annual appropriations
process requires the enactment of all regular appropriations bills prior to the beginning of the
fiscal year (October 1).3 If regular appropriations are not enacted by that deadline, one or more
continuing resolutions (CRs) may be enacted to provide interim funding authority until all regular
appropriations bills are completed or the fiscal year ends.4 During the fiscal year, supplemental
appropriations may also be enacted to provide funds in addition to those in regular appropriations
acts or CRs.5
Amounts provided in appropriations acts are subject to limits, both procedural and statutory,
which are enforced through mechanisms such as points of order and sequestration. Disagreement
over the appropriate level of discretionary spending—as well as its distribution between defense
and nondefense activities—has significantly affected the focus of the FY2016 appropriations
process. While the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 (P.L. 113-67) revised the statutory discretionary
spending limits to allow higher spending in FY2014 and FY2015, that agreement did not alter the
calculation for the FY2016 limits. As a consequence, the current law levels for the FY2016 limits
are generally less than 1% higher than both the FY2014 and FY2015 limits.6 In the FY2016
budget submission, the President proposed raising both the defense and nondefense limits. The

1 An appropriation is a type of budget authority. Budget authority is 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. For a further explanation of these terms, see Government Accountability Office, A Glossary
of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process, GAO-05-734SP, September 2005, pp. 20-21, http://www.gao.gov/.
2 The congressional budget process distinguishes between discretionary spending, which is controlled through
appropriations acts, and direct (or mandatory) spending, which is controlled through permanent law. In FY2014,
discretionary spending comprised about 33% of federal government spending (Congressional Budget Office [CBO],
Updated Budget Projections: Fiscal Years 2015 to 2025, Table 1, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49973). The annual
appropriations process is also used to provide appropriations necessary to finance certain direct spending programs that
lack a funding source in the authorizing statute. Such “appropriated mandatory” or “appropriated entitlement” spending
is discussed in CRS Report RS20129, Entitlements and Appropriated Entitlements in the Federal Budget Process, by
Bill Heniff Jr.
3 These bills may be considered and enacted separately or as part of a consolidated or “omnibus” appropriations
measure, where two or more of the regular bills are combined into one legislative vehicle. For further information, see
CRS Report RL32473, Omnibus Appropriations Acts: Overview of Recent Practices, by Jessica Tollestrup.
4 Continuing appropriations acts are often referred to as “continuing resolutions” because they usually provide
continuing appropriations in the form of a joint resolution rather than a bill.
5 For further information about the annual appropriations process, see CRS Report R42388, The Congressional
Appropriations Process: An Introduction, by Jessica Tollestrup.
6 The discretionary spending limit for defense spending was $520,464,000,000 for FY2014, was $521,272,000,000 for
FY2015, and is $523,091,000,000 for FY2016. The nondefense limit was $491,773,000,000 for FY2014, was
$492,356,000,000 for FY2015, and is $493,491,000,000 for FY2016. For a discussion of the FY2014 and FY2015
appropriations process, including negations with regard to the level of those spending limits, see CRS Report R43338,
Congressional Action on FY2014 Appropriations Measures, by Jessica Tollestrup and CRS Report R43776,
Congressional Action on FY2015 Appropriations Measures, by Jessica Tollestrup.
Congressional Research Service
1
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

congressional budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 11) took a different approach in that it assumed
FY2016 discretionary spending at current law levels. Moreover, the budget resolution allowed
additional spending (largely in the defense category) effectively not subject to the statutory
spending limits to supplement current law levels.7 This additional spending would be at a higher
level than the amount requested by the President. Many observers have suggested that the
progress of the FY2016 appropriations process has been affected by these points of
disagreement.8
Consideration of FY2016 regular appropriations bills in the House began on April 15, 2015, with
subcommittee approval of the Energy-Water (H.R. 2028) and Military Construction-VA
appropriations bills (H.R. 2029). Since that time, a total of nine regular appropriations bills have
been reported from committee, and six of those have passed the House. About a month after the
House, the Senate began its consideration of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills with the
subcommittee approval of the Energy-Water and Military Construction-VA appropriations bills,
on May 19. The Senate Appropriations Committee has reported seven regular appropriations bills.
On June 18, the Senate rejected a motion to invoke cloture on the Department of Defense
appropriations bill (H.R. 2685), and no further Senate floor consideration of appropriations has
occurred as of the date of this report.
This report provides background and analysis on congressional action related to the FY2016
appropriations process. The first section discusses the status of discretionary budget enforcement
for FY2016, including the statutory spending limits and allocations associated with the
congressional budget resolution. The second section provides information on the consideration of
regular appropriations bills. Further information with regard to the FY2016 regular appropriations
bills is provided in the various CRS reports that analyze and compare the components of the
President’s budget submission and the relevant congressional appropriations proposals.9
This report will be updated periodically during the FY2016 appropriations process. The next
update is anticipated to occur on or about July 1, 2015.
For information on the current status of FY2016 appropriations measures, see the CRS
Appropriations Status Table: FY2016, at http://www.crs.gov/Pages/
AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx.





7 This additional spending is primarily for “Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism.” This is
discussed further in the report section titled “Discretionary Spending Budget Enforcement.”
8 See, for example, Tamar Hallerman, “Appropriators Face Long Odds for Fiscal 2016,” CQ News, December 18,
2014; Paul M. Krawzak, “Strains on Spending Caps May Trigger Budget Negotiations,” CQ News, March 24, 2015;
David Rogers, “Hal Rogers Tries for Delicate Balance on Spending,” Politico, April 22, 2015.
9 See, for example, the CRS reports listed on the FY2016 CRS Appropriations Status Table, available at
http://www.crs.gov/Pages/AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx.
Congressional Research Service
2
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Table 1. Regular Appropriations Bills
Regular Appropriations Bill Title
Abbreviated Title
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Agriculture (AG)
Related Agencies
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Commerce-Justice-Science (CJ)
Department of Defense
Defense (DOD)
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Energy-Water (E&W)
Financial Services and General Government
Financial Services (FSGG)
Department of Homeland Security
Homeland Security (DHS)
Departments of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Interior (INT)
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and
Labor-HHS-Education (LHHS)
Related Agencies
Legislative Branch
Legislative Branch (Leg. Branch)
Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Military Construction-VA (MilCon-VA)
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
State-Foreign Operations (S-FOps)
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Transportation-HUD (THUD)
Discretionary Spending Budget Enforcement
The framework for budget enforcement of discretionary spending under the congressional budget
process has both statutory and procedural elements. The statutory elements are the discretionary
spending limits derived from the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. 112-25). The procedural
elements are primarily associated with the budget resolution. It limits both the total spending
under the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committee, as well as spending under the jurisdiction
of each appropriations subcommittee.
In addition, pursuant to Section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Act of 1985 (BBEDCA), certain spending is effectively exempt from these statutory and
procedural spending limits because the limits are adjusted upward to accommodate that
spending.10 Such spending includes budget authority specifically designated as emergency
requirements, Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism (OCO/GWOT),
disaster relief, and particular amounts of budget authority for certain program integrity
initiatives.11 Since the enactment of the BCA in 2011, the vast majority of adjustments pursuant to
Section 251(b) have been for budget authority designated as OCO/GWOT.12 Such adjustments
have allowed for additional budget authority (largely in the defense category) for expenses

10 Procedures to adjust the statutory discretionary limits are also provided in §251(b) of the BBEDCA. Procedures to
adjust the limits associated with the budget resolution are in §314 of the Congressional Budget Act (CBA).
11 For further information about these adjustments to the spending limits, see CRS Report R42388, The Congressional
Appropriations Process: An Introduction, by Jessica Tollestrup, pp. 20-22.
12 Most recently, in FY2015, enacted OCO/GWOT-designated budget authority was $73.692 billion. Enacted budget
authority in all the other adjustments listed above was $13.418 billion. CBO, Fiscal Year 2015 Current Status of
Discretionary Appropriation As of March 13, 2015, http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45384-
BY2015_DiscretionaryCurrentStatus.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
3
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

associated with overseas operations, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other
related purposes.13
FY2016 Discretionary Spending Limits
The FY2016 appropriations process, as noted earlier, has been affected by disagreement over the
appropriate level of discretionary spending, as well as its distribution between defense and
nondefense activities. The BCA established statutory spending limits for FY2016. However, the
President proposed revisions to those limits in his FY2016 budget request. In addition, the
FY2016 budget resolution establishes certain procedurally enforceable limits on discretionary
spending that relate to the levels of the BCA limits. Table 2 displays the established and proposed
limits for FY2016, compared to actual limits in place for FY2014 and FY2015.
FY2016 Statutory Discretionary Spending Limits
The BCA imposes separate limits on defense and nondefense discretionary spending for each of
the fiscal years from FY2012 through FY2021. The defense category includes all discretionary
spending under budget function 050 (defense); the nondefense category includes discretionary
spending in the other budget functions.14 In order to require additional budgetary savings, the
BCA included procedures to lower the level of the initial spending limits for each fiscal year.15
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calculates the amount by which each initial limit
for the upcoming fiscal year is to be lowered, and announces the amount of the lowered limits in
a “preview report” at the same time that the President’s budget is submitted.16
If discretionary spending is enacted in excess of a statutory limit, the BCA requires the level of
spending to be brought into conformance through “sequestration,” which involves largely across-
the-board cuts to non-exempt spending in the category of the limit that was breached (i.e., defense
or nondefense).17 Once discretionary spending is enacted, OMB evaluates that spending relative
to the spending limits and determines whether sequestration is necessary. For FY2016
discretionary spending, the first such evaluation (and any necessary enforcement) is to occur
within 15 calendar days after the 2015 congressional session adjourns sine die.18 For any FY2016

13 For background on OCO/GWOT spending, see CRS Report RL33110, The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other
Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11, by Amy Belasco and CRS Report IF10143, Foreign Affairs Overseas
Contingency Operations (OCO): Background and Current Status, by Susan B. Epstein.
14 For further information with regard to budget functions, see CRS Report 98-280, Functional Categories of the
Federal Budget, by Bill Heniff Jr.
15 The lowering of the limits for each fiscal year was triggered when the joint committee process provided for in the
BCA did not result in the enactment of legislation to achieve a targeted level of spending reductions. See CRS Report
R41965, The Budget Control Act of 2011, by Bill Heniff Jr., Elizabeth Rybicki, and Shannon M. Mahan.
16 The procedures for lowering these limits are in §251A of the BBEDCA. For a description of these procedures, see
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Sequestration Preview Report to the President and Congress for Fiscal
Year 2016, February 2, 2015 (hereafter “FY2016 OMB Preview Report”), https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/
files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/sequestration/2016_sequestration_preview_report_president.pdf.
17 Enforcement of the statutory discretionary spending limits may occur through points of order that are raised during
House or Senate floor consideration of appropriations measures. Such points of order may be raised under §314(f) of
the CBA against any bill, joint resolution, amendment, motion, or conference report that would cause the discretionary
spending limits to be exceeded. For further information with regard to points of order in the congressional budget
process, see CRS Report 97-865, Points of Order in the Congressional Budget Process, by James V. Saturno.
18 BBEDCA, §251(a)(1). In general, an adjournment sine die terminates an annual session of Congress. Unless
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
4
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

discretionary spending that becomes law after the session ends, the OMB evaluation and any
enforcement of the limits would occur 15 days after enactment.19
The BBEDCA also provides specific preconditions for adjusting the statutory limits to
accommodate OCO/GWOT-designated spending. Such spending must be designated by Congress
on an account-by-account basis, and also be subsequently designated by the President, in order
for the relevant statutory limit to be adjusted.20 If the President were not to designate such funds
as OCO/GWOT, the limit would not be adjusted to accommodate that additional spending. This
could cause enacted spending to be higher than the limit and trigger a sequestration to enforce it.
In recent years, appropriations acts that carried OCO/GWOT spending have generally included a
provision stipulating that each amount in that act designated by Congress for OCO/GWOT “shall
be available only if the President subsequently so designates all such amounts.... ”21
Table 2 displays the FY2014 and FY2015 limits and OCO/GWOT enacted spending, the FY2016
initial and current law levels for the limits, and the FY2016 proposed levels for the limits and
OCO/GWOT spending. The total of the limits is also listed. Pursuant to Section 251A of the
BBEDCA, the initial BCA limit on defense spending for FY2016 was reduced by $53.909 billion
to the current law level of $523.091 billion. The initial limit on FY2016 nondefense spending was
reduced by $36.509 billion to $493.491 billion. Recall that the reduced level of these limits is an
increase of less than 1% above both the FY2014 and FY2015 limits.





(...continued)
otherwise specified by law, the latest this adjournment can occur is January 3 each year. For further information with
regard to sine die adjournments of a congressional session, see CRS Report R42977, Sessions, Adjournments, and
Recesses of Congress, by Richard S. Beth and Jessica Tollestrup.
19 BBEDCA, §251(a)(6). This requirement is in effect for spending enacted after the end of the congressional session
but before July 1. For spending enacted between July 1 and the end of the fiscal year, §251(a)(5) provides for “look-
back” budget enforcement, through which the relevant spending limit for the following fiscal year would be reduced by
the amount of the breach of the current year limit.
20 BBEDCA, §251(b)(2)(A)(ii).
21 See, for example, P.L. 113-235, §6(b).
Congressional Research Service
5
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Table 2. FY2016 Statutory Discretionary Spending Limits: Current Law and
Proposed Levels
Budget authority in millions of dollars
Combined
Amount of
Defense
Nondefense
Discretionary
Discretionary
Discretionary
Spending Subject

Spending
Spending
to the Limits
OCO/ GWOT
FY2014 BCA Limits (BBA)a
and Enacted OCO/GWOT
$520,464
$491,773
$1,012,237
$91,938
FY2015 BCA Limits (BBA)a
and Enacted OCO/GWOT
$521,272
$492,356
$1,013,628
$73,692
FY2016 Initial BCA Discretionary
Spending Limitsb
$577,000
$530,000
$1,107,000
—
Reduction to the Spending
Limitsc
$53,909
$36,509
—
—
FY2016 “Current Law” BCA
Spending Limits (OMB
Preview Report)
$523,091
$493,491
$1,016,582
—
President’s Proposed
Revisions to the FY2016
increase by
increase by
Limits and Requested
$37,909 to
$36,509 to
OCO/GWOTd
$561,000
$530,000 $1,091,000 $57,996
FY2016 Budget Resolution
(S.Con.Res. 11)e $523,091
$493,491
$1,016,582
$96,287
Source: Compiled by CRS using the sources listed in the table notes.
Notes:
a. The FY2014 and FY2015 statutory discretionary limits, as revised by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013
(BBA), are in Section 251(c)(1) and (2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
(BBEDCA). The FY2014 and FY2015 enacted OCO/GWOT-designated budget authority for FY2014 and
FY2015 is in CBO, Fiscal Year 2014 Current Status of Discretionary Appropriations-House As of August 4, 2014,
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44333 and CBO, Fiscal Year 2015 Current Status of Discretionary
Appropriations As of March 13, 2015, http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45384-
BY2015_DiscretionaryCurrentStatus.pdf.
b. The initial statutory discretionary spending limits for FY2016 are in Section 251(c)(3) of the BBEDCA.
c. The amount by which the initial FY2016 limits in the BCA were revised by the Office of Management and
Budget as required by Section 251A of the BBEDCA. For further information, see FY2016 OMB Preview
Report, pp. 2-4.
d. For further information on the President’s proposed revisions to the limits, see ibid.
e. The levels for discretionary spending assumed by the FY2016 budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 11) are listed in
the joint explanatory statement accompanying the measure (H.Rept. 114-96, p. 9).
Congressional Research Service
6
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Levels of Discretionary Spending Proposed in the President’s Budget
Submission
The President’s budget submission proposes that both the defense and nondefense limits for
FY2016 be raised by similar amounts (as listed in Table 2).22 Under this proposal, the defense
limit would be increased by $37.909 billion ($16 billion less than the initial BCA defense limit).
The nondefense limit would be increased by $36.509 billion (equal to the level of the initial BCA
nondefense limit). The budget submission also contains a number of other proposed changes to
both spending and revenue that are intended to “offset” the proposed increases to the limits.23 The
requested amount of OCO/GWOT spending is $57.996 billion—a decrease of $15.686 billion
from the FY2015 enacted levels.
Levels of Discretionary Spending Assumed by the FY2016 Budget Resolution
The FY2016 congressional budget resolution (S.Con.Res. 11) assumes different levels of
discretionary spending than those proposed by the President’s budget submission (as listed in
Table 2). The levels of defense and nondefense discretionary spending subject to the limits that
are identified in the joint explanatory statement accompanying the budget resolution are identical
to the current law levels.24 However, the budget resolution also includes certain procedural
contingencies for the consideration of legislation that could alter the statutory discretionary
spending limits. For example, Section 4302 would allow for Senate consideration of legislation
“relating to enhanced funding for national security or domestic discretionary programs” provided
it does not increase the deficit during the period covered by the budget resolution.25 The amount
of OCO/GWOT spending assumed under the budget resolution is $96.287 billion—an increase of
$22.595 billion over FY2015 enacted levels and an increase of $38.291 billion over the
President’s request.
FY2016 Budget Resolution
The procedural elements of budget enforcement generally stem from requirements under the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (CBA) that are associated with the adoption of an annual
budget resolution.26 Through this CBA process, the Appropriations Committee in each chamber
receives a procedural limit on the total amount of discretionary budget authority for the upcoming
fiscal year, referred to as a “302(a) allocation.”27 The House and Senate Appropriations

22 OMB, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2016 (Washington, DC: Government Publishing Office,
2015), p. 132, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2016/assets/budget.pdf.
23 OMB, Analytical Perspectives of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2016 (Washington, DC: Government
Publishing Office, 2015), pp. 121-141, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2016/assets/
spec.pdf.
24 H.Rept. 114-96, p. 9.
25 Section 4302 is a “deficit-neutral reserve fund.” The chair of the Senate Budget Committee would be responsible for
determining whether legislation meets the criteria specified in this provision. For general information about how these
types of procedural provisions operate, see CRS Report R43535, Provisions in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 as an
Alternative to a Traditional Budget Resolution, by Megan S. Lynch, pp. 8-9.
26 P.L. 93-344; 88 Stat. 297; 2 U.S.C. 601-688. Procedural budget enforcement may also be established through other
methods, such as through provisions in the budget resolution.
27 CBA, §302(a).
Congressional Research Service
7
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Committees subsequently divide this allocation among their 12 subcommittees. These divisions to
each subcommittee are referred to as “302(b) suballocations.”28 The 302(b) suballocations restrict
the amount of budget authority available to each subcommittee for the agencies, projects, and
activities under their jurisdictions, and effectively act as caps on each of the 12 regular
appropriations bills. The Appropriations Committee may revise the 302(b) suballocations at any
time by issuing a new suballocation report. Both the 302(a) and 302(b) limits may be enforced on
the floor through points of order.29
Final action of the FY2016 budget resolution occurred on May 5, 2015 (S.Con.Res. 11). The joint
explanatory statement associated with the budget resolution provides 302(a) allocations for the
House and Senate Appropriations Committees that are consistent with the current law levels for
the statutory discretionary spending limits (see Table 2).30 Those 302(a) allocations also included
a separate allocation for OCO/GWOT spending of $96.287 billion.31 The most recently reported
302(b) suballocations of discretionary spending for the House and Senate Appropriations
subcommittees are listed in Table 3. This table also includes a comparison of the distribution of
OCO/GWOT-designated budget authority among those subcommittees, which is in addition to
amounts that are subject to the limits. The initial House 302(b) suballocations were reported on
April 29, 2015, and subsequently revised on May 18, 2015.32 The initial Senate suballocations
were reported about three weeks after the initial House allocations, on May 21, 2015.33 The
Senate Appropriations Committee later revised these suballocations on June 10, 2015.34


28 Ibid., §302(b).
29 The Appropriations Committee allocations are primarily enforced through points of order under the CBA, §§302(f)
and 311. Enforcement of the statutory spending caps may occur through points of order that are raised during House or
Senate floor consideration under the CBA, §§314(f) (in the House and Senate) or 312(b) (in the Senate only). For
further information on points of order in the congressional budget process, see CRS Report 97-865, Points of Order in
the Congressional Budget Process, by James V. Saturno.
30 H.Rept. 114-96, pp. 102 and 105.
31 Both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees are provided a separate 302(a) allocation for OCO/GWOT
spending pursuant to §3102(a) of S.Con.Res. 11. Section 3102(b) allows the Appropriations Committees to provide
separate 302(b) suballocations of the OCO/GWOT spending.
32 H.Rept. 114-97 and H.Rept. 114-118.
33 S.Rept. 114-55
34 S.Rept. 114-61.
Congressional Research Service
8
c11173008

---

.

Table 3. 302(b) Suballocations to the Appropriations Subcommittees of FY2016 Discretionary Budget Authority
Budget authority in millions of dollars
Senate
Senate
House
OCO/
OCO/
Subcommittee
Defense Nondefense Total
House
GWOT
GWOT
Agriculture
—
20,510
20,510
20,650
—
—
Commerce-Justice-Science
5,068
46,000
51,068
51,378
—
—
Defense
488,995
136
489,131
490,235
86,869
88,421
Energy-Water
19,002
16,366
35,368
35,402
—
—
Financial Services
46
20,510
20,566
20,249
—
—
Homeland Security
1,711
38,502
40,213
39,320
160
—
Interior
—
30,010
30,010
30,170
—
—
Labor-HHS-Education
—
153,188
153,188
153,052
—
—
Legislative Branch
—
4,309
4,309
4,300
—
—
Military Construction-VA
8,083
69,490
77,573
76,056
—
532
State-Foreign Operations
—
39,010
39,010
40,500
9,258
7,334
Transportation-HUD
186
55,460
55,646
55,270
—
—
Total: 523,091
493,491
1,016,582 1,016,582 96,287 96,287
Source: As of the date of this report, the most recent House Appropriations Committee 302(b) subal ocations are provided in H.Rept. 114-118 (May 18, 2015); the
most recent Senate Appropriations Committee 302(b) subal ocations are provided in S.Rept. 114-61 (June 10, 2015).
Notes: The House and Senate amounts listed in the first four columns of this table are subject to the statutory discretionary spending limits. Section 302(a)(3) of the
Congressional Budget Act requires that the Senate Appropriations Committee’s allocation be further divided between the discretionary spending limit categories.
Because this requirement does not apply to the House Appropriations Committee, this table does not present a breakdown of defense and nondefense spending for the
House. Budget authority designated as for “Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism” (OCO/GWOT) is effectively exempt from the statutory
discretionary spending limits pursuant to Section 251(b) of the BBEDCA and is listed separately in this table. Section 3102(a) of the FY2016 budget resolution (S.Con.Res.
11) provides a separate 302(a) al ocation for OCO/GWOT spending to both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. Each Appropriations Committee
divided that OCO/GWOT allocation among their subcommittees through a separate 302(b) subal ocation under authority granted by Section 3102(b).

c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Regular Appropriations
The House and Senate provide annual appropriations in 12 regular appropriations bills. Each of
these bills may be considered and enacted separately, but it is also possible for two or more of
them to be combined into an omnibus vehicle for consideration and enactment.35 Alternatively, if
some of these bills are not enacted, annual funding for the projects and activities therein may be
provided through a full-year CR.36
As of the date of this report, the House Appropriations Committee has reported nine of the 12
regular appropriations bills for FY2016. Six of these bills have been passed by the House on
initial consideration. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported seven of the FY2016 regular
appropriations bills. With regard to Senate floor consideration, a motion to invoke cloture on the
Department of Defense appropriations bill (H.R. 2685) was rejected on June 18. 2015. No further
Senate floor consideration of appropriations has occurred.
House Action
Committee
Table 4 lists the regular appropriations bills that have received subcommittee or full committee
action, along with the associated date of subcommittee approval, date reported to the House (if
applicable), and the report number.
The first regular appropriations bills to be approved in subcommittee and reported by the full
committee were Energy-Water (H.R. 2028) and Military Construction-VA (H.R. 2029). Both were
reported to the House on April 24, 2015. Two other measures received some form of committee
consideration during the month of April—Legislative Branch (H.R. 2250) and Transportation-
HUD (H.R. 2577). Both of these measures, however, were not reported until the month of May. A
fifth regular appropriations bill—Commerce-Justice-Science (H.R. 2578)—was reported by the
committee at the end of May.
As of the date of this report, four appropriations measures have been reported by the committee
during the month of June—Department of Defense (H.R. 2685), State-Foreign Operations (H.R.
2772), Interior (H.R. 2822), and Financial Services. Two additional bills—Labor-HHS-Education
and Agriculture—have been approved in subcommittee, bringing the total number of FY2016
bills that the House Appropriations Committee has acted on to 11.



35 For further information with regard to omnibus appropriations acts, CRS Report RL32473, Omnibus Appropriations
Acts: Overview of Recent Practices, by Jessica Tollestrup.
36 Full-year CRs provide budget authority through the end of the fiscal year. For background on full-year CRs, see CRS
Report R42647, Continuing Resolutions: Overview of Components and Recent Practices, by Jessica Tollestrup.
Congressional Research Service
10
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Table 4. FY2016 Regular Appropriations Bills: House Appropriations Committee
Action
Regular Appropriations
Bill Titlea (Bill
Date of Subcommittee
Date Bill Reported to
Number)
Approval
the House
Report No.
E&W (H.R. 2028)
April 15, 2015
April 24, 2015
H.Rept. 114-91
MilCon-VA (H.R. 2029)
April 15, 2015
April 24, 2015
H.Rept. 114-92
Leg. Branch (H.R. 2250)
April 23, 2015
May 12, 2015
H.Rept. 114-110
THUD (H.R. 2577)
April 29, 2015
May 27, 2015
H.Rept. 114-129
CJS (H.R. 2578)
May 14, 2015
May 27, 2015
H.Rept. 114-130
DOD (H.R. 2685)
May 20, 2015
June 5, 2015
H.Rept. 114-139
S-FOps (H.R. 2772)
June 3, 2015
June 11, 2015
H.Rept. 114-154
INT (H.R. 2822)
June 10, 2015
June 18, 2015
H.Rept. 114-170
FSGG
June 11, 2015
June 17, 2015b Not
available
LHHS
June 17, 2015
—
—
AG
June 18, 2015
—
—
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of data available through the Legislative Information
System (LIS; lis.gov) and the CRS FY2016 Appropriations Status Table (http://www.crs.gov/pages/
AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx).
Notes:
a. See Table 1 of this report for the full titles of these bills.
b. Date bill ordered reported to the House.
Floor
Table 5 identifies the six regular appropriations bills that have been passed by the House on
initial consideration, along with the date consideration was initiated, the date consideration was
concluded, and the vote on final passage.
The first FY2016 regular appropriations bills considered on the House floor were Military
Construction-VA (H.R. 2029) and Energy-Water (H.R. 2028). The consideration of both of these
measures was initiated on April 29, 2015, pursuant to modified open rules (H.Res. 223), which
generally limited debate of each amendment to 10 minutes.37 A total of 104 amendments were
offered during the consideration of these two bills, of which 58 were adopted. The House passed
the measures later that same week.38

37 Under current practice, such modified open rules for the consideration of regular appropriations bills usually allow
the chair and ranking minority Member of the Appropriations Committee to offer up to 10 “pro forma amendments”
each during the consideration of the bill. Such amendments may be offered for the purpose of claiming five additional
minutes of debate time. For general information on the initial consideration of appropriations bills on the House floor,
see CRS Report R42933, Regular Appropriations Bills: Terms of Initial Consideration and Amendment in the House,
FY1996-FY2015, by Jessica Tollestrup.
38 For further information on the context for the House floor consideration early in the FY2016 appropriations process,
see Rebecca Adams, Tamar Hallerman, and Emma Dumain, “Spending Tactic Threatened, GOP Leaders Delay
MilCon-VA Votes,” CQ News, April 29, 2015; Tamar Hallerman and Megan Scully, “Military Construction-VA Bill
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
11
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Table 5. FY2016 Regular Appropriations Bills: House Initial Consideration
Total
Amendments
Regular
Date
Date
Adopted/Total
Appropriations Bill
Consideration
Consideration
Amendments
Vote on Final
Titlea (Bill Number)
Initiated
Concluded
Offered
Passage
MilCon-VA (H.R. 2029)
April 29, 2015
April 30, 2015
24/43
255-163
E&W (H.R. 2028)
April 29, 2015
May 1, 2015
34/61
240-177
Leg. Branch (H.R. 2250)
May 19, 2015
May 19, 2015
2/3
357-67
CJS (H.R. 2578)
June 2, 2015
June 3, 2015
51/87
242-183
THUD (H.R. 2577)
June 3, 2015
June 9, 2015
37/79
216-210
DOD (H.R. 2685)
June 10, 2015
June 11, 2015
36/67
278-149
Source: CRS analysis of data available through LIS and the CRS FY2016 Appropriations Status Table
(http://www.crs.gov/pages/AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx).
Notes:
a. See Table 1 of this report for the full titles of these bills.
The Legislative Branch (H.R. 2250) appropriations bill was considered on the House floor on
May 19. A structured rule, as is traditional for Legislative Branch bills, limited consideration to
three specified amendments. Two of these amendments were subsequently adopted. The House
passed the measure on the same day that consideration began.
During the first two weeks in June, the House considered and passed three appropriations
measures. All three of these were considered under the terms of modified open rules. Floor
consideration of the Commerce-Justice-Science (H.R. 2578) bill began on June 2, and the House
passed the measure on June 3. Later that same day, the House began to consider the
Transportation-HUD (H.R. 2577) bill but did not pass it until the following week, on June 9. The
House initiated consideration of the DOD bill on June 10 and passed it the next day. A total of
233 amendments were offered to those three measures during that two-week period, of which 124
were adopted.
Senate Action
Committee
Table 6 lists the regular appropriations bills that have received subcommittee or full committee
action along with the date of subcommittee approval, date reported to the Senate (if applicable),
and the report number.

(...continued)
Squeaks Through House,” CQ News, April 30, 2015; and Tamar Hallerman, “Initial Success on Spending Bills, But a
Steep Trail Ahead,” CQ News, May 4, 2015.
Congressional Research Service
12
c11173008

---

.
Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures

Table 6. FY2016 Regular Appropriations Bills: Senate Appropriations Committee
Action
Regular Appropriations
Bill Titlea (Bill
Date of Subcommittee
Date Bill Reported to
Number)
Approval
the Senate
Report No.
E&W (H.R. 2028)
May 19, 2015
May 21, 2015
S.Rept. 114-54
MilCon-VA (H.R. 2029)
May 19, 2015
May 21, 2015
S.Rept. 114-57
DOD (H.R. 2685)
June 9, 2015
June 11, 2015
S.Rept. 114-63
Leg. Branch (H.R. 2250)
—b
June 11, 2015
S.Rept. 114-64
CJS (H.R. 2578)
June 10, 2015
June 16, 2015
S.Rept. 114-66
DHS (S. 1619)
June 16, 2015
June 18, 2015
S.Rept. 114-68
INT
June 16, 2015
June 18, 2015c Not
available
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of data available through the Legislative Information
System (LIS; lis.gov) and the CRS FY2016 Appropriations Status Table (http://www.crs.gov/pages/
AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx).
Notes:
a. See Table 1 of this report for the full titles of these bills.
b. In recent years, the markup of the Legislative Branch appropriations bill has typically occurred at the full
committee level. For further information, CRS Report R44029, Legislative Branch: FY2016 Appropriations, by
Ida A. Brudnick.
c. Date bill ordered reported to the Senate.
The Senate Appropriations Committee began consideration of the FY2016 regular appropriations
bills in the same order as the House, acting first on the Energy-Water (H.R. 2028) and Military
Construction-VA (H.R. 2029) bills. Both were reported to the Senate on May 21, 2015.
As of the date of this report, five additional bills have been reported by the committee during the
month of June—Department of Defense (H.R. 2685), Legislative Branch (H.R. 2250),
Commerce-Justice-Science (H.R. 2578), Homeland Security (S. 1619), and Interior.
Floor
On June 16, the motion to proceed to the Department of Defense (H.R. 2685) bill was made in the
Senate and cloture was filed on that motion. Two days later, on June 18, the Senate failed to
invoke cloture on the motion to proceed by a vote of 50-45. No further action has occurred on this
measure as of the date of this report.

Author Contact Information
Jessica Tollestrup
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
jtollestrup@crs.loc.gov, 7-0941

Congressional Research Service
13
c11173008

---