Committee Funding Resolutions and Processes, 107th Congress

Committee Funding Resolutions and Processes, 107th Congress

Order Code RL30898
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Committee Funding Resolutions
and Processes, 107th Congress
Updated March 30, 2001
Paul S. Rundquist
Specialist in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
R. Eric Petersen
Analyst in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Committee Funding Resolutions
and Processes, 107th Congress
Summary
All House and Senate standing and select committees (except the Appropriations
Committees) receive their operating budgets through House and Senate approval of
biennial funding resolutions. These resolutions provide the funds with which
committees hire staff, employ temporary consultants, pay for office equipment and
supplies, defray the costs of member and staff travel on committee business, and meet
other miscellaneous costs.
Under Senate Rules, committee funding resolutions are to be approved by
February 28 of the year in which a new Congress begins. However, pursuant to a
unanimous consent request on February 28, 2001, committees were temporarily
permitted to spend at their previously authorized rate, up through March 10, 2001.
On March 8, 2001, by voice vote, the Senate agreed to S. Res. 54, submitted by
Senators Trent Lott and Tom Daschle, to fund the operations of most Senate
committees up through February 28, 2003. The amounts provided reflected the
requests made by each Senate committee to implement the equal staffing provisions
of the Senate powersharing agreement. This agreement, contained in S. Res. 8 of
January 5, 2001, in part provides for equal Republican and Democratic membership
on all Senate committees and an equal division of staff between the parties on all
panels.
Under House Rules, funds for committees are to be approved by March 31,
2001. Earlier in March, budget requests from House committees were considered by
the House Administration Committee. By unanimous voice vote on March 22, the
House Administration Committee ordered reported H.Res. 84, to provide funds for
the House committees for the 107th Congress. The funds recommended appeared to
assure that, by 2002, the minority party would control one-third of the staff positions
on nearly all the committees funded by the resolution. The resolution passed the
House on March 27, by a vote of 357-61.
Long-standing disputes about the equitable apportionment of staff positions and
operating funds between the parties have been a feature of House funding debates
over the past quarter century. Conversely, because Senate rules (since 1981) have
provided more explicit authority for the Senate minority party to control at least one-
third of the committee staff positions and funding, action in that chamber to approve
committee operating budgets is normally not as controversial.

Contents
House Floor Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
House Committee Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
House Funding Procedures and Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Senate Committee Funding Action, 107th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Senate Committee Funding Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
List of Tables
Table 1. House Committee Funding, 105th Congress-107th Congress . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 2. Senate Committee Funding, 105th Congress-107th Congress . . . . . . . . . 8

Committee Funding Resolutions
and Processes, 107th Congress
All standing and select committees of both chambers of Congress (except for the
Appropriations Committees) obtain their operating budgets pursuant to a biennial
committee funding resolution. Often, House action on these funding resolutions is
controversial, because of disputes over the allocation of staff positions on committees
between the majority and minority parties. Senate action is normally less contentious
because there are stronger guarantees in Senate rules providing at least one-third of
committee staff and funds to the minority. Many Members in both chambers criticize
funding recommendations that significantly exceed the rate of inflation, or provide
funds to particular committees to support work by a committee with which these
Members disagree.
In the 107th Congress, the House parties appear to have reached an
accommodation satisfactory to both parties which, by 2002, would provide minority
members on nearly all panels financed through the House funding process with at least
one-third of the committee staff positions. Under House Rules, the minority is
guaranteed one-third of the first 30 staff positions authorized for a committee, but is
not entitled to such a proportion of any additional staff positions. On March 27, 2001,
the House adopted H.Res. 84, the biennial funding resolution, by a vote of 357-61,
the largest margin of support for a funding resolution since the House began to
consider omnibus funding resolutions in 1981.
Senate action on its committee funding for the 107th Congress was modified as
a result of the powersharing agreement established by S. Res. 8 of January 5, 2001.1
This agreement assures Republicans and Democrats of equal staffing resources on all
committees, and supplants Senate rules that require minority party control of at least
one-third of each committee’s staff positions. Despite some delays in its normal
timetable, the Senate, on March 8, 2001, agreed to a biennial funding resolution by
unanimous consent.
House Floor Action
The unanimity among members of the House Administration Committee in
reporting the 107th Congress funding resolution resulted in substantial support for the
measure on the floor among Members of both parties.
1Although this report refers to modifications made by this agreement to normal Senate practice
in committee funding and staffing, for a more complete discussion of the powersharing
arrangement, see also U. S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, The Senate
Powersharing Agreement, by Paul S. Rundquist, CRS Report RL30881, March. 13, 2001.

CRS-2
The House took up H.Res. 84 on March 27, under the terms of a unanimous
consent agreement that precluded the offering of any floor amendments or a motion
to recommit. The House agreed to the funding resolution by a vote of 357-61.2
Among those voting against the resolution were some Members concerned that not
all committees had provided the minority with one-third of the available staff, while
others were opposed to the growth in committee costs since 1995, when the House
cut committee budgets by one-third.3
The House normally acts on committee funding resolutions during the last week
of March in the first year of a Congress. The committee funding resolution is normally
called up as privileged business under the Rules of the House. Such business may be
called up and considered by the House without the need for a special rule from the
Rules Committee. Privileged funding resolutions are considered in the House under
the one-hour rule. Typically, the majority party manager does not yield the floor to
permit amendments to be offered. (The committee-reported amendment in the nature
of a substitute is automatically laid before the House.) At the end of one hour of
debate, the majority party manager moves the previous question and, if agreed to, the
House votes on final passage of the resolution. Before the vote on final passage, it
has become customary for the minority party to offer a motion to recommit the
funding resolution. Such a motion normally permits the minority to offer an
alternative funding proposal and to obtain a vote on it by the House.
House Committee Action
Each committee is encouraged to discuss its proposed budget and approve it at
a committee organization meeting. Some committees, however, do not prepare or
approve their draft budgets this way. Each committee chair normally introduces a
House resolution to provide his or her committee with the requisite funds for the two
years of the Congress. These individual resolutions are then referred to the House
Administration Committee, which holds public hearings on each committee’s request.
The chair and the ranking minority member from each committee normally testify at
these hearings. The House Administration Committee began its hearings on March
1, 2001 and continued them on March 7.
The chair of the House Administration Committee then typically introduces an
omnibus funding resolution, which, after its referral to the House Administration
Committee, has served as the legislative vehicle for a full committee markup. The
chairman’s resolution usually incorporates, without change, the amounts requested
by each committee. House Administration chairman, Representative Rob Ney (R-
OH), introduced such a resolution (H.Res. 84) on March 7, 2001. At its markup
session on March 22, 2001, Chairman Ney offered an amendment in the nature of a
substitute to this resolution. The amendment reduced the funding requests for 16 of
2 Remarks of Representative Rob Ney, and others, “Providing for Expenses of Certain
Committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred Seventh Congress,”
Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 147, March 27, 2001, pp. H1143-H1148, H1154-
H1155.
3 Lauren W. Whittington and Ben Pershing, “After the Revolution, GOP Retreats on Cuts,”
Roll Call, vol. 46, March 29, 2001, pp. 1, 24.

CRS-3
the 19 committees covered in the resolution. The Ney amendment was agreed to, and
the resolution as amended was ordered reported by unanimous voice vote. The report
on the resolution (H.Rept. 107-25) was filed on March 23, 2001. This unanimity
reflected the views of Democratic members of the committee that, by 2002 at the
latest, the minority would control at least one-third of the staff positions on nearly all
committees funded by the resolution.
House Funding Procedures and Issues
Under House Rule X, clause 6, each standing and select committee of the House
(except the Appropriations Committee) is required to submit an operating budget
request for its necessary expenses over the two years of a Congress. The budgetary
requests include estimated salary needs for staff, costs of consulting services, printing
costs, office equipment and supply costs, and travel costs for committee members and
staff. Some costs (such as pension and insurance contributions for committee
employees) are not directly billed to the committee and are paid from other
appropriated funds. Individual committee requests are then packaged by the House
Administration Committee into an omnibus “primary expense resolution.”
Clause 6(c) requires that “the minority party (be) treated fairly in the
appointment” of committee staff employed pursuant to such expense resolutions.
Prior to the 104th Congress, House rules provided a base level of 30 so-called
“statutory” staff positions for all House standing committees (except the
Appropriations Committee). Funds for these staff were provided through a line-item
appropriation and were not included in the funding resolutions reported from the
House Administration Committee. In the 104th Congress, House rules were changed
(1) to provide for biennial committee funding resolutions, and (2) to include funding
authorization for the baseline 30 staff positions in each committee’s funding
authorization. (As before, these provisions were not made applicable to the House
Appropriations Committee.) Twenty of these staff positions are allotted to the
committee majority and 10 to the committee minority. The House majority leadership
has encouraged its committee leaders to move as quickly as possible to provide the
minority with one-third of the remaining committee staff and resources authorized in
the biennial funding resolutions. Statements made by leaders of the House
Administration Committee at the beginning of its committee funding review for the
107th Congress indicate a general consensus that all House committees should provide
at least one-third minority staffing this Congress.
Previously, there have been disputes about the interpretation of funding and
staffing guidelines for the minority. Some committees have considered equitable the
apportionment of one-third of staff salary funds, while others have considered the
one-third standard to apply to the number of staff positions regardless of salary.
Some committees have said that those administrative staff providing services to both
parties should be excluded from the minority-majority staff allocation, although most
such administrative staff may have been majority party staff designees. There are still
disparities among committees on the allocation to the minority of office space, travel
funds, and office equipment. Nevertheless, both parties seem to agree that, since the
103rd Congress, the minority party has been treated more equitably than before in the
allocation of House committee staff and resources. Remaining disputes between the

CRS-4
parties now focus on the speed with which all committees achieve, or plan to achieve,
this one-third standard.
In recent Congresses, the House Administration Committee has included an
authorization for a “reserve fund” in its omnibus funding resolution. With the
approval of the House Administration Committee, money in this fund could be
released to committees that encountered unexpected funding needs during a
Congress. The use of the reserve fund was controversial because the House did not
have to approve its use. However, for the 107th Congress, no reserve fund was set
aside in H.Res. 84.
Senate Committee Funding Action, 107th Congress
The Senate’s powersharing agreement (S. Res. 8, January 5, 2001) provides, in
part, that equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats serve on each Senate
committee and that the two parties be entitled to equal staffing on each committee.
Before Senate committees could draft and agree upon a proposed operational budget
for the 107th Congress, the committees were required under Senate rules to adopt
internal rules of procedure. Delays in adopting these rules (caused by negotiations
between the parties in each committee) caused a subsequent delay in committee
approval of budget request resolutions that would be referred to the Senate Rules and
Administration Committee. On February 28, the Senate agreed by unanimous consent
to continue the 106th Congress committee funding authority up through March 10,
2001, and for committees to have until that date to submit funding request
resolutions.4

On March 8, 2001, by voice vote, the Senate agreed to S. Res. 54, submitted by
Senators Trent Lott and Tom Daschle, to fund the operations of most Senate
committees up through February 28, 2003.5 The Lott-Daschle resolution
incorporated, without change, the dollar amounts requested by each of the individual
committees in resolutions presented earlier by committee chairs to implement the
equal staffing provisions of the Senate powersharing agreement.
Earlier the same day, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the chairman of the
Senate Rules and Administration Committee, submitted S. Res. 50, a resolution
providing operating funds for those Senate committees that had (up to that point)
presented their own funding request resolutions. S. Res. 50 was referred to the
Senate Rules and Administration Committee, but was never acted upon. It was
supplanted, later the same day, by the Lott-Daschle resolution that included amounts
for all committees, including those which had submitted funding resolutions after the
McConnell resolution had been submitted and referred.
4 Remarks of Sen. Trent Lott, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 147, Feb. 28, 2001,
p. S1719.
5 Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 147, March 8, 2001, pp. S2089-S2094.

CRS-5
Senate Committee Funding Rules
The Senate biennial committee funding process applies to all Senate committees
except Appropriations and Ethics, which have permanent authorizations for their staff
and operating expenses. The Senate Committee on Rules and Administration has
jurisdiction over committee funding resolutions, and also issues regulations governing
committee funding and staff. Committee funding and staff are also regulated by
Senate rules, especially Rule XXVI, paragraph 9, and Rule XXVII, as well as by
statute. The funds authorized by resolution are appropriated in legislative branch
appropriations acts.
Soon after a new Congress convenes, generally by January 31 of the first session,
each Senate committee (except Appropriations and Ethics) requests funds for two
years. The formal request comes as a Senate resolution introduced by the chair of
each committee, after formal review of the request by all committee members. The
various resolutions are referred to the Rules and Administration Committee. Each
committee supports its request by submitting supplementary materials, including those
specified by the Rules and Administration Committee. In recent Congresses, that
panel has advised committees on the permissible increase, or required decrease, it
hopes to impose on Senate committees, compared to the funding level in the previous
Congress. Committees requesting funds in excess of these guidelines have been asked
to include a justification in their budget submissions.
The Rules and Administration Committee may then hold hearings during which
committee leaders testify on their budget requests, although in recent Congresses,
testimony from some or all committees has been omitted in the interest of time. The
Rules and Administration Committee chair will normally introduce an omnibus
resolution incorporating the amounts requested each of the Senate committees in their
individual resolutions. The Rules and Administration Committee will then usually
meet to markup the resolution and, after final approval by the committee, report it to
the Senate and issue an accompanying written report. However, on occasion where
both parties have been in agreement on the funding resolution, it has been discharged
by unanimous consent from the committee without a formal markup or written report.
The Senate then considers the funding resolution under normal Senate rules and
procedures, although in recent Congresses, the Senate has agreed to the funding
resolution by unanimous consent without much, if any, floor discussion.
If a committee requires additional funds after the omnibus resolution has been
agreed to, funds may be requested essentially in the same way as they were for its
two-year budget. The Senate has minimized the need for supplemental funding,
however, by allowing committees to use unspent funds from one period specified in
the omnibus resolution during the next funding period. In the 106th and 107th
Congresses, the omnibus funding resolution also contained a special reserve from
which unexpected funding needs by any Senate committee could be met, upon the
request of its chair and ranking member, and the approval of the chair and ranking
member of the Rules and Administration Committee.
Senate Rule XXVII requires that each committee’s staff reflect the ratio of
majority and minority committee members and that the minority receive “fair
consideration” in the appointment of staff. A majority of the minority party members

CRS-6
of a committee may request at least one-third of the personnel funds for hiring
minority staff. This ratio is calculated after excluding funds for staff who perform
administrative and clerical functions for the committee as a whole, if any, as agreed
to by the chair and ranking minority member. The powersharing agreement of the
107th Congress sets this provision aside and, instead, requires equal staffing for the
majority and minority parties, after excluding from the calculation any committee staff
that both committee leaders agree serve members from both parties. Committee staff
may be supplemented by consultants and staff detailed to the committee from federal
agencies, subject to such restrictions as the Committee on Rules and Administration
may impose.
The Senate took several steps in 1999 to move to a biennial funding process that
more clearly reflects a fiscal year orientation. In the funding resolution agreed to in
1999 and again in 2001, the aggregate authorization for each committee is
apportioned among three calendar periodsSfrom March 1 to September 30 of the first
year of a Congress, from October 1 to September 30 of the following year, and from
October 1 to the following February 28. This permits the Senate to identify more
precisely the amounts authorized for each fiscal year and the subsequent
appropriations required.

CRS-7
Table 1. House Committee Funding, 105th Congress-107th Congress
Committees
105th
106th
107th Congress
Congress
Congress
Approved
Approved
Requested
Approved
Difference
% of
1st Session
2nd Session
request
Agriculture
$7,656,162
$8,414,033
$10,010,397
$9,607,006
-$403,391
95.97%
$4,675,093
$4,931,913
Armed Services
$9,721,745
$10,342,681
$10,847,677
$10,872,677
$25,000
100.23%
$5,182,597
$5,690,080
Banking
$8,901,617
$9,307,521
Budget
$9,940,000
$9,940,000
$11,221,912
$11,107,043
-$114,869
98.98%
$5,403,522
$5,703,521
Commerce
$14,535,406
$15,285,113
Education and the Workforce
$10,125,113
$11,200,497
$15,590,870
$13,573,886
-$2,016,984
87.06%
$7,059,821
$6,514,065
Energy and Commerce
$18,813,475
$17,226,770
-$1,586,705
91.57%
$8,527,251
$8,699,519
Financial Services
$15,095,429
$11,846,231
-$3,249,198
78.48%
$5,705,025
$6,141,206
Government Reform
$20,020,572
$19,770,233
$21,842,000
$19,420,233
-$2,421,767
88.91%
$9,810,000
$9,610,233
House Administration
$6,050,349
$6,251,871
$7,859,306
$7,418,045
-$441,261
94.39%
$3,560,662
$3,857,383
International Relations
$10,368,358
$11,313,531
$14,495,256
$12,672,626
-$1,822,630
87.43%
$6,202,095
$6,470,531
Judiciary
$10,604,041
$12,152,275
$15,490,248
$13,166,463
-$2,323,785
85.00%
$6,339,902
$6,826,561
Resources
$9,876,550
$10,567,908
$11,982,260
$11,601,260
-$381,000
96.82%
$5,595,266
$6,005,994
Rules
$4,649,102
$5,069,424
$5,370,773
$5,370,773
$0
100.00%
$2,644,509
$2,726,264
Science
$8,677,830
$8,931,726
$12,254,301
$10,628,041
-$1,626,260
86.73%
$5,172,668
$5,455,373
Small Business
$3,906,941
$4,148,880
$4,798,783
$4,798,783
$0
100.00%
$2,312,344
$2,486,439
Standards
$2,456,300
$2,632,915
$2,921,091
$2,871,091
-$50,000
98.29%
$1,358,708
$1,512,383
Transportation and Infrastructure
$12,184,459
$13,220,138
$16,559,562
$14,479,551
-$2,080,011
87.44%
$6,964,664
$7,514,887
Veterans' Affairs
$4,344,160
$4,735,135
$5,273,013
$5,142,263
-$130,750
97.52%
$2,516,765
$2,625,498
Ways and Means
$11,036,907
$11,930,338
$16,077,758
$14,748,888
-$1,328,870
91.73%
$7,228,481
$7,520,407
Permanent Select Intelligence
$4,815,526
$5,164,444
$7,475,073
$6,955,074
-$519,999
93.04%
$3,407,986
$3,547,088
Reserve Fund
$7,000,000
$3,000,000
Note: Data taken from committee funding resolutions for the particular Congresses. Renamed committees are listed according to their current names. For the 107th Congress, the
renamed Committee on Financial Services and Committee on Energy and Commerce are listed according to their new names, but the committees appear as Committee on Banking
and the Committee on Commerce in earlier Congresses.

CRS-8
Table 2. Senate Committee Funding, 105th Congress-107th Congress
Committees
105th Congress
106th Congress
107th Congress
Approved
Approved
3/1/01-
10/1/01-
10/1/02-
Approved
9/30/01
9/30/02
2/28/03
Total
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
$3,598,024
$4,113,664
$1,794,378
$3,181,922
$1,360,530
$6,336,830
Armed Services
$5,572,267
$7,057,623
$3,301,692
$5,859,150
$2,506,642
$11,667,484
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
$5,877,053
$6,293,483
$2,741,526
$4,862,013
$2,079,076
$9,682,615
Budget
$6,400,221
$6,867,541
$2,880,615
$5,112,126
$2,187,120
$10,179,861
Commerce, Science, and Transportation
$7,103,272
$7,612,541
$2,968,783
$5,265,771
$2,251,960
$10,486,514
Energy and Natural Resources
$5,434,380
$5,823,795
$2,504,922
$4,443,495
$1,900,457
$8,848,874
Environment and Public Works
$5,005,429
$5,352,675
$2,318,050
$4,108,958
$1,756,412
$8,183,420
Finance
$6,234,894
$7,259,701
$3,230,940
$5,729,572
$2,449,931
$11,410,443
Foreign Relations
$5,585,034
$6,203,527
$2,495,457
$4,427,295
$1,893,716
$8,816,468
Governmental Affairs
$9,339,400
$10,008,362
$4,380,936
$7,771,451
$3,323,832
$15,476,219
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
$8,474,547
$9,080,958
$3,895,623
$6,910,215
$2,955,379
$13,761,217
Judiciary
$8,991,557
$9,646,900
$4,230,605
$7,507,831
$3,212,052
$14,950,488
Rules and Administration
$3,210,626
$3,281,000
$1,183,041
$2,099,802
$898,454
$4,181,297
Small Business
$2,233,252
$2,576,258
$1,119,973
$1,985,266
$848,624
$3,953,863
Veterans’ Affairs
$2,314,620
$2,481,210
$1,022,752
$1,814,368
$776,028
$3,613,148
Special Committee on Aging
$2,333,851
$2,790,721
$1,240,422
$2,199,621
$940,522
$4,380,565
Committee on Indian Affairs
$2,352,126
$2,510,237
$970,754
$1,718,989
$734,239
$3,423,982
Select Committee on Intelligence
$4,358,289
$5,140,893
$1,859,933
$3,298,074
$1,410,164
$6,567,171
Reserve Fund
$5,300,000
$2,000,000
$3,700,000
$1,600,000
$7,300,000
Note: Data taken from committee funding resolutions for the particular congresses. Renamed committees are listed according to their current names. The reserve fund was first
authorized in the 105th Congress, but itemized amounts for it were not included in the funding resolution until the 106th Congress.