Committee Funding for the House and Senate, 108th Congress

Committee Funding for the House and Senate, 108th Congress

Order Code RL31816
Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Committee Funding for the House and Senate,
108th Congress
Updated May 7, 2003
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 for the House and Senate,
108th Congress
Summary
House rules require action to approve resolutions providing funds for committee
operations by the end of March 2003. Because of unforeseen delays in completing
action on the committee funding resolution, the House has twice (H.Res. 163,
adopted March 26, 2003, and H.Res. 185, adopted April 9, 2003) agreed to short term
extensions of 107th Congress committee funding levels. Funding authority has now
been extended up through May 9, 2003. Relatedly, the Emergency Wartime
Supplemental Appropriations Act, FY2003 (P.L. 108-11, signed April 18, 2003)
provides $11 million to the House Select Committee on Homeland Security to fund
its operations through December 2004. On May 6, 2003, the House Administration
Committee reported H.Res. 148, an omnibus funding resolution, with an amendment
in the nature of a substitute providing 108th Congress funds for all House committees,
except for the Appropriations and Homeland Security Committees. The House
agreed to a unanimous consent request to make H.Res. 148 in order at any time on
May 7, with the stipulation that the committee amendment be considered as adopted
and that the resolution be debated for one hour equally divided and controlled.
Under House Rules, funds for committees (except for the Appropriations
Committee) are to be approved by March 31 of the first session of each new
Congress. In early March 2003, the House Administration Committee began to
consider budget requests from House Committees. Previously, on February 13, 2003,
the House took up by unanimous consent H.Res. 77, providing interim funding from
January 3, 2003 to March 31, 2003 for the newly established House Select
Committee on Homeland Security. (Committees funded in the 107th Congress are
authorized to spend at the same monthly rate until House action on the 108th
Congress funding resolution. H.Res. 163, agreed to on March 26, 2003, continued
committee funds through April 11, 2003. On April 9, 2003, the House approved
H.Res. 185, continuing that funding authority up through May 9, 2003.) As in
previous Congresses, a major concern in the House committee funding process will
be assuring that the minority party members on each committee have at least one-
third of the committee’s staff and funds. There is also concern about rising
committee costs since 1995, when the House cut its committee staff size by one-
third.
The Senate adopted ad hoc procedures in approving committee operating
budgets. With the Senate divided 51-48-1 at the beginning of the 108th Congress,
Senate Democrats argued for a proportional allocation of committee staff between
the parties. On January 15, a unanimous consent agreement was reached providing
for the proportional allocation of staff and office space between the parties on each
committee, with a separate provision for each committee chair to control up to 10%
of the committee budget to employ administrative staff serving both parties.
Thereafter, Senate Rules and Administration Committee consideration of committee
funding requests was routine, and the Senate agreed on February 28, 2003, to S.Res.
66, authorizing funds for Senate committees through February 2005.

Contents
Recent Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Committee Funding in the 107th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
House Floor Action in 108th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
House Committee Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
House Funding Procedures and Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Senate Committee Funding Action, 108th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Senate Committee Funding Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
List of Tables
Table 1. House Committee Funding, Committee Requests and House
Administration Committee Recommendations, 108th Congress . . . . . . . . . . 9
Table 2. House Committee Funding, 105th Congress-107th Congress . . . . . . . . 10
Table 3. Senate Committee Funding, Committee Requests and Funding
Approved by the Senate, 108th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Table 4. Senate Committee Funding, 105th Congress-108th Congress . . . . . . . . . 12

Committee Funding for the House and
Senate, 108th Congress
Recent Action
House Rules required it to act by March 31, 2003, to provide operating funds
for its standing and select committees (except for Appropriations). Temporary
funding authority provided by House Rules was set to expire on that date. H.Res.
148, an omnibus funding resolution, was introduced by Representative Robert W.
Ney, the chairman of the House Administration Committee, on March 18, 2003. The
resolution incorporates the amounts requested by each House committee into one
resolution. On March 26, 2003, the House agreed by unanimous consent to H.Res.
163, providing a temporary funding extension until April 11, 2003. On April 9,
2003, the House took up and approved by unanimous consent H.Res. 185, extending
that temporary authority up through May 9, 2003. On May 6, 2003, the House
Administration Committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.Res. 148, reducing by more than $18 million the amounts requested by House
Committees. H.Res. 148, as amended, was reported (H.Rept. 108-91) from the
committee the same day by voice vote. A unanimous consent agreement in the
House authorized the House to take up H.Res. 148 at any time on May 7, 2003, and
to consider the funding resolution, as amended, under the One-Hour Rule, with time
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the
House Administration Committee.
Earlier, the House agreed to H.Res.77, authorizing temporary funding of
$700,000 for the newly created House Select Committee on Homeland Security, up
through March 31, 2003. The two House temporary funding extensions applied to
the Select Committee as well. However, on April 18, 2003, the President signed into
law P.L. 108-11, the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act,
FY2003. Chapter 8 of that act provides $11 million for the Homeland Security
Committee, to be available through December 31, 2004. The effect of this action is
to reduce the amount that must be provided later in the FY2004 and FY2005
legislative branch appropriations acts to defray House committee operating expenses.
H.Res. 148, as reported by the House Administration Committee, did not contain
funds (although the original resolution did) for the Homeland Security Committee.
It is expected that the House will consider later a resolution (H.Res. 110) authorizing
funds for the Homeland Security Committee, in the wake of action in the
supplemental appropriations act.
The Senate agreed by unanimous consent to the omnibus funding resolution
(S.Res. 66) for its covered committees on February 27, 2003. On January 15, 2003,
the Senate reached an agreement ending an impasse in electing committees by
agreeing to allot committee staff proportionately between the two parties. Excluded
from this allocation were administrative staff appointed by a committee chair which
both parties agreed served all members.

CRS-2
All standing and select committees of both chambers of Congress (except for
both Appropriations Committees and the Senate Ethics Committee) 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. Some Members may oppose providing
funds to particular committees to support committee inquiries with which these
Members disagree.
Committee Funding in the 107th Congress
In the 107th Congress, the House reached an accommodation satisfactory to both
parties which, by 2002, gave minority members on nearly all panels financed through
the House funding process 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 the biennial funding resolution,
H.Res. 84, by a vote of 357-61, the largest margin of support for a funding resolution
since the chamber 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.
This agreement assures Republicans and Democrats of equal staffing resources on
all committees. Excluded from this equal division of staff are administrative
personnel who serve both parties and who are to be appointed by the committee
chairman in consultation with the ranking minority member. 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 in 108th Congress
On May 6, 2003, the House agreed to a unanimous consent request by
Representative John Linder to provide for the consideration of H.Res. 148, the
omnibus funding resolution, at any time on May 7, 2003. Under the agreement, the
resolution will be considered for one hour, with time equally divided between the
chairman and ranking minority member, and the committee-reported amendment in
the nature of a substitute will be considered as adopted, thereby simplifying House
floor consideration.
As in previous Congresses, a major concern in the House committee funding
process will be whether each committee has provided its minority party members
with least one-third of the committee’s staff and funds. The continued bipartisan
support for the funding process evident two years ago may hinge on whether all
committees are now fully compliant with the two-thirds/one-third allocation.

CRS-3
There may also be concern about the increasing costs of committee operations
since 1995, when the House cuts its committee staff size by one-third. The newly
established Select Committee on Homeland Security has requested $11 million for
its operations in the 108th Congress, and an $11 million appropriation for the select
committee was provided in P.L. 108-11, the Emergency Wartime Supplemental
Appropriations Act. There has been concern about providing funds for this
committee, and for accommodating requested funding increases for other panels,
while retaining reasonable control over the rising costs of committee operations.
House committees have requested $252 million, an increase of nearly $50 million
from the amount approved in the 107th Congress.1
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, allowing it
to be called up and considered without the need for a special rule from the Rules
Committee. Privileged funding resolutions are considered in the House under the
one-hour rule and, typically, the majority party manager does not yield the floor to
permit amendments to be offered. (The committee-reported amendment 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. This
motion normally permits the minority to offer an alternative funding proposal and to
obtain a House vote on it. Owing to the bipartisan consensus on the 107th Congress
funding resolution, House Democrats did not offer such a motion in 2001.
Although House floor action on funding resolutions typically occur in the latter
half of March, unforeseen delays made it impossible for the House and the
administration committee to complete action. Instead, Representative Ney, the
chairman of the House Administration Committee, introduced on March 26, 2003,
and obtained consideration and approval by unanimous consent of a short-term
funding extension (H.Res. 163) continuing committee funding up through April 11,
2003. The resolution was agreed to by unanimous consent. When action could not
be completed within that deadline, the House by unanimous consent agreed on April
9, 2003, to H.Res. 185, continuing funding up through May 9, 2003.
House Committee Action
Each committee is encouraged to discuss its proposed budget and approve it at
a committee organization meeting, although some committees do not prepare or
approve their draft budgets this way. Each committee chair normally introduces a
House resolution to provide the 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
receiving testimony from committee chairs and the ranking minority members. The
1 Suzanne Nelson, “House Admin to Seek Second CR to Fund Committees,” Roll Call
(internet edition), Apr. 10, 2003 [http://www.rollcall.com/issues/48_81/news/1222-1.html].

CRS-4
House Administration Committee held hearings on committee requests on March 13
and 14, 2003.
The chair of the House Administration Committee then typically introduces an
omnibus funding resolution, which, after its referral to the House Administration
Committee, generally serves as the legislative vehicle for a full committee markup.
Representative Ney, chairman of the House Administration Committee, introduced
such a resolution (H.Res. 148) on March 18, 2003.2 His resolution incorporates,
without change, the amounts requested by each committee.
At the House Administration Committee markup, the chair typically offers an
amendment in the nature of a substitute modifying (usually reducing) the amounts
requested by each committee. The markup may feature consideration of additional
amendments, concluded with a vote to approve the resolution as amended. The
measure is then reported to the House, and a written report is issued to accompany
the resolution. Depending upon the degree of controversy surrounding the funding
process, minority, additional, or supplemental written views may be included in the
committee report. On May 6, the House Administration Committee held a markup
session, and agreed to an amendment in the nature of a substitute submitted by
Chairman Ney. H.Res. 148 was then reported to the House by voice vote.
House Funding Procedures and Issues
House Rules establish guidelines for committees in drafting budget requests and
in administering committee funds. The authority of the House Administration
Committee in reviewing budget requests and overseeing the disbursement of
committee funds are also prescribed in House Rules.
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 necessary expenses over the two-year span 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
2 On Mar. 17, Chairman Ney had introduced an earlier omnibus funding resolution, H. Res.
146. The two resolutions are identical, except that the latter resolution, H.Res. 148,
provides an additional $153,795 over two years for the Small Business Committee which
had requested the additional amount in a revised request.

CRS-5
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 (now called “professional staff”) 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.
Previously, there have been disputes about the interpretation of funding and
staffing guidelines for the minority. Some committees have considered as 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
also 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 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 sometimes
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. For the 107th Congress, however, no reserve fund was
included in the funding resolution.
Committee funding resolutions include requests from committees to employ
consultants and to arrange for the services of executive branch staff detailed to the
committee. The House Administration Committee approves consulting contracts and
staff details for all House committees (except for the Appropriations Committee).
Although consultant contract fees are paid from committee budgets, House
committees are not required to reimburse a federal agency for the salary and benefits
cost of detailed staff. The House Administration Committee also has authority to
approve so-called shared staffing arrangements (except those involving the
Appropriations Committee) through which committee staffs are paid partly from
committee funds and partly through Members’ personal staffing funds.
Senate Committee Funding Action, 108th Congress
The Senate, for the second Congress in a row, adopted ad hoc procedures in
approving committee operating budgets. With the Senate divided 51-48-1 at the
beginning of the 108th Congress, Senate Democrats argued for a proportional
allocation of committee staff between the parties. Democratic Senators threatened

CRS-6
to filibuster any resolution offered to elect Senators to committees unless an
agreement was reached first on the partisan allocation of committee staff.
On January 15, after a week-long delay in the appointment of Senate
committees, a unanimous consent agreement was reached providing for the
proportional allocation of staff and office space between the parties on each
committee, with a separate provision that allowed the committee chair the authority
to control up to 10% of the committee budget for the employment of administrative
staff serving both parties. The full text of the Joint Leadership Letter agreement,
signed by Senators Bill Frist (Majority Leader), Ted Stevens, Trent Lott, Thomas A.
Daschle (Democratic Leader), Robert C. Byrd, and Christopher J. Dodd, follows:
We mutually commit to the following for only the 108th Congress:
The budgets of the Committees of the Senate, including Joint and Special
Committees, and all other subgroups, shall be apportioned to reflect the ratio of
the Senate as of this date, with up to an additional ten percent to be allocated to
Chairmen for administrative expenses, to be determined by the Rules committee
(sic), with the total administrative expense allocation for all committees not to
exceed historic levels. The additional administrative expenses described above
shall be available to be expended by a Committee Chairman, after consultation
with the Ranking Member of the Committee. Funds for committee expenses
shall be available to Chairmen consistent with Senate rules and practices of the
107th Congress. No committee budget shall be allocated to reduce the democratic
(sic) staff salary baseline from that of fiscal year 2002 (including COLA), as
adjusted by approved COLAs for fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2004. The
Chairman and Ranking Member of any committee may, by mutual agreement,
modify the apportionment of Committee funding referenced in this letter. The
division of Committee office space shall be commensurate with this funding
agreement.3
Due to this formal agreement, consideration of committee funding requests by
the Senate Rules and Administration Committee was routine. On February 26,
Senators Lott and Dodd, the chair and ranking minority member of the Senate Rules
and Administration Committee, introduced S. Res. 66, providing funds for Senate
committees, except for the Appropriations Committee, through February 28, 2005.
The next day, the Senate agreed to the resolution by unanimous consent.
S.Res. 66 provided funds at the level requested by each Senate committee,
except for the Foreign Relations Committee. The request of the Foreign Relations
Committee included funds for a proposed policy advisory group. The group is to be
comprised largely of outside advisors who would be reimbursed for the cost of their
periodic travel to Washington, DC. It was the view of the Rules and Administration
Committee that a waiver from the Senate Ethics Committee would be necessary for
this group to function, but the Ethics Committee could not provide such a waiver
within the deadlines of the funding process. Consequently, funds for this group were
3 Congressional Record, (daily electronic edition) vol. 149, Jan. 15, 2003, pp. S842-S843.

CRS-7
deleted from the Foreign Relations Committee funds, with the understanding that
such funds might be provided later, if the necessary waivers were obtained.
Senate Committee Funding Rules
Although the Senate has, for the second Congress in a row, followed ad hoc
procedures in determining committee operating budgets and the allocation of staff
positions and other resources among its committees, there are formal provisions in
Senate Rules governing the funding process. This section describes these rules that
will apply in future Congresses, unless the rules are amended or again set aside by
unanimous consent.
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
directives 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 by 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. On occasions when
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
(this was the case in the 107th and 108th Congresses). 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.

CRS-8
If a committee requires additional funds after the omnibus resolution has been
adopted, it may request these funds in the same way it did 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.4 Since 1999, the omnibus funding resolution has
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 with
the approval of the chair and ranking member of the Rules and Administration
Committee.
Senate Rule XXVII requires that each committee’s staff “should reflect the
relative number of majority and minority members of committees” and that the
minority receive “fair consideration” in the appointment of staff. A majority of the
minority party members 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, if any, who perform administrative and clerical functions for the
committee as a whole, as agreed to by the chair and ranking minority member.
In the 107th and 108th Congresses, the Senate set aside these provisions,
authorizing an equal allocation of staff between the parties in the 107th Congress, and
a proportional allocation of staff in the 108th Congress. In both instances, the
agreements were entered into only for the Congress then underway. In both instances
as well, the agreement authorized the exclusion from the partisan staff calculations
of administrative staff performing services for the committee as a whole.
Committee staff may also be supplemented by consultants and staff detailed to
the committee from federal agencies. Such staff arrangements are subject to
regulations that may be imposed by the Committee on Rules and Administration.
4 The Senate funding resolutions provide funds for three specific calendar periods—from
Mar. 1 to Sept. 30 of the first year of a Congress, from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30 of the following
year, and from Oct. 1 to the following Feb. 28. This permits the Senate to identify more
precisely the amounts authorized for each fiscal year and the subsequent appropriations
required.

CRS-9
Table 1. House Committee Funding, Committee Requests and House Administration
Committee Recommendations, 108th Congress
% of
Committees
108th Congress Request
Reported by House Administration
Difference
Request
1st session
2nd session
Total Request
1st session
2nd session
Total Markup
Agriculture
$5,292,225
$5,331,415
$10,623,640
$5,084,900
$5,242,632
$10,327,531
-$296,109
97.21
Armed Services
$5,943,675
$6,434,005
$12,377,680
$5,871,876
$6,059,481
$11,931,357
-$446,323
96.39
Budget
$5,894,018
$5,975,554
$11,869,572
$5,856,333
$6,013,239
$11,869,572
$0
100.00%
Education & Workforce
$7,398,237
$7,523,946
$14,922,183
$7,047,896
$7,625,475
$14,673,371
-$248,812
98.33%
Energy & Commerce
$9,385,902
$9,731,721
$19,117,623
$9,101,042
$9,521,097
$18,622,138
-$495,485
97.41%
Financial Services
$8,144,280
$8,851,207
$16,995,487
$6,601,085
$7,095,402
$13,696,487
-$3,299,000
80.59%
Government Reform
$10,000,000
$10,400,000
$20,400,000
$9,740,963
$9,873,472
$19,614,435
-$785,565
96.15%
House Administration
$5,028,573
$5,346,401
$10,374,974
$4,122,092
$4,404,965
$8,527,057
-$1,847,917
82.19%
International Relations
$7,693,249
$8,344,746
$16,037,995
$6,993,645
$7,559,050
$14,552,695
-$1,485,300
90.74%
Judiciary
$8,422,720
$8,825,346
$17,248,066
$6,957,554
$7,091,062
$14,048,616
-$3,199,451
81.45%
Resources
$7,360,564
$7,549,963
$14,910,527
$6,492,029
$7,017,395
$13,509,424
-$1,401,103
90.60%
Rules
$2,816,332
$2,852,979
$5,669,311
$2,797,898
$2,871,413
$5,669,311
$0
100.00%
Science
$6,072,465
$6,224,225
$12,296,690
$5,711,401
$5,979,444
$11,690,845
-$605,845
95.07%
Small Business
$3,080,591
$3,291,417
$6,372,008
$2,535,261
$2,585,041
$5,120,301
-$1,251,707
80.36%
Standards
$1,636,825
$1,806,325
$3,443,150
$1,527,825
$1,543,425
$3,071,250
-$371,900
89.20%
Transportation & Infrastructure
$8,722,428
$8,960,077
$17,682,505
$7,982,558
$8,479,334
$16,461,893
-$1,220,612
93.10%
Veterans’ Affairs
$3,225,344
$3,551,273
$6,776,617
$2,703,328
$2,783,466
$5,486,795
-$1,289,822
80.97%
Ways and Means
$8,063,151
$8,458,168
$16,521,319
$7,828,037
$8,148,251
$15,976,288
-$545,031
96.70%
Permanent Select Intelligence
$3,773,567
$4,036,163
$7,809,730
$3,780,487
$4,029,243
$7,809,730
$0
100.00%
Select Homeland Security
$5,657,656
$5,371,131
$11,028,787
$5,366,866
$5,585,921
$10,952,787
-$76,000
99.31%
Totals
$123,611,802
$128,866,063
$252,477,865
$124,272,876
$129,994,072
$233,611,883
-$18,865,982
92.53%
Source: Data taken from committee funding resolutions for the 108th Congress.
Note: Adding first and second session amounts for committees may not yield full Congress total because of rounding. Funds recommended for the Homeland Security Committee
are contained in H.Res. 110, as reported.

CRS-10
Table 2. House Committee Funding, 105th Congress-107th Congress
Committees
105th Congress
106th Congress
107th Congress
Agriculture
$7,656,162 $8,414,033
$9,607,006
Armed Services
$9,721,745
$10,342,681
$10,872,677
Banking
$8,901,617 $9,307,521 --
Budget
$9,940,000 $9,940,000
$11,107,043
Commerce
$14,535,406 $15,285,113
--
Education and the Workforce
$10,125,113
$11,200,497
$13,573,886
Energy and Commerce
--
--
$17,226,770
Financial Services
--
--
$11,846,231
Government Reform
$20,020,572
$19,770,233
$19,420,233
House Administration
$6,050,349
$6,251,871
$7,418,045
International Relations
$10,368,358
$11,313,531
$12,672,626
Judiciary
$10,604,041 $12,152,275
$13,166,463
Resources
$9,876,550 $10,567,908
$11,601,260
Rules
$4,649,102 $5,069,424
$5,370,773
Science
$8,677,830 $8,931,726
$10,628,041
Small Business
$3,906,941
$4,148,880
$4,798,783
Standards
$2,456,300 $2,632,915
$2,871,091
Transportation and Infrastructure
$12,184,459 $13,220,138
$14,479,551
Veterans’ Affairs
$4,344,160
$4,735,135
$5,142,263
Ways and Means
$11,036,907
$11,930,338
$14,748,888
Permanent Select Intelligence
$4,815,526
$5,164,444
$6,955,074
Reserve Fund
$7,000,000
$3,000,000
--
Totals
$176,871,138 $183,378,663
$203,506,704
Source: 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-11
Table 3. Senate Committee Funding, Committee Requests and Funding Approved by the Senate, 108th Congress
% of
Committees
108th Congress Request
108th Congress Approved
Difference Request
03/01/03-
10/01/03-
10/01/04-
Total
03/01/03-
10/01/03-
10/01/04-
Total
09/30/03
09/30/04
02/28/05
Request
09/30/03
09/30/04
02/28/05
Approved
Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
$1,949,860
$3,431,602
$1,462,700
$6,844,162
$1,949,860
$3,431,602 $1,462,700
$6,844,162
$0 100.00%
Armed Services
$3,594,172
$6,328,829
$2,698,836
$12,621,837
$3,594,172
$6,328,829 $2,698,836 $12,621,837
$0 100.00%
Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
$2,979,871
$5,244,760
$2,235,697
$10,460,328
$2,979,871
$5,244,760 $2,235,697 $10,460,328
$0 100.00%
Budget
$3,136,108
$5,522,410
$2,355,010
$11,013,528
$3,136,108
$5,522,410 $2,355,010 $11,013,528
$0 100.00%
Commerce, Science and Transportation
$3,227,950
$5,681,955
$2,422,263
$11,332,168
$3,227,950
$5,681,955 $2,422,263 $11,332,168
$0 100.00%
Energy and Natural Resources
$2,724,301
$4,795,783
$2,044,614
$9,564,698
$2,724,301
$4,795,783 $2,044,614
$9,564,698
$0 100.00%
Environment and Public Works
$2,516,590
$4,427,783
$1,886,876
$8,831,249
$2,516,590
$4,427,783 $1,886,876
$8,831,249
$0 100.00%
Finance
$3,511,241
$6,179,693
$2,634,121
$12,325,055
$3,511,241
$6,179,693 $2,634,121 $12,325,055
$0 100.00%
Foreign Relations
$2,933,624
$5,163,940
$2,201,453
$10,299,017
$2,516,590
$4,427,783 $1,886,876
$8,831,249 -$1,467,768
85.75%
Governmental Affairs
$4,764,738
$8,387,779
$3,576,035
$16,728,552
$4,764,738
$8,387,779 $3,576,035 $16,728,552
$0 100.00%
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
$4,236,427
$7,457,494
$3,179,327
$14,873,248
$4,236,427
$7,457,494 $3,179,327 $14,873,248
$0 100.00%
Judiciary
$4,605,727
$8,110,222
$3,548,551
$16,264,500
$4,605,727
$8,110,222 $3,548,551 $16,264,500
$0 100.00%
Rules and Administration
$1,288,413
$2,269,014
$967,696
$4,525,123
$1,288,413
$2,269,014
$967,696
$4,525,123
$0 100.00%
Small Business and Entrepreneurship
$1,215,913
$2,139,332
$911,668
$4,266,913
$1,215,913
$2,139,332
$911,668
$4,266,913
$0 100.00%
Veterans’ Affairs
$1,112,475
$1,958,451
$834,987
$3,905,913
$1,112,475
$1,958,451
$834,987
$3,905,913
$0 100.00%
Special Committee on Aging
$1,347,927
$2,372,258
$1,011,165
$4,731,350
$1,347,927
$2,372,258 $1,011,165
$4,731,350
$0 100.00%
Select Committee on Indian Affairs
$1,051,310
$1,848,350
$787,173
$3,686,833
$1,051,310
$1,848,350
$787,173
$3,686,833
$0 100.00%
Select Committee on Intelligence
$2,117,309
$3,726,412
$1,588,401
$7,432,122
$2,117,309
$3,726,412 $1,588,401
$7,432,122
$0 100.00%
Reserve Fund
--
--
--
--
$3,500,000
$6,000,000 $2,500,000 $12,000,000
--
--
Totals
$48,313,956 $85,046,067 $36,346,573 $169,706,596 $51,396,922 $90,309,910 $38,531,996 $180,238,828
--
--

CRS-12
Table 4. Senate Committee Funding, 105th Congress-108th Congress
Committees
105th Congress
106th Congress
107th Congress
108th Congress
Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
$3,598,024
$4,113,664
$6,336,830
$6,844,162
Armed Services
$5,572,267
$7,057,623
$11,667,484
$12,621,837
Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
$5,877,053
$6,293,483
$9,682,615
$10,460,328
Budget
$6,400,221 $6,867,541
$10,179,861
$11,013,528
Commerce, Science and Transportation
$7,103,272
$7,612,541
$10,486,514
$11,332,168
Energy and Natural Resources
$5,434,380
$5,823,795
$8,848,874
$9,564,698
Environment and Public Works
$5,005,429
$5,352,675
$8,183,420
$8,831,249
Finance
$6,234,894 $7,259,701
$11,410,443
$12,325,055
Foreign Relations
$5,585,034
$6,203,527
$8,816,468
$8,831,249
Governmental Affairs
$9,339,400
$10,008,362
$15,476,219
$16,728,552
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
$8,474,547
$9,080,958
$13,761,217
$14,873,248
Judiciary
$8,991,557 $9,646,900
$14,950,488
$16,264,500
Rules and Administration
$3,210,626
$3,281,000
$4,181,297
$4,525,123
Small Business and Entrepreneurship
$2,233,252
$2,576,258
$3,953,863
$4,266,913
Veterans’ Affairs
$2,314,620
$2,481,210
$3,613,148
$3,905,913
Special Committee on Aging
$2,333,851
$2,790,721
$4,380,565
$4,731,350
Select Committee on Indian Affairs
$2,352,126
$2,510,237
$3,423,982
$3,686,833
Select Committee on Intelligence
$4,358,289
$5,140,893
$6,565,171
$7,432,122
Reserve Fund
--
$5,300,000
$7,300,000
$12,000,000
Totals
$94,418,842 $109,401,089 $163,218,459 $180,238,828
Source: Data taken from committee funding resolutions for the particular Congress. 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.