FY2021 District of Columbia Budget and Appropriations

April 16, 2021 – April 19, 2021 R46763

FY2021 District of Columbia Budget and
April 19, 2021
Appropriations
Joseph V. Jaroscak
The District of Columbia (DC) government’s local operating budget and much of its local
Analyst in Economic
legislation is subject to congressional approval, pursuant to the plenary legislative authority of
Development Policy
Congress over the federal capital granted by the U.S. Constitution. In addition to congressional

authority over the DC budget process, typically, annual federal appropriations legislation has
included a series of federal payments for a variety of services and initiatives in DC. Such

legislation also often includes general provisions, specific to DC, that establish fiscal, budgetary,
and policy controls on federal, and in some cases, local DC funds.
Each year, the DC government produces a budget through a coordinated process between the Executive Office of the Mayor
and the DC Council. The budget consists of a federal portion and a local portion, which are adopted by the DC Council in
two separate bills. Once approved, the federal portion is transmitted by the mayor to the President, who forwards it to
Congress for review, possible modification, and approval through the annual appropriations process. The local portion is
submitted by the chair of the DC Council to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, for review by Congress. In 2013,
DC enacted the Local Budget Autonomy Act of 2012, which amended DC’s home rule charter by decreasing the length of
the congressional review period (also known as the layover period) for its local budget to 30 days, similar to most other DC
laws, during which Congress may act to disapprove the legislation. After a series of legal and legislative challenges, the act
was upheld by a DC Superior Court ruling. The DC government has observed the act in its budget process since 2016.
On February 10, 2020, the Trump Administration submitted its detailed budget request for FY2021, which included $753
million in federal payments to the District of Columbia. The DC government passed a $16.9 billion dollar FY2021 budget on
August 31, 2020. The U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L.
116-260). Division E, Title IV of the act included $734.5 million in federal payments for DC. The act also included several
general provisions relating to fiscal and budgetary controls, administrative directives, and restrictions or prohibitions related
to social policy. Some such provisions pertain to issues including abortion services, DC voting representation, needle
exchange initiatives, and Schedule I controlled substances.

Congressional Research Service

link to page 7 link to page 8 FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

Introduction
The U.S. Constitution provides Congress with plenary legislative authority over the District of
Columbia (DC) as the federal capital. With the passage of the District of Columbia Self-
Government and Governmental Reorganization Act of 1973 (Home Rule Act; P.L. 93-198),
Congress granted DC limited home rule authority and empowered DC residents to elect a mayor
and city council. However, Congress retained its authority to review and approve al DC laws,
including DC’s annual budget. In addition to its budget authority, general y, Congress annual y
appropriates a series of federal payments to DC for a variety of purposes, funded through the
Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) appropriations bil .1
The provisions in annual federal appropriations acts related to the DC budget typical y include the
following three components:
1. Federal payments for specific purposes;2
2. Approval, disapproval, or modifications to DC’s operating budget;3 and
3. General provisions pertaining to fiscal, budgetary, and policy directives, controls,
and restrictions.4
This report provides an overview of the DC budget process, details the types and amounts of
federal payments appropriated in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260), and
discusses some general provisions related to local DC policy in the FY2021 appropriations act.
District of Columbia Budget Process
The DC Home Rule Act codifies the process by which the Executive Office of the Mayor and DC
Council develop DC’s operating budget. Under this process, the DC Mayor establishes a
proposed budget, consistent with guidance on funding levels from the DC Chief Financial
Officer. The mayor’s budget also considers agency requests and other analysis by the Executive
Office of the Mayor.
With regards to the budget, the DC council serves in an oversight role. As required by the Home
Rule Act, the DC Council must approve a budget within 70 days after receiving a budget proposal
from the DC mayor. The budget consists of a federal portion and a local portion, which are
adopted by the DC Council in two separate bil s. Once approved, the federal portion is
transmitted by the mayor to the President, who forwards it to Congress for review, possible
modification, and approval through the annual appropriations process. The local portion is
submitted by the chairman of the DC Council to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, for
a 30-day period of review by Congress.5 If Congress does not act to disapprove the legislation
within this 30-day period, it becomes a law.6

1 For more information on FSGG appropriations, see CRS Report R46621, Financial Services and General
Governm ent (FSGG) FY2021 Appropriations: Overview, by Baird Webel.
2 T he federal payments for FY2020 and FY2021 are enumerated in Table 1 of this report.
3 D.C. Code §1-204.46
4 For an overview of some such provisions, see “ General Provisions: Key Policy Issues” in this report.
5 Government of the District of Columbia, Fiscal Year 2021 Approved Budget and Financial Plan , August 27, 2020,
https://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/DC_OCFO_Budget_Vol_1-Bookmarked-9-1-
2020.pdf.
6 District of Columbia Council, How a Bill Becomes a Law: District of Columbia Legislative Process,
Congressional Research Service
1

FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

Since the passage of P.L. 109-115 for FY2006, the DC appropriations have been included in a
multi-agency appropriations bil ; before FY2006 the DC budget was considered by the House and
the Senate as a stand-alone bil . The DC budget is currently included in the Financial Services
and General Government appropriations bil (FSGG).
Local Budget Autonomy
In 2013, DC enacted the Local Budget Autonomy Amendment Act of 2012 (D.C. Law 19-321).7
The act amended DC’s home rule charter by decreasing the length of the congressional review
period (also known as the layover period) for its local budget to 30 days, similar to most other DC
laws. The DC Board of Elections placed the proposed charter amendment on an April 23, 2013,
bal ot. DC voters approved the local budget autonomy charter amendment with 83% of the vote
in support of the amendment. The act faced legal and federal legislative chal enges.8 A 2016 DC
Superior Court ruling upheld the act.9 The DC government has observed the act in its budget
process since 2016.10
FY2021 Appropriations of Federal Payments for the
District of Columbia
The President’s FY2021 Budget Request
On February 10, 2020, the Trump Administration submitted its detailed budget request for
FY2021. The President’s proposed budget for federal payments to DC was included in an
appendix for Other Independent Agencies.11 The Administration’s proposed budget included $753
mil ion in federal payments to the District of Columbia for activities including court services,
offender supervision, and public defender services, which would have represented a $39 mil ion
increase over the FY2020 appropriations of $714 mil ion.
The President’s budget specifical y sought to eliminate appropriations of certain federal payments
for DC, including resident tuition assistance, citing that the program’s authorization expired in
FY2012 and there is “a lack of a clear Federal role for supporting the cost of higher education
specifical y for District residents.”12 The budget request also sought to eliminate a federal
payment for the DC Sewer and Water Authority.13

https://dccouncil.us/how-a-bill-becomes-a-law/.
7 D.C. Law 19-321, Local Budget Autonomy Amendment Act of 2012 , https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/laws/19-
321.html.
8 See Council of the District of Columbia v. Jeffrey S. Dewitt, 144 Daily Wash. L. Rptr. 893 (D.C. Super. Ct. March
18, 2016).
9 “Superior Court judge sides with D.C. lawmakers on control of locally -raised dollars,” Washington Post, March 18,
2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/superior-court -judge-sides-with-dc-lawmakers-on-control-
of-locally-raised-dollars/2016/03/18/1059c6e6-ed55-11e5-a6f3-21ccdbc5f74e_story.html.
10 Information provided by the District of Columbia Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 2020.
11 Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Appendix, February 2020,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET -2021-APP/pdf/BUDGET -2021-APP.pdf.
12 Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Appendix, 2020, pp. 1250-1251,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET -2021-APP/pdf/BUDGET -2021-APP.pdf.
13 Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Appendix, 2020, p. 1253,
Congressional Research Service
2

link to page 7 FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

District of Columbia FY2021 Budget
On May 18, 2020, the DC mayor submitted a proposed budget to the DC Council. The council
approved a budget of $16.9 bil ion on July 28, 2020, and transmitted it to the mayor on August
17, 2020.14 On August 27, 2020, the mayor transmitted the federal portion of the budget to
President Trump.15 The mayor signed and returned a version of the budget to the DC Council
August 31, 2020.16 On August 31, 2020, the DC Council Chair submitted the local budget to
Congress for review, in accordance with the Local Budget Autonomy Amendment Act of 2012
(D.C. Law 19-321).17 The federal payment figures in the DC proposed budget did not include the
proposed cuts to resident tuition support and the DC Water and Sewer Authority in the Trump
Administration’s budget proposal.
Congressional Action
The House Committee on Appropriations reported a Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2021 (H.R. 7668) on July 17, 2020.18 The bil proposed approximately $762
mil ion in federal payments to DC, representing an increase of approximately $48 mil ion
compared to the FY2020 level. The text of H.R. 7668, as reported, was subsequently included as
Division D of H.R. 7617 when that bil was considered on the House floor. H.R. 7617 passed the
House July 31, 2020.
The Senate Appropriations Committee did not hold hearings on the FY2021 budget request for
federal payments for DC. However, the committee majority released a draft bil and a draft
explanatory statement on November 10, 2020.19
FSGG appropriations were enacted in Division E of H.R. 133, the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2021. The House and Senate passed the H.R. 133 on December 21, 2020. The President
signed the bil into law on December 27, 2020, as P.L. 116-260. Title IV of Division E of the act
included $734.5 mil ion in federal payments for a variety of purposes in DC. Table 1 details the

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET -2021-APP/pdf/BUDGET -2021-APP.pdf.
14 District of Columbia Council, B23-0761—Fiscal Year 2021 Local Budget Act of 2020: Legislative History,
https://lims.dccouncil.us/Legislation/B23-0761; District of Columbia Council, B23-0760—Fiscal Year 2021 Budget
Support Act of 2020: Legislative History, https://lims.dccouncil.us/Legislation/B23-0760.
15 Letter from Muriel Bowser, District of Columbia Mayor, to T he Honorable Donald J. T rump, President of the United
States, August 27, 2020, https://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/
DC_OCFO_Budget_Vol_1-Bookmarked-9-1-2020.pdf.
16 District of Columbia Council, B23-0761—Fiscal Year 2021 Local Budget Act of 2020: Legislative History,
https://lims.dccouncil.us/Legislation/B23-0761; District of Columbia Council, B23-0760—Fiscal Year 2021 Budget
Support Act of 2020: Legislative History, https://lims.dccouncil.us/Legislation/B23-0760.
17 Letter from Phil Mendelson, District of Columbia Council Chair, to T he Honorable Nancy Pelosi and T he Honorable
Michael R. Pence, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and President of the Senate, August 31, 2020,
https://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/DC_OCFO_Budget_Vol_1-Bookmarked-9-1-
2020.pdf.
18 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government,
Report to Accom pany H.R. 7668, 116th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 116-456, July 17, 2020.
19 See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, “Committee Releases FY21 Bills in Effort to Advance
Process, Produce Bipartisan Results,” https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/committee-releases-fy21-bills-in-
effort -to-advance-process-produce-bipartisan-results/.
Congressional Research Service
3

link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 7 FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

FY2021 proposed and enacted amounts of federal payments for the District of Columbia, as
compared to the FY2020 enacted amounts.20
P.L. 116-260 also approved the expenditure of DC local funds as outlined in the Fiscal Year 2021
Budget Request Act of 2020.21 Additional y, the act included a provision al owing the use of DC
government local funds in the event of any potential federal government shutdown in FY2022. A
similar provision has been included in al appropriations bil s since FY2013.22
Table 1. District of Columbia Appropriations, FY2020-FY2021: Federal Payments
In Mil ions of Dol ars
FY2021
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
FY2021
Senate
FY2021
Enacted
District of
Presidential
House
Committee
Enacted
(P.L. 116-
Columbia
Budget
Passed
Majority
(P.L. 116-

93)
Request
Request
(H.R. 7617)
Draft
260)
Resident
Tuition
40.0
40.0
—
40.0
10.0
40.0
Support
Emergency
Planning and
Security
18.0
52.9a
51.4
52.9
38.4
38.4b
Costs
DC Courts
250.1
267.8
267.8
265.6
242.5
250.1
Defender
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
Services
Court
Services and
Offender
248.5
—c
248.2
245.9
243.7
245.9
Supervision
Agency
The Public
Defender
44.0
—c
44.2
44.0
46.2
46.2
Service
Criminal
Justice
Coordinating
2.2
2.2
1.8
2.2
1.8
2.2
Council
Judicial
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.6
Commissions
School
Improvement
52.5
90.0
90.0
52.5
60.0
52.5
DC National
Guard
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6

20 Please note that not all of the funds in Table 1 are directed to, or expended by, DC government agencies.
21 D.C. Law 23-136, Fiscal Year 2021 Local Budget Act of 2020, https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/laws/23-
136.html.
22 Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, “Norton Assures Residents Budget Provision Will Keep D.C. Open if Federal
Government Shuts Down,” press release, December 8, 2020, https://norton.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/
norton-assures-residents-budget -provision-will-keep-dc-open-if-federal.
Congressional Research Service
4

link to page 8 link to page 8 FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

FY2021
FY2020
FY2021
FY2021
FY2021
Senate
FY2021
Enacted
District of
Presidential
House
Committee
Enacted
(P.L. 116-
Columbia
Budget
Passed
Majority
(P.L. 116-

93)
Request
Request
(H.R. 7617)
Draft
260)
Testing and
Treatment of
4.0
4.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
4.0
HIV/AIDS
DC Water
and Sewer
8.0
8.0
—
8.0
8.0
8.0
Authorityd
Federal
Payments
714.3e
511.9
753.3
762.1
700.5
734.5
Total
Sources: P.L. 116-93; D.C. Act 23-409, Fiscal Year 2021 Federal Portion Budget Request Act of 2020,
https://lims.dccouncil.us/downloads/LIMS/45034/Signed_Act/B23-0762-Signed_Act.pdf; Office of Management and
Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Appendix, February 2020, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-
2021-APP/pdf/BUDGET-2021-APP.pdf; H.Rept. 116-456, Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations Bil , 2021, https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/116th-congress/house-report/456;
https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news/committee-relea ses-fy21-bil s-in-effort-to-advance-process-produce-
bipartisan-results/; P.L. 116-260.
Notes: Figures may not sum to totals due to rounding.
a. This does not include amounts budgeted for COVID-19 relief.
b. This amount includes approximately $21.9 mil ion for costs associated with the January 2021 Presidential
Inauguration.
c. This item is not included in the DC Federal Portion Budget Request Act. This is a federal y chartered entity
working exclusively on behalf of the District. Its budget request is submitted under a separate account.
d. The federal payment for the DC Water and Sewer Authority includes a provision requiring a 100% match
from the authority.
e. The FY2020 enacted federal payment total amount in this table does not include any supplemental
appropriations provided under the CARES Act.
General Provisions: Key Policy Issues
General y, FSGG appropriations acts include a series of general provisions pertaining to federal
payments and other sources of DC budgetary funding. These provisions can be grouped into
several distinct but overlapping categories, with the most predominant being provisions related to
fiscal and budgetary directives and controls. Other provisions include administrative directives
and controls, limitations on lobbying for statehood or congressional voting representation,
congressional oversight, and congressional y imposed restrictions and prohibitions related to
social policy.
Title VIII of Division E of P.L. 116-260 enumerates such provisions for FY2021. The remainder
of this section provides an overview of some proposed and enacted provisions restricting or
prohibiting the use of federal and/or local funds for particular local social policy initiatives in
DC.23

23 Such provisions are limitations (also known as limitation provisions or, more colloquially, riders) that
restrict/prohibit the use of funds for certain purposes. For information on limitations, see CRS Report R41634,
Lim itations in Appropriations Measures: An Overview of Procedural Issues, by James V. Saturno.
Congressional Research Service
5

FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

Abortion Services
The use of public funding for abortion services in DC is a perennial issue debated in Congress
during annual deliberations on DC appropriations.24 President Trump’s FY2021 budget request
included a provision intended to continue existing restrictions on the use of any funds, federal or
local, by the DC government for abortion services, except in instances of rape, incest, or when the
woman’s life would be endangered if the pregnancy were carried to term.25 The House-passed
FY2021 FSGG appropriations bil , H.R. 7617, included a provision that would have restricted the
use of federal funds for the same purposes outlined in the President’s budget request, but it did
not mention other sources of funding (i.e., local funds). A proposed provision in the Senate
Committee on Appropriations majority draft would have prohibited the use of federal and local
DC funds, with certain exceptions. As enacted, Section 810 of Title VIII of Division E of P.L.
116-260 similarly prohibits the use of any funds by the DC government to provide for abortion
services, stating:
No funds available for obligation or expenditure by the District of Columbia government
under any authority shall be expended for any abortion except where the life of the mother
would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where the pregnancy is the result
of an act of rape or incest.
DC Voting Representation in Congress
For several years, the general provisions of annual appropriation acts have prohibited the DC
government from using federal or local funds to lobby for voting representation in Congress,
including statehood.26 P.L. 116-260 included three specific provisions limiting this type of activity
in sections 802, 804, and 806 of Title VIII of Division E. The three provisions state:
1. “None of the Federal funds provided in this Act shal be used for publicity or
propaganda purposes or implementation of any policy including boycott designed
to support or defeat legislation pending before Congress or any State legislature.”
2. “None of the Federal funds provided in this Act may be used by the District of
Columbia to provide for salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the
offices of United States Senator or United States Representative under section
4(d) of the District of Columbia Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives
of 1979 (D.C. Law 3-171; D.C. Official Code, sec. 1-123).”
3. “None of the Federal funds contained in this Act may be used by the District of
Columbia Attorney General or any other officer or entity of the District
government to provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action which
seeks to require Congress to provide for voting representation in Congress for the
District of Columbia.”
Substantial y similar provisions were included in the Trump Administration’s proposed budget
and the Senate Committee on Appropriations majority draft. These provisions were not included

24 Since 1979, with the passage of the District of Columbia Appropriations Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-93; 93 Stat. 719),
Congress has placed some limitation or prohibition on the use of public funds for abortion services for District
residents. For a detailed overview of these provisions, see CRS Report R41772, District of Colum bia: A Brief Review
of Provisions in District of Colum bia Appropriations Acts Restricting the Funding of Abortion Services.
25 Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Appendix, February 2020,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET -2021-APP/pdf/BUDGET -2021-APP.pdf.
26 Several similar provisions date back to the 1980s and 1990s.
Congressional Research Service
6

FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

among general provisions specifical y pertaining to DC in the version of FSGG appropriations
that passed the House of Representatives (H.R. 7617).
Needle Exchange
Addressing the spread of HIV and AIDS among intravenous drug abusers has been a policy issue
of ongoing debate in congressional appropriations for DC.27 Some appropriations acts have
included provisions to prohibit or restrict the use of funds to establish a needle exchange program
aimed at reducing the spread of HIV and AIDS among users of il egal drugs.
The prohibition on the use of federal and District funds for a needle exchange program was first
approved by Congress as Section 170 of the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, 1999
(Division A of P.L. 105-277). The FY1999 act did al ow private funding of needle exchange
programs. The Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2008 (Division
D, Title VIII of P.L. 110-161) contained language that further modified the needle exchange
provision included in previous appropriations acts. This act al owed the use of local funds for a
needle exchange program, a provision that has been continued in subsequent fiscal years. Under
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (Division C, Title VIII of P.L. 111-117), the provision
was further modified to prohibit the use of federal funds in locations deemed to be
“inappropriate” for needle exchange, by local professionals in public health or law enforcement.
The Trump Administration’s FY2021 budget proposal included a provision that would have
prohibited the use of federal funds for the distribution of needles or syringes for this purpose.28 As
passed in the House, H.R. 7617 did not include a provision restricting or prohibiting the use of
funds for needle or syringe distribution. The Senate committee majority version of FSGG
appropriations would have continued the provision prohibiting the use of federal funds for related
needle and syringe distribution. Section 807 of Title VIII of Division E of P.L. 116-260 continued
the provision prohibiting the use of federal funds for this use, as stated below:
None of the Federal funds contained in this Act may be used to distribute an y needle or
syringe for the purpose of preventing the spread of blood borne pathogens in any location
that has been determined by the local public health or local law enforcement authorities to
be inappropriate for such distribution.
Schedule I Substances
Several general provisions included in appropriations acts have restricted or prohibited the DC
government from implementing local laws related to the legalization or decriminalization of
schedule I controlled substances, including marijuana.29 These provisions have varied depending
on the legislation that they were designed to restrict, ranging from legalization to
decriminalization of such substances for medical or recreational purposes.30

27 Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, “HIV Progress in D.C. Accelerated by Federal Payments Norton Secures and Her
Removal of the Needle Exchange Rider,” press release, August 21, 2020, https://norton.house.gov/media-center/press-
releases/hiv-progress-in-dc-accelerated-by-federal-payments-norton-secures-and.
28 Office of Management and Budget, A Budget for America’s Future: Appendix, February 2020,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET -2021-APP/pdf/BUDGET -2021-APP.pdf.
29 For a definition of schedule I substances, see 21 U.S.C. §812.
30 In 1998, District of Columbia voters approved Initiative 59, which allowed the use of medical marijuana to assist
persons suffering from debilitating health conditions and diseases, includin g cancer and HIV infection. T he
certification and implementation of the initiative, however, were delayed over a decade by Congress due to the passage
of the “Barr Amendment,” which, in a series of DC appropriations acts, prohibited the use of appropriated funds to
Congressional Research Service
7

FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

In 2014, the DC Council passed the “Marijuana Possession Decriminalization Amendment Act of
2014”31 that decriminalized the possession of smal amounts of marijuana by making such
activity a civil violation subject to a civil fine of $25.32 The act went into effect in July 2014. Also
in 2014, almost 65% of DC voters voted to approve Initiative 71 to legalize the possession,
growth, and exchange of certain amounts of marijuana among individuals aged 21 and older in
DC.33 Subsequently, the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L.
113-235) included a general provision prohibiting the use of funds contained in the act to carry
out such laws or regulations. Similar provisions have been included in subsequent appropriations
acts. In November, 2020, approximately 76% of DC voters voted to approve bal ot Initiative 81,
to decriminalize some psychedelic plants and fungi.34
The Trump Administration’s FY2021 budget proposal and the Senate Appropriations Committee
majority draft included a provision that would have prohibited the use of any funds to enact or
implement the legalization or decriminalization of schedule I substances. The bil that passed the
House of Representatives, H.R. 7617, did not include this provision. As enacted, Section 809 of
Title VIII of Division E of P.L. 116-260 continued the provision prohibiting the use of federal and
local funds for the legalization or decriminalization of schedule I substances in DC, as stated
below:
(a) None of the Federal funds contained in this Act may be used to enact or carry out any
law, rule, or regulation to legalize or otherwise reduce penalties associated with the
possession, use, or distribution of any schedule I substance under the Controled
Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) or any tetrahydrocannabinols derivative.
(b) No funds available for obligation or expenditure by the District of Co lumbia
government under any authority may be used to enact any law, rule, or regulation to
legalize or otherwise reduce penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution
of any schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.)
or any tetrahydrocannabinols derivative for recreational purposes.
Concluding Observations
Congress maintains plenary authority over DC legislation and budgets, as granted under the U.S.
Constitution. One way in which Congress has exercised its authority has been through general
provisions in annual federal appropriations legislation. Some Members of Congress have
proposed legislation that would modify the role of Congress in passing local DC legislation. For
instance, in the 117th Congress, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton introduced the District of
Columbia Legislative Autonomy Act (H.R. 411), which would amend the DC Home Rule Act by
eliminating the process of congressional review for legislation passed by the DC Council.
Other proposed legislation related to voting representation in Congress for DC residents, would
also likely change the role of Congress in local legislation and policy decisions. For information

conduct any ballot initiative that sought to legalize marijuana or otherwise reduce penalties for its use.
31 District of Columbia Council, Marijuana Possession Decriminalization Amendment Act of 2014 , July 2014,
https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/laws/20-126.html.
32 Aaron C. Davis, “ D.C. Council Votes to Eliminate Jail T ime for Marijuana Possession ,” Washington Post, March 5,
2014.
33 District of Columbia Council, Legalization of Possession of Minimal Amounts of Marijuana for Personal Use
Initiative of 2014, February 2015, https://code.dccouncil.us/dc/council/laws/20-153.html.
34 Justin Wm. Moyer, “D.C. Voters Approve Ballot Question to Decriminalize Psychedelic Mushrooms,” Washington
Post, November 3, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-magic-mushrooms-result/2020/11/03/
bb929e86-1abc-11eb-bb35-2dcfdab0a345_story.html.
Congressional Research Service
8

FY2021 District of Columbia Appropriations

on some such proposed legislation, please see CRS Insight IN11599, District of Columbia Voting
Representation Proposals in the 117th Congress, by Joseph V. Jaroscak.

Author Information

Joseph V. Jaroscak

Analyst in Economic Development Policy

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 n ot 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.

Congressional Research Service
R46763 · VERSION 2 · NEW
9

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Apr. 19, 2021

HTML · PDF

1% changed

Apr. 16, 2021

HTML · PDF

Metadata

Topic areas

Legislative Process

Appropriations

Report Type: CRS Report

Source: CRSReports.Congress.gov

Raw Metadata: JSON