Updated January 31, 2023
Foreign Relations Reauthorization: Background and Issues
Introduction
expansive authorization laws that include new State
The Constitution gives Congress the power to provide
Department authorities, congressional oversight provisions,
funding, authorize programs, and conduct oversight with
and limited authorizations of appropriations. Factors that
respect to the implementation of foreign policy. In
may inhibit the passage of comprehensive reauthorization
exercising these powers, Congress has enacted several laws
laws include disagreements among Members over
requiring foreign affairs appropriations to be authorized
controversial issues related to foreign affairs and reticence
prior to expenditure. These include Section 504(a)(1) of the
among some Members to vote multiple times to support
National Security Act of 1947 (P.L. 80-253), Section 15 of
overseas spending that may be unpopular with constituents.
the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (P.L.
84-885), Section 10 of an act to amend the Foreign Military
In the absence of comprehensive reauthorization laws,
Sales Act, and for other purposes (P.L. 91-672), and
Congress typically waives the aforementioned statutory
Section 313 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,
reauthorization requirements in Department of State,
FY1994 and FY1995 (P.L. 103-236). One motivation
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS)
behind these requirements is to assert the role of the foreign
appropriations measures (e.g., see P.L. 117-328; Division
affairs authorizing committees in budgetary
K, §7022) in order to fund foreign affairs activities. As a
decisionmaking. Congress also utilizes these laws as
result, appropriators, who pass legislation annually to
vehicles to address a range of foreign affairs policies, make
ensure continued government operations, often include
changes to agencies or functions, and mandate reporting
foreign affairs policy directives and reporting requirements
requirements.
in appropriations laws. Some observers argue that these
developments have resulted in appropriators taking a
Authorization-Appropriations Process
primary role in some aspects of congressional foreign
policymaking that would otherwise be under the remit of
An avenue for exercising Congress’s power of the purse is the
SFRC and HFAC.
authorization and appropriation of federal spending to carry
out government activities. The formal process generally
Relevance of Foreign Relations
consists of (1) enactment of an authorization measure that
Reauthorization
may create or continue an agency, program, or activity, as
well as authorize the subsequent enactment of appropriations,
In recent years, some Members of Congress and other
and (2) enactment of appropriations to provide funds for the
observers have expressed concerns that the executive
authorized agency, program, or activity. For additional detail,
branch is conducting foreign policy without sufficient
see CRS Report RS20371, Overview of the Authorization-
recognition of congressional prerogatives. Among the areas
Appropriations Process, by Bil Heniff Jr.
where Congress can assert its authority is the regular
passage of comprehensive foreign relations reauthorization
Historically, Congress adhered to these statutory
laws. Proponents argue that such action would have several
requirements by enacting two types of foreign affairs
potential implications, including
authorizing legislation on a regular basis. One, covering the
fulfilling a key responsibility of HFAC and SFRC;
day-to-day operations of the State Department, diplomacy,
serving as a means for HFAC and SFRC to provide
and international broadcasting, is referred to as foreign
funding guidance to the appropriators for State
relations authorization or State Department
Department operations and activities;
authorization. The second, which is not the focus of this
analysis, is referred to as foreign assistance authorization
establishing a consistent legislative vehicle for Congress
and authorizes spending on matters such as economic
to participate in establishing foreign policy priorities
development programs, selected security assistance,
and/or reforming, reorganizing, creating, or eliminating
disaster assistance, and multilateral aid. The House Foreign
agencies, offices, or functions, as needs arise; and
Affairs Committee (HFAC) and Senate Foreign Relations
providing Congress more opportunity to consult with the
Committee (SFRC) have jurisdiction over both
State Department to coordinate foreign policy.
authorization measures. In addition to establishing,
terminating, and otherwise shaping foreign affairs programs
Recent Congressional Action
and activities, these bills authorize funding levels to guide
In December 2016, Congress passed the Department of
congressional appropriators, often for two years at a time.
State Authorities Act, Fiscal Year 2017 (P.L. 114-323).
While this law did not provide any authorizations of
Congress has not passed a comprehensive foreign relations
appropriations, it included new authorities and oversight
reauthorization law since 2002 (see P.L. 107-228). Since
measures pertaining to State Department operations,
2016, however, Congress has passed progressively more
including diplomatic security, embassy construction, and
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Foreign Relations Reauthorization: Background and Issues
personnel management. Although State Department
Scope of Authorizing Legislation. While Congress has
authorization measures introduced in the 115th and 116th
passed increasingly expansive State Department authorizing
Congresses (see H.R. 5592 and H.R. 3352, respectively)
laws beginning in 2016, it has refrained from passing
enjoyed bipartisan support, they did not become law. Near
legislation that authorizes expenditures across a broad range
the end of the 116th Congress, Members weighed attaching
of appropriations accounts since 2002. In the 118th
a State Department authorization measure to the FY2021
Congress, Members may seek to build upon recently passed
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) yet reportedly
authorizing laws and work to pass a broader measure that
refrained from doing so due to disputes over whether to
establishes congressional priorities for and oversight of
authorize certain foreign assistance programs in law.
State Department expenditures. To do so, however, may
require Congress to resolve disputes that have stymied past
Although Congress did not include a State Department
efforts to enact comprehensive reauthorization legislation.
authorization as part of the FY2021 NDAA, it attached
State Department authorization laws to both the FY2022
Appropriate Legislative Vehicle. In the past two years,
(Division E of P.L. 117-81) and FY2023 (Division I of P.L.
Congress succeeded in passing State Department
117-263) NDAAs. Among other provisions, these laws
authorization laws in part by attaching them to the annual
NDAA. However, some stakeholders have expressed
authorized appropriations for the Embassy Security,
concern that use of this legislative vehicle may afford other
Construction, and Maintenance SFOPS appropriations
congressional committees that generally do not exercise
account and, separately, purposes including promoting
jurisdiction over the State Department undue influence in
global internet freedom, recruiting personnel with
determining the scope and content of State Department
backgrounds in fields such as cybersecurity and
authorizing measures. Congress could seek to address this
emerging technologies, and facilitating U.S.
concern by passing stand-alone State Department
participation in international fairs and expositions;
authorizing laws. Yet given the absence of stand-alone laws
authorized senior State Department positions and
in recent decades, it is unclear whether the leadership of
operating units and, in some cases, specified their
HFAC and SFRC, along with other Members supportive of
responsibilities, including the Assistant Secretary of
passing regular State Department authorizing laws, could
State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
garner the support needed for both chambers to consider
Affairs, the Bureau of Consular Affairs, and the Bureau
stand-alone bills. Further, some Members of Congress who
of Cyberspace and Digital Policy;
may have supported State Department authorization laws
established a Commission on Reform and
largely in the interest of ensuring continued annual passage
Modernization of the Department of State tasked with
of an NDAA may be more disposed to vote against a stand-
examining “the changing nature of diplomacy” and
alone measure they find objectionable or unnecessary.
offering recommendations to the legislative and
executive branches regarding how the State Department
Process and Timing. Should Congress seek to shift toward
can modernize to advance U.S. interests;
once again passing stand-alone, comprehensive State
addressed diplomatic security and embassy construction
Department authorization measures on a routine basis,
with the intention of enabling the State Department to
SFRC, HFAC, and other congressional stakeholders may
more appropriately weigh security risks with the priority
need to consider process and timing concerns that were
of allowing U.S. diplomats to engage with foreign
previously apparent when Congress did so. In the past, the
government officials and other stakeholders to advance
chairs of HFAC and/or SFRC introduced an authorization
U.S. national security interests;
bill with the intention of seeing it enacted before the fiscal
sought to enhance the State Department’s diversity,
year it was to take effect. For instance, the most recent
equity, inclusion, and accessibility programming
comprehensive authorization law enacted (P.L. 107-228)
through measures intended to strengthen recruitment of
was introduced in the House on April 27, 2001, and passed
persons belonging to underrepresented groups, require
by the full House on May 16, 2001. A year later, it was
the Secretary of State to employ transparent processes
taken up and passed by SFRC and passed in the full Senate
for appointing employees to key positions, and provide
by unanimous consent on May 1, 2002. The conference
for performance and advancement requirements that
report was agreed to on September 25-26, 2002, by the
reward efforts to foster an inclusive environment; and
House and Senate, respectively, and the bill was signed into
law on September 30, 2002, for implementation October 1,
required the State Department to provide additional
2002. Returning to a similar reauthorization schedule may
information to Congress on matters including the
provide a degree of predictability, as well as broader
effectiveness of management and leadership at U.S.
congressional participation in foreign policymaking, but
embassies and other overseas posts and cases involving
may require significant planning on the part of legislative
the wrongful detention of U.S. nationals abroad.
leaders.
Issues for Congress
As Congress weighs a possible State Department
Cory R. Gill, Analyst in Foreign Affairs
authorization measure in the 118th Congress, Members may
IF10293
consider the following issues:
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Foreign Relations Reauthorization: Background and Issues
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10293 · VERSION 12 · UPDATED