Contents

• Introduction
• Note on Data and Citations
• Legislative Action on FY2018 DHS Appropriations
• Annual Appropriations
• Trump Administration FY2018 Request
• House Action
• Senate Action
• Supplemental FY2018 Appropriations for DHS
• First FY2018 Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 115-72, Division A)
• Second FY2018 Supplemental Appropriations (P.L. 115-123, Division B)
• Consolidated Appropriations Act 2018
• Summary of DHS Appropriations
• The DHS Common Appropriations Structure
• DHS Appropriations by Title
• Title I—Departmental Management and Operations
• Title II—Security, Enforcement, and Investigations
• Title III—Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
• Title IV—Research and Development, Training, and Services
• Title V—General Provisions
• For Further Information

Summary

This report provides an overview and analysis of FY2018 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The primary focus of this report is on congressional direction and funding provided to DHS through the appropriations process. It includes an Appendix with definitions of key budget terms used throughout the suite of Congressional Research Service reports on homeland security appropriations. It also directs the reader to other reports providing context for specific component appropriations.

As part of an overall budget that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimated to be $70.69 billion (including fees, trust funds, and other funding that is not annually appropriated or does not score against discretionary budget limits set by the Budget Control Act (BCA; P.L. 112-25)), the Trump Administration requested $44.00 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS for FY2018. The request amounted to a $1.59 billion (3.8%) increase from the $42.41 billion in annual and supplemental appropriations enacted for FY2017 through the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31, Division F).

The Administration also requested discretionary funding for DHS components that does not count against discretionary spending limits and is not reflected in the above totals. The Administration requested an additional $6.79 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in disaster relief funding, as defined by the BCA, and in the budget request for the Department of Defense (DOD), a transfer of $162 million in Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror designated funding (OCO).

On July 21, 2017, the House Committee on Appropriations reported out H.R. 3355, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, accompanied by H.Rept. 115-239. Committee-reported H.R. 3355 included $44.33 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for FY2018. This was $327 million (0.7%) above the level requested by the Administration, and $1.92 billion (4.5%) above the enacted level for FY2017. The House committee-reported bill included the Administration-requested levels for disaster relief funding—and the House Appropriations Committee chose to provide the Coast Guard OCO funding as a transfer as requested, through H.R. 3219, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2018.

The Senate Appropriations Committee released a draft bill and explanatory statement on November 21, 2017. No further action was taken on the annual appropriations legislation for DHS as a stand-alone bill.

Prior to the resolution of FY2018 annual appropriations the Trump Administration requested two tranches of supplemental appropriations in response to a series of natural disasters in 2017. Congress provided $59.3 billion to DHS, including $42.2 billion for the Disaster Relief Fund and $16.0 billion in debt cancellation for the National Flood Insurance Program.

On March 22, 2018, the House voted on a consolidated appropriations bill, which included the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, as Division F, providing $47.7 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS, as well as $7.4 billion designated as disaster relief and $163 million designated as being for overseas contingency operations. The House passed the bill by a vote of 256-167. The next day, the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 65-32, and it was presented to the President and signed into law as P.L. 115-141 that same day.

This report will be updated in the event of further FY2018 supplemental appropriations action.

---

Department of Homeland Security Appropriations: FY2018

Introduction

This report describes and analyzes annual appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for FY2018. It compares the enacted FY2017 appropriations for DHS, the Donald J. Trump Administration's FY2018 budget request, and the appropriations measures developed in response. This report identifies additional informational resources, reports, and products on DHS appropriations that provide context for the discussion, and it provides a list of Congressional Research Service (CRS) policy experts with whom clients may consult on specific topics.

The suite of CRS reports on homeland security appropriations tracks legislative action and congressional issues related to DHS appropriations, with particular attention paid to discretionary funding amounts. These reports do not provide in-depth analysis of specific issues related to mandatory funding—such as retirement pay—nor do they systematically follow other legislation related to the authorizing or amending of DHS programs, activities, or fee revenues.

Discussion of appropriations legislation involves a variety of specialized budgetary concepts. The Appendix to this report explains several of these concepts, including budget authority, obligations, outlays, discretionary and mandatory spending, offsetting collections, allocations, and adjustments to the discretionary spending caps under the Budget Control Act (BCA; P.L. 112-25). A more complete discussion of those terms and the appropriations process in general can be found in CRS Report R42388, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction, coordinated by [author name scrubbed], and the Government Accountability Office's A Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process.¹

Note on Data and Citations

All amounts contained in the suite of CRS reports on homeland security appropriations represent budget authority. For precision in percentages and totals, all calculations in these reports used unrounded data, which is presented in each report's tables. However, amounts in narrative discussions are rounded to the nearest million (or ten million, in the case of numbers larger than one billion), unless noted otherwise.

Data used in this report for FY2017 amounts are derived from the explanatory statement accompanying P.L. 115-31, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017—Division F of which is the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2017.⁵ Data for the FY2018 requested and FY2018 enacted levels are drawn from the explanatory statement accompanying P.L. 115-141, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018—Division F of which is the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act 2018.⁶ The explanatory statement also includes data on FY2018 supplemental appropriations for DHS enacted prior to March 22, 2018.

Data for the House-passed amounts are drawn from H.Rept. 115-239, which accompanied H.R. 3355, the FY2018 DHS appropriations bill, modified with information drawn from the Legislative Information System on amendments and structural alterations. Data for the Senate draft amounts are drawn from the draft bill and report released by the Senate Appropriations Committee on November 21, 2017.⁷

Scoring methodology is consistent across this report. However, caution should be exercised in comparing this data, developed with Congressional Budget Office methodology, with that developed using Office of Management and Budget methodology, due to slight discrepancies that could result in flawed analysis.

Legislative Action on FY2018 DHS Appropriations

This section provides an overview of the process of enactment of appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for FY2018. It includes the process for the annual appropriations bill from the request through November 2017; two supplemental appropriations bills; and the final consolidated appropriations bill enacted as Division F of P.L. 115-141.

Annual Appropriations

Trump Administration FY2018 Request

On March 16, 2017, the Trump Administration released a 53-page budget outline, or "skinny budget," which included summary information on the Administration's forthcoming FY2018 budget request. It is not uncommon for such a document to be released by a new Administration in its first term as work continues on more comprehensive budget request documentation. The document indicated that the Administration would request $44.1 billion in net discretionary budget authority for DHS, and stated that the request would include "$4.5 billion in additional funding for programs to strengthen the security of the Nation's borders and enhance the integrity of its immigration system."⁸ While selected priority programs were highlighted in the two pages that focused on DHS, detailed information on the overall budget for individual components was not included.

On May 23, 2017, the Trump Administration released its complete budget request for FY2018. The Trump Administration requested $44.00 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS for FY2018, as part of an overall budget that the Office of Management and Budget estimated to be $70.69 billion (including fees, trust funds, and other funding that is not annually appropriated or does not score against discretionary budget limits). The request amounted to a $1.59 billion (3.8%) increase from the $42.41 billion in annual and supplemental appropriations enacted for FY2017 through the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31, Division F).

The Trump Administration also requested discretionary funding for DHS components that does not count against discretionary spending limits set by the Budget Control Act (BCA; P.L. 112-25) and is not reflected in the above totals. The Administration requested an additional $6.79 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in disaster relief funding, as defined by the BCA, and in the budget request for the Department of Defense, a transfer of $162 million in Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror designated funding (OCO).

House Action

On July 21, 2017, the House Committee on Appropriations reported out H.R. 3355, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, accompanied by H.Rept. 115-239. Committee-reported H.R. 3355 included $44.33 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for FY2018. This was $327 million (0.7%) above the level requested by the Administration, and $1.92 billion (4.5%) above the enacted level for FY2017. The House committee-reported bill also included the Administration-requested levels for disaster relief funding. In a departure from the FY2017 appropriations process, the House Appropriations Committee chose to provide the Coast Guard OCO funding as a transfer as requested by the Administration, through H.R. 3219, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2018, rather than through the DHS appropriations bill.

The next week, the House took up H.R. 3219, the Make America Secure Appropriations Act (H.R. 3219), the first of two consolidated appropriations acts considered by the House in the summer of 2017. It contained four annual appropriations bills, but not the annual appropriations for DHS.

On July 26, 2017, H.R. 3219 began consideration under a structured rule (H.Res. 473), making certain amendments in order. The next day, a second rule (H.Res. 478) was adopted, which provided for additional amendments, including one offered by House Appropriations Committee, Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman John Carter. This amendment added a new division to H.R. 3219, which consisted only of a Procurement, Construction, and Improvements appropriation for CBP. The appropriation would provide $1,571,239,000 for construction of physical barriers along the Southwestern border of the United States. This funding was specifically directed in the amendment text as follows:

• $784,000,000 for 32 miles of new border bollard fencing in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas;
• $498,000,000 for 28 miles of new bollard levee wall in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas;
• $251,000,000 for 14 miles of secondary fencing in San Diego, California; and
• $38,239,000 for planning for border wall construction.

The overall total of $1,571,239,000 and first three directed amounts were identical to specific recommendations by the House Committee on Appropriations for border infrastructure construction in H.Rept. 115-239, the committee report accompanying H.R. 3355.

Because of the provisions of the rule, which said the amendment was to "be considered as adopted," no separate vote was taken on adoption of the amendment. An attempt to strike the funding through a motion to recommit the bill failed by a roll call vote, 193-234 (Roll No. 424).

The week of September 4, 2017, the House took up the Make America Secure and Prosperous Appropriations Act (H.R. 3354). The legislation was originally presented as Rules Committee Print 115-31, a consolidated appropriations bill which contained the text of the eight remaining annual appropriations bills that were not included in H.R. 3219. One of those eight was H.R. 3355, with some modifications.

The primary changes to this version of the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018 from its House Appropriations Committee-reported form were a reduction in CBP's Procurement, Construction, and Improvement appropriation to account for the passage by the House of the funding for border barrier planning and construction as noted above, and the addition of specific legislative direction for the use of the remaining appropriation. The direction provided was comprehensive, exceeding that provided in the committee report. The bill also included new general provisions required for inclusion of a stand-alone committee-reported bill in a consolidated appropriations bill and conforming to the likely terms of floor debate.

On September 6, 2017, the House took up H.R. 3354, with an additional modification: the first rule governing the debate on the bill incorporated the text of House-passed H.R. 3219 as part of H.R. 3354, creating a single bill that included all of the annual appropriations for FY2018. However, the border barrier funding remained in a separate title from the other annual DHS appropriations: Division E of H.R. 3354 is the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018; and Division M is the Department of Homeland Security Border Infrastructure Construction Appropriation Act, 2018.

During floor debate, Division E was amended by five stand-alone amendments and one 14-piece en bloc amendment. These reduced appropriations for secretarial and management accounts, with smaller reductions for Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, while increasing funding for the Office of Inspector General, Science and Technology Directorate, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

On September 14, 2017, H.R. 3354 passed the House by a vote of 211-198 (Roll No. 528). As it passed the House, the bill included $45.2 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority, and $6.8 billion in disaster relief designated appropriations.

Senate Action

The Senate Appropriations Committee released a draft bill and explanatory statement on November 21, 2017. The draft legislation would have provided $44.1 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS, as well as $6.8 billion designated as disaster relief, $559 million designated as emergency funding, and $163 million designated as being for overseas contingency operations. No action was taken by the committee or the full Senate on the draft legislation.

Supplemental FY2018 Appropriations for DHS

In the wake of a series of hurricanes and wildfires in 2017, supplemental appropriations were requested for FY2017 in September 2017 and provided in P.L. 115-31, including $7.4 billion in emergency-designated funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Disaster Relief Fund (DRF). Once FY2018 began, two additional bills were passed that included emergency-designated supplemental appropriations for DHS.

First FY2018 Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 115-72, Division A)

On October 4, 2017, the Trump Administration requested an additional $12.7 billion for the DRF, and $16 billion in debt cancellation for the National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF).⁹ On October 12, the House passed H.R. 2266 with a further House amendment to a Senate amendment to the measure, which originally concerned bankruptcy judgeships. Division A of the amended bill included the requested appropriations. The House amendment included $18.67 billion for the DRF, and also allowed some of that funding to be transferred to two other programs: $4.9 billion would go to FEMA's Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program account, and $10 million to the DHS Office of Inspector General for oversight of disaster-related activities. The measure also included $577 million for the costs of fighting wildfire on federal lands, and authority to use $1.27 billion of reserve funds for a grant to support nutrition assistance programs in Puerto Rico. The bill was signed into law as P.L. 115-72 on October 26, 2017.

Second FY2018 Supplemental Appropriations (P.L. 115-123, Division B)

The Trump Administration made a second request for FY2018 supplemental appropriations (the third responding to the 2017 disasters) on November 17, 2017, seeking roughly $44.0 billion in additional relief and recovery funding, including almost $24.2 billion for DHS.¹⁰

On December 18, 2017, H.R. 4667 was introduced with House Appropriations Committee language prepared in response to this request. The measure included roughly $81 billion in additional funding, as well as other matters, including disaster recovery reform, agriculture assistance, and nutrition assistance. The House-passed bill included $28.6 billion for DHS.

On December 21, 2017, H.R. 4667 was brought to the House Floor under the terms of H.Res. 670, a resolution reported from the House Committee on Rules which added additional disaster-related tax provisions and a designation of low-income communities in Puerto Rico as opportunity zones. The bill passed the House 251-169, and was sent to the Senate.¹¹

On February 7, 2018, the Senate took up H.R. 1892, an unrelated piece of legislation, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell introduced S.Amdt. 1930 which would become the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018.¹² Subdivision I of Division B of the amendment was titled "Further Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Requirements Act, 2018" and included more than $84 billion in additional disaster assistance funding, including $24.7 billion for DHS. The amendment was agreed to by a vote of 71-28 on February 9, 2018. The amended bill passed the House by a vote of 240-186 later that same day and was signed into law by President Trump as P.L. 115-123.

Consolidated Appropriations Act 2018

On March 22, 2018, the House Rules Committee reported out a resolution that made in order a consolidated appropriations bill as an amendment to H.R. 1625, a House bill already amended and passed by the Senate. The bill included all twelve annual appropriations measures and several other authorization bills, including modifications to the disaster relief allowable adjustment. An explanatory statement serving the purpose of a conference report accompanying the consolidated appropriations bill was printed in the Congressional Record that same day. The amendment included the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, as Division F, which would provide $47.7 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS, as well as $7.4 billion designated as disaster relief and $163 million designated as being for overseas contingency operations. The House agreed to the amendment by a vote of 256-167, sending the amended bill back to the Senate.¹³ On March 23, the Senate passed the amended bill by a vote of 65-32,¹⁴ and it was presented to the President and signed into law as P.L. 115-141 later that same day.

Summary of DHS Appropriations

Generally, the homeland security appropriations bill includes all annual appropriations provided for DHS, allocating resources to every departmental component.¹⁵ Discretionary appropriations¹⁶ provide roughly two-thirds to three-fourths of the annual funding for DHS operations, depending how one accounts for disaster relief spending and funding for overseas contingency operations.¹⁷ The remainder of the budget is a mix of fee revenues, trust funds, and mandatory spending.

The DHS Common Appropriations Structure

When DHS was established in 2003, components of other agencies were brought together over a matter of months, in the midst of ongoing budget cycles. Rather than developing a new structure of appropriations for the entire department, Congress and the Administration continued to provide resources through existing account structures when possible.

At the direction of Congress, in 2014 DHS began to work on a new Common Appropriations Structure (CAS), which would standardize the format of DHS appropriations across components. In an interim report in 2015, DHS noted that operating with "over 70 different appropriations and over 100 Programs, Projects, and Activities ... has contributed to a lack of transparency, inhibited comparisons between programs, and complicated spending decisions and other managerial decision-making."¹⁸

After several years of work and negotiations with Congress, DHS made its first budget request in the CAS for FY2017, and implemented it while operating under the continuing resolutions funding the department in October 2016. All DHS components have implemented the structure except for the Coast Guard, due to limitations of its current financial management system.

A visual representation of the FY2018 enacted funding in this new structure follows in Figure 1. On the left are appropriations categories of the revised CAS with a black bar representing the total FY2018 funding levels requested for DHS for each category. A catch-all category is included for budget authority associated with the legislation that does not fit the CAS categories, and a separate category is included for appropriations for the Coast Guard, which, as noted above, has not transitioned its accounting system to the CAS format. Colored lines flow to the DHS components listed on the right, showing how the amount of funding for each appropriations category is distributed across DHS components. Wider lines indicate greater funding levels, so it is possible to understand how components may be funded differently. For example, while CBP gets most of its funding from Operations and Support appropriations, FEMA receives most of its funding from the Disaster Relief Fund appropriation.

Figure 1. FY2018 Requested Annual Appropriations in the Common Appropriations Structure (adjusted net discretionary budget authority and disaster relief-designated funding)

Source: CRS analysis of P.L. 115-141 and its explanatory statement as printed in the Congressional Record of March 22, 2018, pp. H2544-H2608. Note: Disaster relief-designated funding makes up a portion of the Disaster Relief Fund element on the left side of the figure, which includes the cost of a variety of Stafford Act activities unrelated to major disasters. Abbreviations: CBP, Customs and Border Protection; FEMA, Federal Emergency Management Agency; ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; TSA, Transportation Security Administration; USSS, U.S. Secret Service; NPPD, National Protection and Programs Directorate; ST, Science and Technology Directorate; MD, Management Directorate; DNDO, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office; AO, Analysis and Operations; FLETC, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center; OIG, Office of the Inspector General; OSEM, Office of the Secretary and Executive Management; OHA, Office of Health Affairs; USCIS, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; and USCG, U.S. Coast Guard.

DHS Appropriations by Title

Appropriations measures for DHS typically have been organized into five titles.¹⁹ The first four are thematic groupings of components, while the fifth provides general direction to the department, and sometimes includes provisions providing additional budget authority.

Prior to the FY2017 act, the legislative language of many appropriations included directions to components or specific conditions on how the budget priority it provided could be used. Similarly, general provisions provided directions or conditions to one or more components. In the FY2017 act, a number of these provisions within appropriations and component-specific general provisions were grouped at the ends of the titles where their targeted components are funded, and identified as "administrative provisions."²⁰ This practice continued with the FY2018 measures drafted in the House and Senate.

The following sections present textual and tabular comparisons of FY2017 enacted and FY2018 requested and enacted appropriations for the department. The structure of the appropriations reflects the organization outlined in the detail table of the explanatory statement accompanying P.L. 115-141.

The tables summarize the appropriations, subtotaling the resources provided, requested, recommended, and enacted for each component.

• Only the formal request for FY2018 annual appropriations is reflected in the "Request" column.
• The tables include data on enacted annual and supplemental appropriations.
• In cases where appropriations are provided for a title's components in other parts of the bill, those are shown separately. Where supplemental appropriations with an emergency designation were requested or provided for a given component in FY2017 or FY2018, those are displayed after discussion of annual appropriations.
• Following the methodology used by the appropriations committees, totals of "appropriations" do not include resources provided by transfer or under adjustments to discretionary spending limits (i.e., for emergency requirements, overseas contingency operations for the Coast Guard or the cost of major disasters under the Stafford Act for the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Amounts covered by adjustments are included with discretionary appropriations in a separate total for "discretionary funding."
• A subtotal for each component of total estimated budgetary resources that would be available under the legislation and from other sources (such as fees, mandatory spending, and trust funds) for the given fiscal year is also provided at the end of each component section.
• At the bottom of each table, totals indicate the total net discretionary appropriation for the title on its own, the total net discretionary funding from the annual appropriations bill and any supplemental appropriations (when such were provided), and the projected total estimated budgetary resources for each phase in the appropriations process shown in the table.

Title I—Departmental Management and Operations

Departmental Management and Operations, the smallest of the component-specific titles, contains appropriations for the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, the Management Directorate,²¹ Analysis and Operations (A&O), and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). For FY2017, these components received almost $1.25 billion in net discretionary funding through the appropriations process.

• The Trump Administration requested $1.29 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for components included in this title.²²
• In addition, $24 million was requested as a transfer from the Disaster Relief Fund to the OIG.
• Not including the transfer, the appropriations request was $38 million (3.1%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• House-passed H.R. 3354 included $1.31 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $22 million (1.7%) more than requested by the Trump Administration and $60 million (4.8%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The Senate draft included $1.18 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $111 million (8.6%) less than requested by the Trump Administration and $73 million (5.9%) less than the amount provided for FY2017.
• In addition, the Senate draft also included $48 million as a transfer from the Disaster Relief Fund to the OIG, double what had been requested by the Administration.
• Together, P.L. 115-123 and P.L. 115-141 included $1.36 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• When the $25 million in FY2018 supplemental appropriations are set aside, the enacted annual appropriations were $50 million (3.9%) more than requested, and almost $89 million (7.1%) above the FY2017 funding level.

Table 1 shows these comparisons in greater detail. As resources were requested and provided for the Management Directorate and Office of the Inspector General from outside Title I, separate lines are included for each of those components showing a total for what is provided solely within Title I, then the individual non-Title I items, followed by the total annual appropriation for the components.

Title II—Security, Enforcement, and Investigations

Security, Enforcement, and Investigations, comprising roughly three-quarters of the funding appropriated for the department, contains appropriations for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Coast Guard (USCG), and the U.S. Secret Service (USSS). For FY2017, these components received $34.48 billion in net discretionary budget authority through the appropriations process, and $162 million in Overseas Contingency Operations funding, for a total of $34.64 billion in net discretionary funding.²³

• The Trump Administration requested $36.31 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for components included in this title, as part of a total budget for these components of $44.58 billion for FY2018.²⁴
• The funding request was $1.66 billion (4.8%) more than the amount provided for FY2017, while the total resources proposed were $2.96 billion (7.1%) more than FY2017.
• House-passed H.R. 3354 included $36.32 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $14 million (0.0%) more than requested by the Trump Administration and $1.68 billion (4.8%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $643 million (1.4%) less than the Administration's request (largely due to rejection of a proposed TSA fee increase), but $2.32 billion (5.6% more) than projected for FY2017.
• The Senate draft included $36.34 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $31 million (0.1%) more than requested by the Trump Administration and almost $1.70 billion (4.9%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $626 million (1.4%) less than the Administration's request (largely due to rejection of a proposed TSA fee increase), but $2.34 billion (5.6%) more than projected for FY2017.
• Together, P.L. 115-123 and P.L. 115-141 included $39.51 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• When the $1.09 billion in FY2018 supplemental appropriations are set aside, the enacted annual appropriations were $2.15 billion (5.9%) more than requested, and almost $3.81 billion (11.0%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• Setting aside supplemental funding, the total budgetary resources projected were $46.07 billion—$1.49 billion (3.4%) more than the Administration's request and $4.46 billion (10.7%) more than were projected for FY2017.

Table 2 shows these comparisons in greater detail.

Title III—Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery

Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, the second largest of the component-specific titles, contains appropriations for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), the Office of Health Affairs (OHA), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). For FY2017, these components received $6.81 billion in net discretionary appropriations and $6.71 billion in specially designated funding for disaster relief through the annual appropriations process. In addition to that annual funding, $7.4 billion was provided for FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) in emergency supplemental appropriations in FY2017. Incorporating all these elements, the total net discretionary funding level for all Title III components was $20.78 billion for FY2017.

• The Trump Administration requested $5.89 billion in FY2018 net discretionary appropriations for components included in this title, and $6.79 billion in specially designated funding for disaster relief as part of a total discretionary funding level for these components of $12.43 billion for FY2018.²⁵
• Setting aside the $7.4 billion in FY2017 supplemental appropriations, the appropriations request was $946 million (7.1%) less than the amount provided for FY2017 in net discretionary funding.
• House-passed H.R. 3354 included $13.35 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $920 million (7.4%) more than requested by the Trump Administration and $26 million (0.2%) less than the amount provided for FY2017, setting aside supplemental funding.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $894 million (4.7%) more than the Administration's request, but $186 million (0.9%) more than projected for FY2017, setting aside supplemental funding.
• The House-passed bill included within these totals the requested disaster relief funding of $6.79 billion.
• The Senate draft included $13.23 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $795 million (6.4%) more than requested by the Trump Administration and $151 million (1.1%) more than the amount provided for FY2017, setting aside supplemental funding.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $721 million (3.8%) more than the administration's request,²⁶ but $13 million (0.1%) more than projected for FY2017, setting aside supplemental funding.
• The Senate draft also included within these totals the requested disaster relief funding of $6.79 billion, as well as $559 million in emergency designated funds for the base operations of the Disaster Relief Fund.
• Together, P.L. 115-123, P.L. 115-72, and P.L. 115-141 included $72.61 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title, including $58.23 billion in supplemental appropriations, mostly for FEMA's DRF.
• When the supplemental appropriations are set aside, the $14.38 billion in enacted annual discretionary funding was $1.95 billion (15.7%) more than requested, and $1.00 billion (7.5%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $1.92 billion (2.4%) more than the Administration's request,²⁷ and almost $1.22 billion (6.2%) more than projected for FY2017, setting aside supplemental funding.
• The act also included within these totals $7.37 billion in funding designated as disaster relief, $573 million (8.4%) more than was requested.

Table 3 shows these comparisons in greater detail. As some annually appropriated resources were provided for FEMA from outside Title III in FY2017, a separate line is included for FEMA showing a total for what is provided solely within Title III, then the non-Title III appropriation, followed by the total annual appropriation for FEMA.

Title IV—Research and Development, Training, and Services

Title IV, Research and Development, Training, and Services, the second smallest of the component-specific titles, contains appropriations for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), the Science and Technology Directorate (S&T), and the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO). In FY2017, these components received $1.50 billion in net discretionary funding, as part of a total budget of $5.56 billion.

• The Trump Administration requested $1.36 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for components included in this title, as part of a total budget for these components of $5.67 billion for FY2018.
• The funding request was $136 million (9.1%) less than the amount provided for FY2017, although the overall budget request was $114 million (2.1%) higher than the budget projected for FY2017, due to changes in anticipated fee collections.
• House-passed H.R. 3354 provided the components included in this title $1.44 billion in net discretionary funding.
• This was $76 million (5.5%) more than requested, and $60 million (4.0%) less than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $76 million (1.3%) more than the administration's request, and $190 million (3.4%) more than were projected for FY2017.
• The Senate draft included $1.40 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• This was $41 million (3.0%) more than requested by the Trump Administration and $95 million (6.4%) less than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The total budgetary resources projected would have been $41 million (0.7%) more than the administration's request, and $155 million (2.8%) more than projected for FY2017.
• Together, P.L. 115-123 and P.L. 115-141 included $1.57 billion in FY2018 net discretionary funding for the components funded in this title.
• When the $10 million in FY2018 supplemental appropriations are set aside, the enacted annual appropriations were $200 million (14.7%) more than requested, and $65 million (4.3%) more than the amount provided for FY2017.
• The total budgetary resources projected are $251 million (4.4%) more than requested by the Administration, and $366 million (6.6%) more than projected for FY2017.

Table 4 shows these comparisons in greater detail.

Title V—General Provisions

As noted above, the fifth title of the act contains general provisions, the impact of which may reach across the entire department, affect multiple components, or focus on a single activity. Rescissions of prior-year appropriations—cancellations of budget authority that reduce the net funding level in the bill—are found here.²⁸

For FY2017, Division F of P.L. 115-31 included $1.48 billion in rescissions. For FY2018, the Administration proposed rescinding $593 million in prior-year funding. House Appropriations Committee-reported H.R. 3355 included $1.21 billion in rescissions, but these were reduced to $332 million in House-passed H.R. 3354. The Senate draft included $577 million in rescissions. Division F of P.L. 115-141 included $489 million in rescissions.

Funding is also included in Title V for the Financial Systems Modernization initiative and a grant program for Presidential Residence Protection costs, which are reflected in the tables for Title I and Title III respectively, as those titles fund the components that manage these resources.

For Further Information

For additional perspectives on FY2018 DHS appropriations, see the following:

• CRS Report R44604, Trends in the Timing and Size of DHS Appropriations: In Brief;
• CRS Report R44052, DHS Budget v. DHS Appropriations: Fact Sheet; and
• CRS Report R44919, Comparing DHS Component Funding, FY2018: In Brief.

Readers also may wish to consult CRS's experts directly. The following table lists names and contact information for the CRS analysts and specialists who contribute to CRS DHS appropriations reports.

Appendix. Appropriations Terms and Concepts

Budget Authority, Obligations, and Outlays

Federal government spending involves a multistep process that begins with the enactment of budget authority by Congress. Federal agencies then obligate funds from enacted budget authority to pay for their activities. Finally, payments are made to liquidate those obligations; the actual payment amounts are reflected in the budget as outlays.

Budget authority is established through appropriations acts or direct spending legislation and determines the amounts that are available for federal agencies to spend. The Antideficiency Act²⁹ prohibits federal agencies from obligating more funds than the budget authority enacted by Congress. Budget authority also may be indefinite in amount, as when Congress enacts language providing "such sums as may be necessary" to complete a project or purpose. Budget authority may be available on a one-year, multiyear, or no-year basis. One-year budget authority is available for obligation only during a specific fiscal year; any unobligated funds at the end of that year are no longer available for spending. Multiyear budget authority specifies a range of time during which funds may be obligated for spending, and no-year budget authority is available for obligation for an indefinite period of time.

Obligations are incurred when federal agencies employ personnel, enter into contracts, receive services, and engage in similar transactions in a given fiscal year. Outlays are the funds that are actually spent during the fiscal year.³⁰ Because multiyear and no-year budget authorities may be obligated over a number of years, outlays do not always match the budget authority enacted in a given year. Additionally, budget authority may be obligated in one fiscal year but spent in a future fiscal year, especially with certain contracts.

In sum, budget authority allows federal agencies to incur obligations and authorizes payments, or outlays, to be made from the Treasury. Discretionary funded agencies and programs, and appropriated entitlement programs, are funded each year in appropriations acts.

Discretionary and Mandatory Spending

Gross budget authority, or the total funds available for spending by a federal agency, may be composed of discretionary and mandatory spending. Discretionary spending is not mandated by existing law and is thus appropriated yearly by Congress through appropriations acts. The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990³¹ defines discretionary appropriations as budget authority provided in annual appropriations acts and the outlays derived from that authority, but it excludes appropriations for entitlements. Mandatory spending, also known as direct spending, consists of budget authority and resulting outlays provided in laws other than appropriations acts and is typically not appropriated each year. Some mandatory entitlement programs, however, must be appropriated each year and are included in appropriations acts. Within DHS, Coast Guard retirement pay is an example of appropriated mandatory spending.

Offsetting Collections³²

Offsetting funds are collected by the federal government, either from government accounts or the public, as part of a business-type transaction such as collection of a fee. These funds are not considered federal revenue. Instead, they are counted as negative outlays. DHS net discretionary budget authority, or the total funds appropriated by Congress each year, is composed of discretionary spending minus any fee or fund collections that offset discretionary spending.

Some collections offset a portion of an agency's discretionary budget authority. Other collections offset an agency's mandatory spending. These mandatory spending elements are typically entitlement programs under which individuals, businesses, or units of government that meet the requirements or qualifications established by law are entitled to receive certain payments if they establish eligibility. The DHS budget features two mandatory entitlement programs: the Secret Service and the Coast Guard retired pay accounts (pensions). Some entitlements are funded by permanent appropriations, and others are funded by annual appropriations. Secret Service retirement pay is a permanent appropriation and, as such, is not annually appropriated. In contrast, Coast Guard retirement pay is annually appropriated. In addition to these entitlements, the DHS budget contains offsetting Trust and Public Enterprise Funds. These funds are not appropriated by Congress. They are available for obligation and included in the President's budget to calculate the gross budget authority.

302(a) and 302(b) Allocations

In general practice, the maximum budget authority for annual appropriations (including DHS) is determined through a two-stage congressional budget process. In the first stage, Congress sets overall spending totals in the annual concurrent resolution on the budget. Subsequently, these totals are allocated among the appropriations committees, usually through the statement of managers for the conference report on the budget resolution. These amounts are known as the 302(a) allocations. They include discretionary totals available to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for enactment in annual appropriations bills through the subcommittees responsible for the development of the bills.

In the second stage of the process, the appropriations committees allocate the 302(a) discretionary funds among their subcommittees for each of the appropriations bills. These amounts are known as the 302(b) allocations. These allocations must add up to no more than the 302(a) discretionary allocation and form the basis for enforcing budget discipline, since any bill reported with a total above the ceiling is subject to a point of order. The 302(b) allocations may be adjusted during the year by the respective Appropriations Committee issuing a report delineating the revised suballocations as the various appropriations bills progress toward final enactment. No subcommittee allocations are developed for conference reports or enacted appropriations bills.

Table A-1 shows comparable figures for the 302(b) allocation for FY2017, based on the adjusted net discretionary budget authority included in Division F of P.L. 115-31, the President's request for FY2018, and the House and Senate subcommittee allocations for the Homeland Security appropriations bills for FY2018.

The Budget Control Act, Discretionary Spending Caps, and Adjustments

The Budget Control Act established enforceable discretionary limits, or caps, for defense and nondefense spending for each fiscal year from FY2012 through FY2021. Subsequent legislation, including the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013,³³ amended those caps. Most of the budget for DHS is considered nondefense spending.

In addition, the Budget Control Act allows for adjustments that would raise the statutory caps to cover funding for overseas contingency operations/Global War on Terror, emergency spending, and, to a limited extent, disaster relief and appropriations for continuing disability reviews and control of health care fraud and abuse.

Three of the four justifications outlined in the Budget Control Act for adjusting the caps on discretionary budget authority have played a role in DHS's appropriations process. Two of these—emergency spending and overseas contingency operations/Global War on Terror—are not limited.

The third justification—disaster relief—is limited. Under the Budget Control Act, the allowable adjustment for disaster relief was determined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), using the following formula until FY2019:

Limit on disaster relief cap adjustment for the fiscal year = Rolling average of the disaster relief spending over the last ten fiscal years (throwing out the high and low years) + the unused amount of the potential adjustment for disaster relief from the previous fiscal year.

The disaster relief allowable adjustment for FY2018 was $7.366 billion, and was used to support appropriations to FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund (DRF).³⁴ The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 amended the above formula, increasing the allowable size of the adjustment by adding 5% of the amount of emergency-designated funding for major disasters under the Stafford Act, calculated by OMB as $6.296 billion.³⁵ The act also extended the availability of unused adjustment capacity. OMB plans to release a sequestration update report for FY2019 in August 2018, which is to include the new official estimate for the FY2019 allowable adjustment.³⁶

Author Contact Information

Footnotes

1.	U.S. Government Accountability Office, A Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process, GAO-05-734SP, September 1, 2005, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-734SP.
2.	For example, the FY2019 request envisions an appropriations bill that includes: discretionary appropriations—budget authority that is provided to the department through appropriations acts; appropriations that have their impact on the budget offset by agency collections, such as user fees; funding that is not subject to the discretionary spending limits due to special designation; transfers of appropriated budget authority between components; appropriations that are considered to be mandatory spending; and rescissions—cancellation of budget authority that otherwise would be available for obligation and thus is treated as negative spending. Also credited to the discretionary spending in the bill are two elements of "permanent indefinite discretionary spending" that are not included in the actual appropriations bill but are included in the discretionary spending total of the bill because of scorekeeping practices. For a discussion these mechanisms, see the Appendix.
3.	For a discussion of allocations of discretionary budget authority, see the Appendix.
4.	This definition is drawn from the terms usage in the detail tables provided in multiple House Appropriations Committee reports, conference reports, and explanatory statements. It should be noted that this term has also been used as shorthand for the adjusted net discretionary budget authority in some appropriations committee communications. See https://appropriations.house.gov/uploadedfiles/03.21.18_fy18_omnibus_-_homeland_security_-_summary.pdf for an example.
5.	The explanatory statement is available in the Congressional Record, May 3, 2017, pp. H3807-H3873.
6.	The explanatory statement is available in the Congressional Record of March 22, 2018, pp. H2544-H2608.
7.	While the bill was never marked up or ordered reported from the Subcommittee on Homeland Security, or voted on by either the Senate Appropriations Committee or Senate, the text of the draft bill and report represent a position on FY2018 appropriations for DHS developed by the majority staff and with the endorsement of the majority Senate Appropriations Committee leadership. As such, it is presented for comparison with other positions taken by the Administration and the House.
8.	Office of Management and Budget, America First: A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again, Washington, DC, March 18, 2017, p. 23, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/budget/fy2018/2018_blueprint.pdf.
9.	Letter from Mick Mulvaney, Director, Office of Management and Budget, to The Honorable Michael R. Pence, President of the Senate, October 4, 2017, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/letter_regarding_additional_funding_and_reforms_to_address_impacts_of_recent_natural_disasters.pdf.
10.	Letter from Mick Mulvaney, Director, Office of Management and Budget, to The Honorable Paul D. Ryan, Speaker of the House of Representatives, November 17, 2017, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/Letters/fy_2018_hurricanes_supp_111717.pdf.
11.	The House had also contemplated including the supplemental appropriations language as an amendment to H.R. 1370 in the form of Rules Committee Print 115-50 (see "Bills to be Considered on the House Floor" for the week of December 18, 2017, at http://docs.house.gov/floor/Default.aspx?date=2017-12-18), but H.R. 1370 was instead amended by the language of Rules Committee Print 115-52, to provide further continuing appropriations, and other matters. The CBO cost estimate for the supplemental appropriations language was prepared in reference to Rules Committee Print 115-50 (see https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53423).
12.	In addition to being the vehicle for the supplemental appropriations bill, this large and complex piece of legislation adjusted the discretionary budget caps for FY2018 and FY2019, extended the FY2018 continuing resolution, extended suspension of the debt limit, and provided legislative fixes for a variety of disaster-related policy issues.
13.	Roll No. 127.
14.	Record Vote Number 63.
15.	Although most appropriations are available for only one year, not all appropriations are spent in the year they are provided. Some appropriations, such as those for Procurement, Construction, and Improvements, are available for multiple years. Others, such as those for the Disaster Relief Fund, never expire, and are available until they are used or rescinded.
16.	Generally speaking, those provided through annual legislation. For more detail, see the preceding text box and the Appendix.
17.	These items, which qualify for special designation under the Budget Control Act, provide discretionary budget authority to DHS components but are not included in the "appropriations" total for the bill at the end of the detail tables in the committee reports.
18.	Office of the Chief Financial Officer, A Common Appropriations Structure for DHS: FY2016 Crosswalk, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, February 2, 2015, p. 2.
19.	Although the House and Senate have generally produced symmetrically structured bills in the past, additional titles are sometimes added by one of the chambers to address special issues. For example, the FY2012 House full committee markup added a sixth title to carry a $1 billion emergency appropriation for the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF). The Senate version carried no additional titles beyond the five described above. For FY2017, the House and Senate committee bills took different approaches to restructuring appropriations and departmental functions, and ultimately, a sixth title was added to provide supplemental appropriations requested by the then-new Trump Administration.
20.	The detail table at the end of the explanatory statement notes the budget authority provided by these provisions, as well as budget authority that scorekeeping rules mandate be included in the act's total spending.
21.	The Management Directorate includes the Office of the Under Secretary for Management (USM), the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and the Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO).
22.	This includes $2 million charged to the discretionary score of the bill for a policy provision regarding expenses of primary and secondary schooling for DHS employee dependents. (The provision was included the House-passed bill as Division E, Section 530, but not in the Senate draft or enacted FY2018 annual appropriation.)
23.	$1.14 billion of this total was provided as supplemental appropriations under Title VI of Division F of P.L. 115-31.
24.	Other resources that contribute to the budget for these components include mandatory spending, fee revenues, and trust funds.
25.	In addition to the appropriations provided in Title III and the funding for disaster relief ($24 million of which was requested to be transferred to the OIG), roughly $1.5 billion is provided through offsetting collections to the Federal Protective Service and FEMA—but as it is funding through offsetting collections, it is not visible in the net discretionary appropriations total. Other resources that contribute to the budget for these components include mandatory spending, fee revenues, and trust funds, including the National Flood Insurance Fund.
26.	This includes a proposed $48 million transfer from the DRF to the OIG, twice what had been requested by the Administration.
27.	This includes a proposed $48 million transfer from the DRF to the OIG, twice what had been requested by the Administration.
28.	As noted elsewhere, general provisions also may provide funding. Incidences where this occurs in the act are reflected in Tables 1-4.
29.	31 U.S.C. §§1341, 1342, 1344, 1511-1517.
30.	Appropriations, outlays, and account balances for various appropriations accounts can be viewed in the end-of-year reports published by the U.S. Treasury titled Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government. The DHS portion of the report can be accessed at http://fms.treas.gov/annualreport/cs2005/c18.pdf.
31.	P.L. 101-508, Title XIII.
32.	Prepared with assistance from [author name scrubbed], Analyst in American National Government.
33.	P.L. 113-67.
34.	Office of Management and Budget, OMB Final Sequestration Report to the President and Congress for Fiscal Year 2017, Washington, DC, May 19, 2017, pp. 7-8, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/sequestration_reports/2017_final_sequestration_report_may_2017_potus.pdf.
35.	Letter from Mick Mulvaney, Director, OMB, to the Honorable Patrick Leahy, Vice Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, April 23, 2018.
36.	Ibid., p. 11.