APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY2000: TREASURY, POSTAL SERVICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT
CRS Report for Congress
Appropriations for FY2000:
Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of
the President, and General Government
Updated May 25, 2000
Sharon Gressle, Coordinator
Government and Finance Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
Appropriations are one part of a complex federal budget process that includes budget
resolutions, appropriations (regular, supplemental, and continuing) bills, rescissions,
and budget reconciliation bills. The process begins with the President’s budget
request and is bounded by the rules of the House and Senate, the Congressional
Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (as amended), the Budget
Enforcement Act of 1990, and current program authorizations.
This report is a guide to one of the 13 regular appropriations bills that Congress
passes each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House
and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Treasury, Postal Service, Executive
Office of the President, and General Government. It summarizes the current
legislative status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related
legislative activity. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered
and related CRS products.
This report is updated as soon as possible after major legislative developments,
especially following legislative action in the committees and on the floor of the House
NOTE: A Web version of this document with
active links is available to congressional staff at
Appropriations for FY2000: Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government
Public Law 106-58 (H.R. 2490), signed by the President September 29, 1999,
to fund the Department of the Treasury, the Executive Office of the President, several
independent agencies and to provide partial funding for the U.S. Postal Service. The
act funds the accounts at $27.99 billion, including mandatories (before scorekeeping
by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)). The consolidated FY2000 funding
measure, P.L. 106-113, signed November 29, 1999, requires a cut by 0.38% in all
accounts. The administration’s budget, to be submitted in early February, will contain
a report on the exact amounts of cuts for each of the accounts.
The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2490 would have funded the accounts at
$27.77 billion and the House at $27.8 billion. The President’s FY2000 budget,
submitted February 1, 1999, requested a funding level of $27.997 billion for the
mandatory and discretionary accounts. This is an increase over the FY1999 level
enacted at just under $27 billion in regular appropriations, with additional emergency
funding. CBO scores the total for the FY2000 funding at $28.2 billion. The
mandatories are $14.5 billion and the discretionary funding are $13.7 billion.
In summary, P.L. 106-58, prior to the across-the-board cut, funds the
Department of Treasury at $12,354.6 million, which is $ 282.6 million less than the
FY1999 enacted (which included emergency funding), $21.5 million less than
requested, $165 million more than the House passed, and $120 million more than the
Senate passed for FY2000. One principle point of difference is the funding for the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Both the House and Senate would have substantially
cut funding in several of the IRS accounts (See Table 4 for specifics).
Although the total appropriation for the U.S. Postal Service equals the request
by the Administration, only $29 million of the $93.4 million is available in FY2000.
The remainder will be delayed until FY2001.
Title III of the Treasury appropriation funds the Executive Office of the
President and accounts entitled, “Funds Appropriated to the President.” Under the
act, those accounts total $645.5 million. That funding level is $6 million more than
the President’s request, $9.3 million less than House-enacted, and $75.4 million more
than Senate-enacted. Both the House- and Senate-passed versions would have
funded the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) at about $10 million
over the request. The major differences between the chamber action and the act are
in the Funds Appropriated to the President, which are funds the ONDCP transfers to
other entities for drug control efforts.
The independent agencies are funded at $14.9 billion. That is $9.1 million less
than requested, $16.6 million more than House-enacted and $2.5 million more than
Senate-enacted. Funding for the General Services Administration and the National
Archives and Records Administration represent the largest differences.
Area of ExpertiseNameCRS DivisionTel.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and FirearmsWilliam KrouseG&F7-2225
Council of Economic AdvisersEdward KnightG&F7-7785
Customs ServiceWilliam KrouseG&F7-2225
Debt ManagementJames BickleyG&F7-7794
Executive Office of the PresidentRogelio GarciaG&F7-8687
Federal Child Care PolicyMelinda GishDSP7-4618
Federal Election CommissionJoseph CantorG&F7-7876
Federal Employee Health Care PolicyCarolyn MerckDSP7-7320
Federal Employee Pension PolicyPatrick PurcellDSP7-7571
General Services AdministrationStephanie SmithG&F7-8674
Independent AgenciesSharon GressleG&F7-8677
Internal Revenue ServiceSylvia MorrisonG&F7-7755
National ArchivesHarold RelyeaG&F7-8679
Office of Government EthicsMildred AmerG&F7-8304
Office of Personnel ManagementBarbara SchwemleG&F7-8655
Postal ServiceBernevia McCalipG&F7-7781
Presidential SalarySharon GressleG&F7-8677
Procurement ReformStephanie SmithG&F7-8674
Secret ServiceStephanie SmithG&F7-8674
Year 2000 ConversionRichard NunnoRSI7-7037
Division abbreviations: G&F = Government and Finance; DSP = Domestic Social Policy; RSI=Resources,
Science, and Industry.
Most Recent Developments........................................1
Introduction ................................................... 1
Status and Legislative History......................................6
Budget and Key Policy Issues......................................8
Department of the Treasury....................................8
Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the President
Federal Child Care..............................................22
Members of Congress and Other Federal Officials..................23
General Schedule. .....................................24
Federal Wage System....................................25
Other ................................................ 25
Buy Outs and Early Retirement ................................25
Major Funding Trends...........................................25
Glossary of Budget Process Terms.................................34
For Additional Reading..........................................36
CRS Issue Briefs...........................................36
CRS Info Packs............................................36
Selected World Wide Web Sites................................38
List of Tables
Table 1. Status of FY2000 Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President and General Government............8
Table 2. Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the
President, and General Government, FY1995 to FY1999.............27
Table 3. Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President and General
Government Appropriation, FY2000, by Title.....................27
Table 4. Department of Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President,
and General Government Appropriations ........................28
Appropriations for FY2000: Treasury, Postal
Service, Executive Office of the President, and
Most Recent Developments
On September 29, 1999, President Clinton signed Public Law 106-58
(H.R..2490), making appropriations for the Department of the Treasury, the Postal
Service, the Executive Office of the President and other independent agencies for
FY2000. Subsequently, P.L. 106-113, approved November 29, required a 0.38% cut
in all funding for FY2000.
House and Senate conferees reached agreement September 9, 1999. The House
agreed to the conference report September 15. The Senate agreed to the report
September 16. The bill was sent to the President for signature September 21. In the
event the bill was not signed before the close of the fiscal year, the accounts would
have been covered in the continuing funding resolution (H.J.Res. 68) passed by
Congress September 28.
The House, on July 15, passed H.R.. 2490, by one vote. On July 19, 1999, the
Senate passed H.R. 2490, amended to incorporate the language of S. 1282, as passed
the Senate (July 1). The Senate conferees were named that day, with the House
conferees named July 21.
Action on FY2000 supplemental funding was pending as Congress left for the
Memorial Day break.
The President, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required
to submit to Congress, annually, the Budget of the United States Government. On
February 1, 1999, the budget for FY2000 was submitted.1
Congress has established a procedure under which it passes a concurrent
resolution which establishes the congressional budget for the government and sets
1U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the
United States Government, Fiscal Year 2000 (Washington: GPO, 1999). Hereinafter referred
to as Budget, with specific budget document cited.
forth budgetary levels for several years in the future.2 The House and Senate
Appropriations Committees then allocate the discretionary funding levels (302(b)
allocations) to each of the subcommittees. Since passage of the FY2000 budget3
resolution, the committees have changed the allocations several times. The
Congressional Budget Office has offered spending and revenue options in the context
of budgetary discipline.4
Appropriations for the Department of the Treasury, in addition to funding the
operations of the department, fund the work of a group of law enforcement
organizations, which include the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the
Customs Service, the Secret Service, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Treasury appropriations also cover
the Internal Revenue Service, the Financial Management Service, and the Bureau of
For the most part, the U.S. Postal Service has become self-supporting. Federal
contributions are limited to payments to the Postal Service Fund to compensate for
revenues forgone (e.g., free postal service for the blind).
Appropriations for the Executive Office of the President provide salaries and
expenses for the White House Offices, operation of the residences of the President
and Vice President, and most other agencies within the Executive Office of the
President (EOP). Organizations such as the Council of Economic Advisers, the
National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of
National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) are funded through these provisions.
Specific funding for drug control initiatives is provided for distribution by ONDCP.
Among the independent agencies financed through P.L. 106-58 are the Federal
Election Commission, the General Services Administration, the National Archives and
Records Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, the Office of Special
Counsel, and the U.S. Tax Court.
P.L. 106-58 provides funding for federal child care facilities. That provision
generated considerable concern among some Members and was a point of contention
as the conference agreement was discussed. The Senate, in passing S. 1282, added a
title to the bill for the purpose of ensuring “the safety and availability of child care
centers in Federal facilities.” According to the sponsors of the amendment,
2H.Con.Res. 68, 106th Congress, agreed to by the House April 14, 1999 and by the Senate
April 15, 1999.
3U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Report on the Revised Suballocation
of Budget Allocations for Fiscal Year 2000, 106th Cong., 1st sess., H. Rept. 106-217
(Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999) and U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations,
Further Revised Allocation to Subcommittees of Budget Totals for Fiscal Year 2000, 106thst
Cong., 1 sess., S. Rept. 106-101 (Washington: GPO, July 1, 1999).
4U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining Budgetary Discipline: Spending and
Revenue Options (Washington: GPO, 1999), hereafter referred to as: CBO, Budgetary
This amendment will require all child care services located in federal
facilities to meet, at the very least, the same level of health and safety standards5
required of other child care centers in the same geographical area.
The House bill, as passed, did not contain all of the child care provisions included in
the Senate amendment. However, it did contain the same language addressing the
issue of improving the affordability of child care for federal employees. An
amendment similar to this year’s Senate amendment was offered to the FY1999
Treasury bill, adopted in the Senate, and fell in conference. The issue is discussed
further later in this report.
Among other provisions adopted by the Senate, July 1, the following would
!Convey federal land to the Columbia Hospital for Women;
!Amend the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to provide bonus grants to high performance States based on certain
criteria and collect data to evaluate the outcome of welfare reform;
!Prohibit the use of funds to pay for an abortion or to pay for the administrative
expenses in connection with certain health plans that provide coverage for
!Provide additional funding to reduce methamphetamine usage in High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Areas;
!Increase U.S. Customs Service funding to enable the hiring of 500 new
inspectors to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. and to facilitate
legitimate cross-border trade and commerce; and
!Require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an Internet site where a
taxpayer may generate a receipt for an income tax payment which itemizes the
portion of the payment which is allocable to various government spending
The Senate rejected the amendment which would have required the inclusion of
alcohol abuse by minors in the ongoing national anti-drug media campaign for youth.
The House narrowly passed H.R. 2490 (210-209) on July 15, 1999. The House
committee, in an effort to bring total spending down to FY1999's freeze level, had
reduced the subcommittee discretionary funding levels by $249 million. That action
contributed to many Members withdrawing support of the bill. The programs
affected by that reduction are Treasury-wide systems and capital improvements,
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) processing, assistance, and management, IRS tax law
enforcement, IRS information systems, and General Services Administration repairs
Several amendments were offered during consideration of H.R. 2490. Those
subject to voice vote were
!An amendment to prohibit the import of any children’s sleepwear without the
labels required by the flammability standards issued by the Consumer Product
Safety Commission was agreed to;
5“Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
!An amendment to change the language of the provision requiring contraceptive
coverage in the FEHBP was agreed to, amended;
!An amendment to provide $3 million for grants to investigate money
laundering and related financial crimes; and
!An amendment to establish that no funds may be used to enforce any
prohibition on women breastfeeding their children in federal buildings or on
Those subject to roll call votes were
!An amendment to strike language limiting funds availability through the
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP)— failed;
!An amendment to strike language increasing the President’s salary— failed;
!An amendment to amend the amendment offered to change the language of the
provision requiring contraceptive coverage in the FEHBP — agreed to; and
!An amendment to limit use of the Exchange Stabilization Fund— failed.
Several House Members offered amendments and then subsequently withdrew
them after receiving assurances from the managers of the bill that the issues would
either be addressed in conference or would be pursued with the appropriate executive
branch administrators. Among those were amendments to provide for the release of
frozen assets of a foreign state to satisfy all pending court judgements; to require an
U.S. Customs Service report on the conduct of strip searches, including data on the
ethnicity, gender, nationality, and race of the individuals subject to the searches; to
require that any U.S. Customs officer conducting a strip search be of the same gender
as the subject of the search; to study the safety of red-dye kerosene fuel available to
elderly and low income individuals; and to allow enrollees in the Federal Employee
Health Benefits Program the option of choosing dental, optometry, infertility, or
prescription drug benefits in lieu of mandated contraceptive coverage.
An amendment to prevent Members of Congress from receiving a pay adjustment
in January 2000 was not in order, under the rule (H. Res. 246) for H.R. 2490, and
was not offered on the floor. The act provides increase in the President’s salary, to
$400,000, effective January 20, 2001. Compensation issues are discussed elsewhere
in this report.
Pursuant to the provisions of P.L. 106-1136, the Consolidated Appropriations
Act for FY2000, agencies must cut their FY2000 funding by 0.38%. As part of the
FY2001 budget submission, expected in early February, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) will report on the specific reductions in the accounts.
OMB issued a fact sheet (2000-01-10 OMB Fact Sheet, January 10, 2000) in
which the Administration stated that the law stipulated that 0.38 percent in savings
needed to come from each and every Department. However, within each department,
it provided latitude to protect high-priority programs as long as the dollar figure
amounting to 0.38 percent was achieved provided certain other conditions were met.
6P.L. 106-113, Nov. 29, 1999, §1000(a)(5), §301. See CRS Report RS20403, FY2000
Consolidated Appropriations Act: Reference Guide by Robert Keith.
OMB provided guidance regarding general principles the Agencies should use to
!The 0.38 cut must not be imposed across the board, but targeted to reflect
areas of higher and lower priority;
!Reductions need to come from least critical funding;
!Reductions should be considered from funding that Congress enacted above
the President's request,
!Wherever possible, no reductions in force from personnel.
According to OMB, the law also imposed the condition that no reduction in any
single program could exceed 15% of its total. In other words, the law did not permit
an entire program to be eliminated in order to count toward the savings necessary for
a given department. At least 85% of the funding total for the program had to remain
intact. Among those accounts identified as being fully protected are the ATF Youth
Gun Initiatives and Secret Service Salaries and Expenses.
The funding levels in the tables in this report are provided by the House
Appropriations Committee. The funding levels in the text are, unless otherwise noted,
also provided by the House committee. The Senate documentation is noted if there are
differences between the two versions. Also, in some instances the account totals may
differ between the budget as submitted by the President and the requested funding levels
calculated by the House and Senate committees. Any significant differences will be
discussed in the text. The committee data are more current and represent the amounts
used by Members in considering various funding alternatives.
The Budget documents provided by the Office of Management and Budget and the
appropriations bills do not necessarily follow the same organization of accounts. For
example, not all of the agencies which are organizationally within the Executive Office
of the President, as found in the budget, are funded through the Treasury, Postal Service
and General Government appropriations legislation. Also, the FY2000 and FY1999
individual account data in this report do not reflect scorekeeping by the Congressional
See the glossary for definitions of discretionary and mandatory spending. In some
instances, the mandatory levels drive up the percent of increase represented in the
appropriation. The appropriators are bound by those entitlements under permanent law
and control only the discretionary spending levels. The data on the tables and the funding
levels provided in the text, unless otherwise noted, reflect the mandatory and
discretionary funding combined.
Status and Legislative History
Public Law 106-58, an act making FY2000 appropriations for the Department
of the Treasury, the U.S. Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President and
several independent agencies, was signed by President Clinton September 29, 1999.7
H.R. 2490 was sent to the President for signature September 21, 1999. In the
event he had not signed the bill before the close of FY1999, the accounts were
included in a continuing funding resolution (H.J.Res. 68) which passed the Congress8
September 28 and which expires October 21.
The House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal
Service, and General Government held eight days of hearings during February and
March 1999. The subcommittee marked up a bill and sent it to the full committee
on May 14. The House Appropriations full committee marked up the subcommittee9
provisions and reported the bill, H.R. 2490 (H. Rept. 106-231) on July 13, 1999.
Pursuant to a rule for consideration (H. Res. 246, H. Rept. 106-58234),10 H. R.
On July 1, 1999, the Senate passed S. 1282, the Treasury appropriations bill for12
FY2000. By unanimous consent, the Senate agreed to hold the bill at the desk until
the companion measure was received from the House.
Several days of hearings were held by the Senate Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government subcommittee
during February, March, and April. The subcommittee had scheduled consideration
of the Senate version of the appropriations measure on June 22. However, in lieu of
7P.L. 106-58, September 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 430.
8Making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2000, Congressional Record, vol. 145,
296), Senate passed H.J.Res. 68, pp. S11543-53; the House passed H.J.Res. 68, by a yea and
nay vote of 421 yeas to 2 nays with one voting ``present'', Roll No. 453, pp. H8901-08 H.
Res. 305, the rule that provided for consideration of the joint resolution was agreed to by voice
vote, pp. H8896-H8901.
9U. S. House, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury, Postal Service, and General
Government Appropriations Bill, 2000, report to accompany H.R. 2490, 106th Cong., 1st
sess., H. Rept. 106-231 (Washington: GPO, 1999). Hereafter referred to as H. Rept. 106-
10“Providing for the Consideration of H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, July 15,
11“Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
12“Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
subcommittee action, the full committee marked up the measure June 24. It was
introduced as S. 1282, accompanied by S. Rept. 106-87.13
On July 19, 1999, the Senate passed H.R. 2490, amended to incorporate the
Senate-passed language of S. 1282.14 Senate conferees were named at that time. The
House disagreed with the Senate amendments and insisted on a conference.15 A
motion to instruct was offered and agreed to. Later in the day, conferees were16
Conferees reached agreement September 9, 1999 and ordered the conference
report to be filed (H. Rept. 106-319).17 The Rule for consideration of H.R. 2490
provided that there would be waivers of all points of order against the provisions of
the bill and its consideration (H.Res. 291, H. Rept. 106-322).18
The House agreed to the conference language, by a vote of 296-126 (Roll Call19
No. 426). The Senate agreed to the conference language, by a vote of 54-38 (Vote
No. 277), September 16.20
13U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury and General Government
Appropriation Bill, 2000, report to accompany S. 1282, 106th Cong., 1st sess., S. Rept. 106-
14“Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
15“Appointment of Conferees on H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, July 21,
16Ibid, p. H6082.
17 U.S. Congress, House, Making Appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United
States Postal Service, the Executive office of the President, and Certain Independent
Agencies, for the Fiscal Year ending September 30, 2000, and for Other Purposes,thst
conference report to accompany H.R. 2490, 106 Cong., 1 Sess., H. Rept. 106-319
(Washington: GPO, 1999). (Hereafter referred to as H. Rept. 106-319.) See also: Conference
Report on H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000,
Congressional Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, September 14, 1999) pp. H8201-
18Waiving Points of Order Against the Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 2490,
Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000, Congressional
Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, September 15, 1999) p. H8338.
19Conference Report on H.R. 2490, Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
20Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2000—Conference Report,
Congressional Record, vol. 145 (Washington: GPO, September 16, 1999) pp. S10965-
For the purposes of legislative history on the FY1999 omnibus funding act, the
reader is reminded that P.L. 105-27721 was a product of using the Transportation
appropriation bill (H.R. 4328) as the vehicle for creating the larger bill. The Treasury
and General Government appropriation was subject to congressional action as H.R.
Table 1. Status of FY2000 Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President and General Government
ReportPassage ReportPassagePublic LawHouseSenateHouseSenate
7/13/99 6/24/99 9/14/99
6/22/99H. Rept. S. Rept. H. Rept.9/29/99
5/14/99 scheduled 106-231 7/15/99 106-87 7/16/99 106-319 9/15/99 9/16/99 P.L.106-58
Budget and Key Policy Issues
Department of the Treasury
The Department of the Treasury has both financial and law enforcement
functions. The financial functions are carried out by the Financial Management
Service, the Mint, and the Bureau of Public Debt. The law enforcement functions are
carried out by the Customs Service, the Secret Service, the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The Internal Revenue Service has both
a financial function—to determine and audit tax obligations—and a law enforcement
function—to enforce collection of amounts due.
P.L. 106-58 funds the Department of the Treasury at $12,354,616,000. The
single largest account within the department’s funding is the Internal Revenue
Service, at $8,248,774,000.
For FY1999, Congress appropriated $12,637,225,000 to the Department of the
Treasury (P.L. 105-277), including emergency funding. Of this amount,
$8,375,165,000 (including emergency Y2K funding), or 66.3 % of the total
departmental funding, was allocated to the Internal Revenue Service. The President’s
budget request for FY2000 totals somewhat less—$12,376,130,000 for the
department with $8,248,774,000 allocated for the IRS. Of the total departmental
request, 66.6% would be assigned to the IRS.
21P.L. 105-277, §101(h), October 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681, at 2681-480. See: Conference
Report on H.R. 4328, making omnibus consolidated and emergency supplemental
appropriations for fiscal year 1999, Congressional Record, daily edition, October 19, 1998,
p. H11044, et. seq.
As passed by the Senate July 1, 1999, S. 1282 would have funded the
department accounts at $12,234,649,000. As passed by the House July 15, 1999,
H.R. 2490 would have funded the accounts at $12,189,648,000. An amendment
agreed to in the House would have earmarked $3 million to be used for grants in
combating money laundering.
The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and
General Government marked up the FY2000 appropriations measure on May 14.
Their mark for the Department of the Treasury was $12,329,592,000. On July 13, the
House Appropriations Committee reported their bill. As reported, H.R. 2490 would
fund the Department of Treasury at $12,198,648,000. According to a July 13 press
release from the committee, a major amendment to the subcommittee mark would
reduce funding to the department by $139 million: $4.9 million to Treasury-wide
Systems and Capital Improvement; $42.4 million to IRS Processing, Assistance, and
Management; $31.7 million to IRS Tax Law Enforcement; and $60.86 million to IRS
On June 24, the Senate Committee on Appropriations reported their bill. The
funding level in the Senate would be $12,213,529,000. Senate floor action would
have increased funding, beyond the Senate committee spending levels, for the U.S.
Customs Service, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program for reducing
methamphetamine usage, and for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’
Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative.
The Department of the Treasury established the Office of Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration in January 1999, as required by P.L. 105-206, the
Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. The IRS Office of
the Chief Inspector was abolished. To provide the necessary flexibility for
establishing and reorganizing the new office, the House Appropriations Committee
authorized voluntary separation incentives for the office’s employees. The incentives
of up to $25,000 may be offered from October 1, 1999 through January 1, 2003. The
Office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration may redeploy or use
the positions vacated through voluntary separations to make other positions available
to more critical locations or more critical occupations.
The Chicago Financial Center of the Department of the Treasury’s Financial
Management Service is being closed. To provide the necessary flexibility to carry out
the closure, the House Appropriations Committee authorized voluntary separation
incentives for the center’s employees. The incentives of up to $25,000 may be offered
from October 1, 1999 through January 31, 2000. The Secretary of the Treasury, prior
to obligating any resources for the payments, must submit a strategic plan to the
Office of Management and Budget outlining the intended use of the payments and a
proposed organizational chart for the agency once the payments have been completed.
The total number of funded positions in the agency will be reduced by one full-time
equivalent position for each vacancy created by a separation incentive. This provision
could be waived if the agency demonstrated that the positions would better be used
to reallocate occupations or reshape the workforce and to produce a more cost-
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). The Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) is a law enforcement agency that monitors compliance
with federal laws related to the manufacture, importation, and distribution of alcohol,
tobacco, firearms, and explosives. While these laws prohibit certain illegal activities,
they also regulate legal activities related to these commodities. ATF also enforces
federal laws related to arson. In enforcing federal law, ATF officers often work
closely with other federal, state, and local law enforcement officers. ATF’s mission
is focused on three goals: 1) reducing crime, 2) collecting revenue, and 3) protecting
For FY2000, P.L. 106-58 provides ATF with $605,879,000 in total funding, an
amount that includes a direct appropriation of $565,959,000 for the salaries and
expenses account, and an additional appropriation of $40,920,000 from the Violent
Crime Reduction Trust Fund. In conference report language, conferees directed the
Department of Treasury to allocate another $34,947,000 from the Treasury Asset
Forfeiture Fund for ATF.
The ATF direct appropriation of $565,959,000 is $1,100,000 less than the
amount proposed by the House, and $4,386,000 less than the amount proposed by the
Senate. Also, the amount is 2% over the agency’s FY1999 funding of
$552,769,000,000, but 3% below the Administration’s FY2000 request of
$584,859,000. Over and above this amount, the Administration also requested
$15,000,000 for the relocation of ATF headquarters and laboratory facilities, but
conferees instructed the agency in report language to find funding for this initiative
in the Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund.
For the Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative (YCGII), a program that
coordinates federal, state, and local law enforcement agency efforts to eliminate illegal
sources of firearms for juveniles and youth, the act provides $51,320,000 in total
funding. This funding will allow ATF to expand this program from 27 to 37 cities in
FY2000. Of this amount, $39,000,000 is earmarked in ATF’s direct appropriation.
The additional $12,320,000 is earmarked for ATF from the Violent Crime Reduction
Trust Fund. Also, included in this trust fund is an earmark of $13,000,000 for ATF’s
Gang Resistance Education and Assistance Training grant program, and another
$3,000,000 for ATF to administer this program.
In addition, the conferees earmarked $5,000,000 to expand the Integrated
Ballistic Identification System, as earmarked in the House report language. The
conferees also earmarked, as in House report language, $5,000,000 for implementing
the tobacco compliance provision arising from the 1997 balanced budget agreement,
which gave ATF the authority to enter and examine commercial enterprises that re-
import U.S. cigarettes in an attempt to bypass taxes and licensing fees.
Among ATF’s activities, the regulation and enforcement of laws related to
firearms commerce and possession appear to be the most controversial. Consistent
with language included in ATF appropriations in previous years, the agency’s
appropriations bill language specifies that agency funding cannot be used to
consolidate or centralize the records, or any portion of the records, of the acquisition
and disposition of firearms that are maintained by Federal Firearm Licensees. In
addition, the agency’s appropriations bill language specifies that agency funding
cannot be used to implement regulations modifying the term “curios or relics,” or
investigate relief for individuals disqualified from possessing a firearm or for
corporations disqualified from dealing in firearms. Furthermore, the act’s general
provisions make permanent a provision that allows Federal Firearms Licensees to
perform a background check before a firearm is offered as collateral for a loan.
Both the House and Senate, meanwhile, have acted on gun control-related
legislation. For further information, see CRS Issue Brief IB10014, Gun Control.
Customs Service. The U.S. Customs Service, the federal government’s oldest
regulatory agency, is responsible for monitoring the movement of persons, carriers,
merchandise, and commodities between the United States and other countries. In
FY1998, Customs inspected nearly 460 million passengers, 121 million private
vehicles, 237 million private and commercial aircraft, 10 million commercial trucks,
and 5 million vessel cargo containers. As part of this process, Customs also assesses
trade-related duties, taxes, and fees on imported merchandise, collecting about $22
million in revenue annually.
For FY2000, P.L. 106-58 provides the Customs Service with $1,878,052,000
in total appropriated funding. This amount includes funding from four sources. The
first three sources make up Customs’ core funding of $1,817,052,000, and include:
1) a direct appropriation from the General Fund of $1,705,364,000 for salaries and
expenses, 2) an appropriation of $3,000,000 in fee receipts from the Harbor
Maintenance Fee Account for salaries and expenses, and 3) another direct
appropriation of $108,688,000 for the Air and Marine Interdiction Programs. The
fourth source is the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund from which $61,000,000 is
provided for Customs. In addition, conferees directed the Department of Treasury
to allocate $64,493,000 from the Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund for Customs.
Core funding for Customs ($1,817,052,000), as provided by the act, is $450,000
less than the amount approved by the House, and $34,617,000 more than the amount
passed by the Senate. By comparison, the Administration’s FY2000 request for the
Customs Service of $1,829,783,000 was $219,371,000 less than the previous year’s
appropriation. This decrease, however, was largely reflective of supplemental
appropriations for FY1999 totaling $276,000,000 to increase counter-drug trafficking
activities. A large part of this funding was for the one-time acquisition of aircraft and
non-intrusive inspection technology.
Conferees earmarked in report language a number of budget enhancements for
FY2000, which include 1) $35,000,000 to upgrade automated systems that track
imports, 2) $9,000,000 for additional non-intrusive mobile personal inspection
technology, 3) $5,011,000 for the forced child labor program, 4) $2,000,000 for
money laundering outbound detection technology, and 5) $1,600,000 for the
The conferees, as did the Senate and House, rejected the Administration’s
proposal to enact a user fee as a means to generate funding to modernize the
Automated Commercial System (ACS) and continue the development of the
Automated Commercial Environment (ACE). The ACS is used by the Customs
Service to track, control, and process all commercial goods imported into the United
States. In recent years, this system has proved inadequate and has suffered from
“brownouts” that inhibit international commerce. To upgrade the old system and
continue development of the second, the act provides $35,000,000 for FY2000.
While it has been estimated that it will cost $1,800,000,000 over four years to develop
the ACE system, the conferees requested the Customs Service to provide the revised
blueprint, schedule, and budget for ACE not later than the time when the
Administration makes its FY2001 budget submission to Congress.
The act provides $4,000,000 in total FY2000 funding for Custom’s
Cybersmuggling Center, which includes $2,400,000 provided for the center from the
Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund, as recommended by both the Senate and the
House committees. Custom’s Cybersmuggling Center tracks and investigates child
pornography trafficking and child exploitation over the Internet. The Senate would
have provided an increase of $4,000,000 to expand the Customs Integrity Awareness
Program to improve screening of new job applicants and to administer polygraph
examinations to candidates for positions that are the most susceptible to corruption;
the conferees were silent on this initiative.
The conferees addressed several other issues in report language. Regarding
operations on the Southwest border, conferees earmarked $25,000,000 from the
Treasury Asset Forfeiture Fund for the Southwest border initiative. Conferees also
instructed the Customs Service to maintain current levels of staffing in Arizona, and
to report to the Appropriations Committees by March 31, 2000, on what resources
would be necessary to reduce wait times at Southwest border ports of entry to not
more than 20 minutes. Further, within 60 days of enactment of this appropriations
act, conferees required that the Customs Service submit to the Appropriations
Committees its recommendations for reducing wait times and improving contraband
detection at Southwest border ports of entry.
Responding to allegations that some Customs inspectors inordinately target
African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans for personal searches and detention, the
conferees directed the Secretary of the Treasury to submit a report to Congress on
the Customs Service’s personal search and detention procedures by February 15,
Regarding international ports of entry in general, the conferees required the
Customs Service, with the General Services Administration, to assess current
infrastructure at international ports and provide a report to the appropriations
committees within 9 months of the enactment of this appropriations act. Conferees
also urged the Customs Service to evaluate the merits of creating new international
ports of entry at airports in 1) Fargo, North Dakota; 2) San Antonio, Texas; and 3)
Manchester, New Hampshire. The act provides $725,000 and directs the Customs
Service to create a Northern Plains agricultural economics program to analyze issues
related to bilateral U.S./Canada trade issues on the northern plains.
Finally, conferees expressed their strong dissatisfaction that the Customs Service
did not deliver its air and marine fleet modernization plan, which was to be submitted
with the Administration’s FY2000 budget. Conferees reiterated that this plan is to
include life span and replacement schedules for Customs craft, associated operations
and maintenance activities, and cost projections for fleet modernization, and stipulated
that they expected prompt completion and delivery of the plan.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). P.L. 106-58 provides funding of
$8,248,774,000 to the IRS for FY2000. For FY1999, Congress appropriated
$8,375,165,000 (including emergency Y2K funding), to the IRS accounts. The
President’s budget request for FY2000 would fund $8,248,774,000 to the IRS.
Excluding emergency funding from the total FY1999 enacted, shows the President’s
FY2000 request exceeding the regular FY1999 funding.
The Senate agreed to a funding level of $8,191,135,000. An amendment was
adopted by the Senate to require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop an Internet
site where a taxpayer may generate a receipt for an income tax payment which
itemizes the portion of the payment which is allocable to various government spending22
The House Treasury Subcommittee had recommended an appropriation of
$8,244,774,000. The bill reported from full committee on July 13 included a major
amendment which would reduce funding to the department by $139 million: $4.9
million to Treasury-wide Systems and Capital Improvement; $42.4 million to IRS
Processing, Assistance, and Management; $31.7 million to IRS Tax Law
Enforcement; and $60.86 million to IRS Information Systems. As reported and
passed in the House, the bill would have funded the IRS at $8,109,774,000. The
House conferees were instructed to restore $50 million in funding for the IRS to
complete its Y2K compliance effort.
The President’s budget for FY2000 lists implementation of IRS reforms as a
Priority Management Objective.23 Specifically, the modernization of the IRS’
organization and its information technology to better serve taxpayers and improve
productivity are stated as the major goals of the restructuring. In December 1998, the
service let a contract for designing and installing information technology
improvements. In the spring of 1999, IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti is due to
begin implementation of system improvements.
In the 105th Congress, P.L. 105-206 was enacted to address long standing
operational problems in the IRS.24 On January 8, the first report to Congress
mandated by the new law was delivered. The report, 1998 IRS National Taxpayer
Advocate’s Annual Report to Congress,25 spelled out action taken by the National
Taxpayer Advocate, as required by the statute to address IRS issues with taxpayers.
22“Treasury and General Government Appropriations, 2000,” Congressional Record, vol.
23Budget, Budget, Table IV-2, p. 56 and 56.
24See CRS Report 97-984, Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service in the 105th Congress:
P.L. 105-206, by Sylvia Morrison.
25Bureau of National Affairs, Daily Tax Report, (Washington: BNA, January 8, 1999).
Secret Service. The U.S. Secret Service provides for the protection and security
of the President, Vice President, and other dignitaries and designated persons. It is
also responsible for the protection of the White House and other Washington, D.C.,
buildings, as well as the enforcement of federal laws pertaining to financial crimes and
frauds. P.L. 106-58 provides regular funding of the Secret Service at $672,235,000.
In addition, the agency is to receive $4,200,000 under the Violent Crime Reduction
Program (Crime Control Trust Fund).
For FY2000, the President had requested $661,312,000 for salaries and expenses
for the Secret Service.
On July 1, 1999, the Senate agreed to an appropriation of $643,739,000,
including $638,816,000 to carry out its presidential candidate and nominee protection,
protective research, and counterfeiting investigations, and $3,196,000 for the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
The bill, as reported to the House from the full committee, would provide an
appropriation of $643,739,000. On July 15, 1999, the House agreed to an
appropriation of $666,235,000 for protective functions, acquisition, and
While the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) generates most of the funding it requires
through sales of its products and services, it also receives an appropriation from the
federal government. The USPS receives an annual appropriation to its Postal Service
Fund to pay for revenue forgone on free and reduced rate mail (for the blind and
visually impaired and overseas voting). P. L. 105-277 provided FY1999 funding at
$71,195,000. Supplemental appropriations for FY1999 provided an additional
$29,000,000 for revenue forgone reimbursement. For payment to the Postal Service
Fund for revenue forgone for FY2000, the President is requesting $93,436,000.
P.L. 106-58 provides funding at $93,436,000, with $29,000,000 prior to October 1,
P.L. 105-277 required that the Postal Service submit, within six months of
enactment, a report on its current and future commercial services. Further language
required the USPS to report on its packaging service, especially how such service
meets customer demand nationally, especially in rural areas, before such service is
initiated. In compliance with P.L. 105-277, the report was submitted by the Postal
Service to the Appropriations Committee in April 1999.
Finally, P.L. 105-277 amended the USPS’ international service agreements by
making the Secretary of State solely responsible for formulating, coordinating, and
overseeing foreign policy related to international postal and delivery services. USPS
officials, with presidential consent, may establish international rates and/or fees for
mail and delivery services. Regarding the importing or exporting of mail shipments,
the USPS is required to follow the same procedures and laws applicable to similar
shipments transmitted by or to private companies.
Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the
The Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government appropriations bill funds all
the offices in the Executive Office of the President (EOP), except the following three
offices—the Council on Environmental Quality and the Office of Science and
Technology Policy (both funded under Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban
Development, and Independent Agencies appropriations), and the Office of the United
States Trade Representative (funded under Commerce, Justice, State, and the
Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations). Moreover, the Federal Drug Control
Programs account, which comprises almost two-thirds of EOP’s appropriation, is not
for use by agencies within EOP, but for transfer to federal and state entities for their
drug control programs. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), which
is located in the EOP, distributes the funds to federal and state entities.
The FY2000 appropriations for the offices in the EOP that are funded by the
Treasury appropriations act total $645,489,000, which is .9% more than the
$639,498,000 requested by the President, and 3.7% less than the $670,112,000
appropriated for FY1999. The House initially approved an appropriation of
$654,762,000, and the Senate an appropriation of $570,128,000. The smaller amount
initially appropriated by the Senate was due to a decrease in the funding for the
special forfeiture account in the Federal drug control program.
The specific accounts are discussed below. In those cases in which there is no
difference between P.L. 106-58, the FY2000 request, and Senate or House passage
only the appropriation is noted.
Compensation of the President. The FY2000 appropriation is $250,000, and
includes an allowance of $50,000 for official expenses. This is the same amount as
appropriated in FY1999.
The act includes an increase in the President’s salary to $400,000 per annum,
.effective with the change in administration in January 2001. Hearings on the issue
were held May 24 by the House Committee on Government Reform Subcommittee
on Government Management, Information, and Technology.26 An amendment to
strike the provision failed during consideration of H.R. 2490 on the House floor.
White House Office. The FY2000 appropriation is $52,444,000 for salaries and
expenses in the White House Office, the amount requested by the President, and an
increase of .2% over the $52,344,000 appropriated in FY1999. The FY2000
appropriation includes $10,313,000 for reimbursements to the White House
Communications Agency, a Department of Defense component which has historically
provided non-telecommunications support services. The reimbursements are in
accordance with P.L. 104-21.
26A listing of the witnesses and the transcripts of the Chairman and several witnesses’
statements can be found on the subcommittee’s web site:
Executive Residence (White House). The FY2000 appropriation is $9,260,000,
an increase of 6.5% over the $8,691,000 appropriated in FY1999. The FY2000
appropriation includes $810,000 for the repair, alteration, and improvement of the
Executive Residence. (Maintenance and repair costs for the White House are also
funded by the National Park Service as part of that agency’s responsibility for national
monuments. Entertainment costs for state functions are funded by the Department
of State.) As in previous appropriations statutes, reimbursable political events in the
Executive Residence are to be paid for in advance by the sponsor, and all such
advance payments are to be credited to a reimbursable expenses account. The
political party of the President is to deposit $25,000 to be available for expenses
relating to reimbursable political events during the fiscal year.
Special Assistance to the President (Office of the Vice President) and Official
Residence of the Vice President. The FY2000 appropriation is $3,617,000 for the
Office of Vice President, an increase of 3% over the $3,512,000 appropriated in
FY1999. The FY2000 appropriation includes $345,000 for the Official Residence of
the Vice President, an increase of 3.3% of over the $334,000 appropriated in
FY1999. Up to $90,000 could be used for official entertainment expenses.
Council of Economic Advisers. The FY2000 appropriation is $3,840,000, an
increase of 4.7% over the $3,666,000 appropriated in FY1999.
Office of Policy Development. The FY2000 appropriation is $4,032,000, the
same as appropriated in FY1999.
National Security Council. The FY2000 appropriation is $6,997,000, an
increase of 2.8% over the $6,806,000 appropriated in FY1999.
Office of Administration. The FY2000 appropriation is $39,198,000, which is
32.6% less than the $58,141,000 appropriated in FY1999. (The FY1999
appropriation included $29,791,000 in emergency funding for Y2K conversion. An
additional $12,000,000 was transferred to the office from other accounts.) Of the
FY2000 funds, $8,806,000 is to be available for a capital investment plan which
provides for the modernization of the information technology infrastructure. Title VI,
section 638, calls for the creation of a Chief Financial Officer in the EOP. The House
initially approved an FY2000 appropriation of $39,448,000, of which $250,000 was
to be used to establish the new position
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The FY2000 appropriation is
$63,495,000, an increase of 4.7% over the $60,617,000 appropriated in FY1999. To
combat crimes against intellectual property rights, the Senate Appropriations
Committee has directed the Director of OMB to submit a plan to establish an inter-
agency National Intellectual Property Coordination Center, not later than February
15, 2000, unless the President determines that such a center is not necessary.27 The
committee also directs the Director to prepare an inventory of Federal grant programs
27S. Rept. 106-87, p. 47.
for fiscal year 1999, as a step in simplifying and consolidating the federal grant
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). The FY2000 appropriation
is $52,201,000, an increase of 21% over the President's request of $43,133,000, and
an increase of 6% over the $49,242,000 FY1999 appropriation. The appropriation
consists of two line items, $22,951,000 for Salaries and Expenses, of which
$1,100,000 shall be available for policy research and evaluation, and $1,000,000 for
the National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws; and $29,250,000 for the
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, consisting of $16,000,000 for
counternarcotics research and development projects, and $13,250,000 for the
continued operation of the technology transfer program. The $16,000,000 for
counternarcotics research and development projects shall be available for transfer to
other Federal departments or agencies. The focus of the increased funding would be
the media campaign to reduce and prevent drug use among youth. A proposal to
include underage alcohol consumption as a target in that media campaign was
dropped from the bill, as provided by the subcommittee. The Congressional Budget
Office, in offering options for government-wide spending cuts, suggested that
additional appropriations for the media campaign should be eliminated. Their report
presumes that the effectiveness of the campaign would be sustained at the level of29
funding appropriated in FY1999.
Appropriations also include funding for two federal drug programs that ONDCP
is to transfer to federal and state entities. The FY2000 appropriation for the High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) is $192,000,000, an increase of 3.3% over
the President's requested $185,777,000 ($1,800,000 for auditing services), and an
increase of 3.8% over the $184,977,000 appropriated in FY1999. The FY 2000
appropriation for the Special Forfeiture Fund is $216,000,000, which is 4.1% less
than the $225,300,000 the President requested, and the same as appropriated in
Unanticipated Needs. The FY2000 appropriation is $1,000,000 for
discretionary expenses necessary to enable the President to meet unanticipated needs,
in furtherance of the national interest, security, or defense which may arise at home
or abroad. In FY1999, two additional appropriations were included under this
account that are not included in FY2000. Both appropriations were included under
the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. One
was $30,000,000 (of which $10,000,000 was later rescinded) for a grant to the Red
Cross for reimbursement of disaster relief, recovery expenditures and emergency
services (P.L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681, at 2681-576). The second was emergency
funding of $2,250,000,000, for Year 2000 conversion of federal information
technology systems, and related expenses, with allocations specified (P.L.105-277,
112 Stat. 2681, at 2681-572). areas throughout the United States. Those surveys are
conducted, but the pay adjustments have been limited through language in the
Treasury bill for several years.
28Ibid., pp. 47-48.
29CBO, Budgetary Discipline, . 214.
Federal Election Commission (FEC). The Federal Election Commission (FEC)
administers federal campaign finance law, oversees disclosure requirements, limits on
contributions and expenditures, and the presidential election public funding system,
and retains civil enforcement authority. For Fiscal Year 2000, Congress appropriated
$38,152,000 to fund the FEC, $364,000 less than the Administration's request of
P.L. 106-58 also makes three statutory changes in FEC operations, based on
proposals by a recent Price Waterhouse Coopers management study. Aimed at
improving operations, these new provisions give the FEC authority to require
electronic filing by committees meeting a threshold financial activity level, allow an
administrative fine schedule for minor, unambiguous disclosure violations (with
reasonable appeals procedures), and allow candidate report filing on an election cycle,
rather than calendar year, basis.
The Administration's request of $38.5 million constituted a 5.5% increase over
the $36.5 million appropriated for the agency in FY1999. Of the $38.5 million total,
no less than $4.9 million was designated for computer modernization, 10.5% more
than was earmarked for such purposes in the prior year. While the agency has been
criticized as either overly intrusive or insufficiently vigilant in its enforcement
capacities, depending on the source, there has been widespread support for improving
the automated data processing systems. Through greater availability and use of
electronic disclosure, computer modernization is seen as a way to alleviate burdens
on staff resources and enforcement functions.
The Senate adopted its Appropriations Committee's recommendation of
$38,175,000 for the FEC, $341,000 less than was requested. Of the total, no less
than $4.9 million would be designated for computer modernization—the same amount
specified in the Administration’s request. The House approved its Appropriations
Committee’s recommendation for $38,152,000—$364,000 less than was requested,
and with the proviso that no less than $4.9 million would be designated for computer
modernization. The House total reflected a cut of five full-time positions from the
nine new ones requested. The House appropriation figure was $23,000 lower than
the Senate figure, but both earmarked the same $4.9 million for computer
modernization. The conference committee accepted, and Congress agreed to, the
House-approved appropriation of $38,152,000.
The three legislative provisions ultimately enacted had been included first in the
House bill, as per its Treasury subcommittee’s recommendation. The Senate version
did not contain these provisions. The conference committee accepted, and Congress
agreed to, the provisions earlier approved by the House.
Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). P.L. 106-58 provides funding of
$23,828,000 for the FLRA. This amount matches the President’s budget request and
is 5.5% above the $22,586,000 appropriated in FY 1999. This was also the House-
passed funding and is $147,000 more than that passed by the Senate. The agency
serves as a neutral party in the settlement of disputes that arise between unions,
employees, and agencies on matters outlined in the federal service labor management
relations statute; decides major policy issues; prescribes regulations; and disseminates
information appropriate to the needs of agencies, labor organizations, and the public.
General Services Administration (GSA). Established in 1949, GSA administers
and coordinates the federal civilian acquisition policy program. The agency also
oversees the management of federal real and surplus property, which includes the
construction and maintenance of federal buildings. Other functions include
transportation, telecommunications, and information systems technology management.
For FY2000, the President requested $158,316,000 for GSA’s operating
expenses. The President’s request also prescribed $5,345,100,000 (from revenues)
in new obligational authority for GSA’s Federal Buildings Fund for real property
management and related activities. P.L. 106-58 provides funding for GSA at
$151,781,000, more than the Senate had voted and less than the House. The principle
difference is in the policy and operations account.
On July 13, 1999, the House Committee on Appropriations agreed to a funding
level of $146,006,000 for GSA’s FY2000 operating expenses. The House, in passing
H.R. 2490, did not change the funding level further.
In their June 24 report, the Senate committee recommended that funds in the
Federal Buildings Fund be transferred to meet program requirements, subject to
advance approval by the Appropriations Committees. No funds were to be used in
FY2001 for courthouse construction not meeting the Administrative Office of the
U.S. Court’s five-year plan and design standards. Any new proposed construction
plan was required to include a standardized courtroom utilization study. No funds
were to be used to provide cleaning services or security enhancements usually
provided through the Federal Buildings Fund to any agency not paying GSA’s
assessed costs. Claims against the government of less than $250,000 from direct
construction were to be liquidated from savings in other projects, with prior
notification to the Appropriations Committees. Funds made available for new
construction projects by the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997
(Public Law 104-208) were to remain available prior to September 30, 1999. A total
of $59,203,500 is not to be made available for rental of space and $59,203,500 is not
to be made available for building operations from the “Federal Buildings Fund
Limitations on Availability of Revenue.”
During floor consideration and adoption of S. 1282 on July 1, 1999, in addition
to funding of GSA at $156,297,000, two GSA amendments were agreed to by the
Senate. Senate Amendment No. 1192 increased the aggregate amount available in the
Federal Buildings Fund to $5,261,478,000. The Campbell Amendment (No. 1218),
agreed to by voice vote, reaffirmed aggregate reductions in the Federal Buildings
Fund for rental of space and buildings operations.
Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). P.L. 106-58 provides funding of
$27,586,000 for the MSPB. Additionally, $2,430,000 will be transferred from the
Civil Service Retirement and Disability trust fund for administrative expenses to
adjudicate retirement appeals. This amount matches the President’s budget request.
The agency’s FY 1999 appropriation was $25,805,000 and emergency funding of
$66,000 was provided for Y2K conversion. These amounts totaled $25,871,000.
The law, not including the trust fund transfer, is 6.9% above the $25,805,000 and
passed amount and is $164,000 more than that passed by the Senate. The MSPB
assists federal agencies in running a merit-based civil service system.
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The custodian of the
historically valuable records of the federal government since its establishment in 1934,
NARA also prescribes policy and provides both guidance and management assistance
concerning the entire life cycle of federal records. It also administers the presidential
libraries system; publishes the laws, regulations, and presidential and other documents;
and assists the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), which manages federal
security classification and declassification policies, and the National Historical
Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), which makes grants nationwide to
help nonprofit organizations identify, preserve, and provide access to materials that
document American history.
P.L. 106-58 provides $223,468,000 in funding for NARA. This funding level
is higher than either the House or Senate had originally passed. It represents more
funding for repairs and restoration than either version. The operating expenses are
the same as those passed by the House but higher than the Senate’s figure.
In the House, the July 15, 1999, passage of H.R. 2490 resulted in a
recommendation of $180,398,000 for NARA FY2000 operating expenses. This
amount is $6,054,000 less than the $186,452,000 requested by the President, and is
$44,216,000 less than the $224,614,000 appropriated for FY1999. Operating
expenses include costs incurred in connection with the administration of NARA
(including ISOO), archived federal records and related activities, and the review and
declassification of documents. The additional $6 million requested for FY2000 for
NHPRC operations and programs, which is $4 million less than the amount
appropriated for the commission for FY1999, was recommended by the committee,
as well. The panel also agreed to the President’s recommendation of the establishment
of a records center revolving fund and an appropriation of $22,000,000 as initial
capitalization of the fund. This revolving fund is available for expenses and equipment
necessary to provide for storage and related services for all temporary and prearchival
federal records to be or actually stored at federal national and regional records centers
by agencies and other instrumentalities of the federal government.
In the Senate, the FY2000 funding levels for NARA provided in S. 1282, as
amended and reported from committee, remained unchanged during floor
consideration and adoption of the bill on July 1, 1999. As reported on June 24, 1999,
the bill recommended $179,738,000 for NARA FY2000 operating expenses. This
amount was $6,714,000 less than the $186,452,000 requested by the President, and
was $44,876,000 less than the $224,614,000 appropriated for FY1999. The $6
million requested for NHPRC FY2000 operations and programs was met by the
Senate committee and an additional $250,000 was included, making the total amount
recommended $6,250,000. The additional $250,000 was provided for the Fort
Buford reconstruction project, deemed “an important Lewis and Clark ‘Corps of
Discovery’ site” by the committee. The records center revolving fund and its initial
$22 million capitalization as recommended in the President’s budget was also adopted
by the committee.
Office of Government Ethics (OGE). The Office of Government Ethics, a small
agency within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in Government Act
of 1978. Originally part of the Office of Personnel Management, OGE became a
separate agency on October 1, 1989, as part of the Office of Government Ethics
Reorganization Act of 1988. The Office of Government Ethics exercises leadership
in the executive branch to prevent conflicts of interest on the part of government
employees, and to resolve those conflicts of interest that do occur. In partnership
with executive branch agencies and departments, OGE fosters high ethical standards
for employees and strengthens the public’s confidence that the Government’s business
is conducted with impartiality and integrity. P.L. 106-58 provides funding of
$9,114,000, the same amount as the FY2000 budget request. This is a 7.3%
($622,000) increase from the $8,492,000 appropriated for FY1999. During
congressional consideration of the measure, the House voted the amount requested
by the President. However, when the Senate passed the measure, it
included$9,071,000 for OGE, $43,000 less than the budget request.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). P.L. 106-58 provides a total current
appropriation of $14,354,105,000 for OPM. Funding of $90,584,000 is provided for
the salaries and expenses account. (This was the House-passed amount and is
$1,000,000 less than the Senate-passed funding and the President’s budget request.)
The law also provides an appropriation of $960,000 for the Office of Inspector
General (OIG) salaries and expenses and mandatory funding of $5,105,482,000 for
the government payment for annuitants of the employees health benefits program
(FEHB), $36,207,000 for the government payment for annuitants of the employees
life insurance program, and $9,120,872,000 for payment to the civil service retirement
and disability fund. Trust fund transfers of $95,486,000 for salaries and expenses and
$9,645,000 for OIG salaries and expenses are provided as well. (In FY 1999,
$91,236,000 for salaries and expenses and $9,145,000 for OIG salaries and expenses
were transferred from trust funds.) The agency’s FY 1999 appropriation was
$13,478,212,000 and emergency funding of $2,428,000 was provided for Y2K
conversion. These amounts totaled $13,480,640,000. Not including the trust fund
transfers, the combined discretionary and mandatory funding provided by the law is
6.5% above the FY 1999 amount for the agency which is responsible for
administering personnel management functions.
Office of Special Counsel (OSC). P.L. 106-58 provides funding of $9,740,000
for the OSC. This amount matches the President’s budget request. The agency’s
FY1999 appropriation was $8,720,000 and emergency funding of $100,000 was
provided for Y2K conversion. These amounts totaled $8,820,000. The funding level
in the act is 11.7% above the $8,720,000 and 10.4% above the $8,820,000. The
funding provided by the act was also the House-passed amount and is $51,000 more
than that passed by the Senate. According to the conference report, “the conferees
are concerned about the number of backlogged cases” and “direct OSC to report back
within 90 days after enactment of this Act, on the number of cases pending that have
exceeded the statutory time requirements, including requirements for referral.”30 The
OSC investigates federal employee allegations of prohibited personnel practices and,
30Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 145, Sept. 14, 1999, p. H8223.
when appropriate, prosecutes before the Merit Systems Protection Board; provides
a channel for whistle blowing by federal employees; and enforces the Hatch Act.
Federal Child Care
P.L. 106-58 permits the use of executive branch agency funds (otherwise
available for salaries) to provide child care services for low-income federal employees
The Senate, in passing S. 1282, added a title to the bill (Amendment No. 1197)
that would have established new requirements for child care facilities operated by
federal agencies, including legislative and judicial branch agencies, for their
employees. The provision would require that executive facilities meet state or local
licensing standards within six months of the legislation’s enactment, and comply with
(or have made substantial progress towards complying with) standards set by a state
or nationally recognized accreditation entity within three years of enactment.
The Senate bill also would have required regulations, set by the Administrator
of General Services, establishing health and safety standards for federal agency child
care programs. Legislative agency facilities would be required to meet a state or
nationally recognized accreditation entity’s standards within one year of the bill’s
enactment. If the legislative facility does not maintain accreditation, it must follow
regulations no less stringent than those of executive agency facilities. Judicial branch
facilities would also be required to meet regulations (issued by the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts) pertaining to licensing and accreditation that are
no less stringent than those of executive branch agencies. Executive branch agencies
would be authorized to use agency funds to provide child care for employees and to
improve the affordability of such care for low-income employees. The amendment
would also authorize $900,000 in fiscal year 2000, and such sums thereafter, for an
interagency council of federal agencies to share best practices and coordinate policy
with regard to child care. A similar amendment was offered to the FY1999 Treasury
bill, adopted in the Senate, and fell in conference.
H.R. 2490, as passed by the House, July 15, 1999, included the provision (also
included in S. 1282) allowing executive branch federal agencies (not including the
General Accounting Office) to use agency funds to provide child care services, in a
facility owned or leased by the agency, for employees of the agency, provided these
funds are used to improve the affordability of child care for low-income federal
employees. It did not contain the other child care provisions included in the Senate
bill. However, on July 19, 1999, the Senate incorporated the provisions of S. 1282
as an amendment (Title VII) to H.R. 2490, and passed this companion measure,
numbered H.R. 2490, in lieu of S. 1282.
In conference, the conferees agreed to delete Title VII of H.R. 2490. The
conference report (H. Rept. 106-319) filed on September 14, 1999, and subsequently
approved by the House and Senate, does not contain all of the federal child care
provisions originally proposed in the Senate’s bill, S. 1282. Instead, the conference
report includes only the provisions contained in the original House proposal,
permitting the use of agency funds (otherwise available for salaries) to provide child
care services for low-income federal employees.
Public Law 106-58, has some significant pay provisions and is gaining a good
deal of attention by provisions that are absent. Specific rates for all affected pay
systems will be promulgated in late December or early January through an Executive
Section 644 provides that, effective noon January 20, 2001, the pay of the
President will be increased to $400,000 per annum. It has been $200,000 since
January 1969. There is a constitutional proscription on increasing or decreasing the
pay of a President during the term for which he was elected. Therefore, Mr. Clinton
will not benefit from this increase.
The President must pay federal income tax on his salary. There is an official
expense allowance of $50,000. That allowance, which has been the same rate since
1949, can be used for official purposes only, is not subject to income tax. Any unused
portion reverts to the U.S. Treasury.
Members of Congress and Other Federal Officials
Under the provisions of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989,31 Members and other
officials of Congress, the Vice President, executive branch officials, and federal judges
are to receive an annual adjustment in pay. Adjustments are based on the percent of
change in the private sector wages and salaries element of the Employment Cost
Index (ECI) minus 0.5% They are to go into effect at the same time as, and at a rate
no greater than, the rate adjustments for the General Schedule. The rate of change
in the private sector, December 1997 to December 1998, was 3.9%. Therefore the
rate of pay adjustment, effective January 2000, for federal officials will be 3.4%.
The significance of this bill to the pay adjustment for federal officials is that since
1995, with the exception of the adjustment in January 1998, Congress has acted
legislatively to deny themselves and other federal officials the annual adjustment. The
legislative vehicle for that denial has been the Treasury appropriations bill.
Federal judges’ salary adjustments are subject to further legislative activity.
While the Ethics Reform Act includes those adjustments in the automatic mechanism,32
there is further statutory restriction. Congress has required that they specifically
authorize any such adjustment. Traditionally, that authorization has come through the
Commerce, State, Justice, and Judiciary Appropriations. The FY2000 appropriations
bill for those accounts (H.R. 2670), as it passed the Senate, contains the
31P.L. 101-194; Nov. 30, 1989; 103 Stat. 1716, at 1769.
3295 Stat. 1183.
authorization. It is assumed that the bill, as it comes out of conference, will contain
the authorization language. Congress has consistently authorized the pay adjustments
whenever there has been an increase for other federal officials.
General Schedule. .Federal employees under the General Schedule (GS) and
related pay systems will receive a 4.8% pay adjustment effective the first pay period
beginning on or after January 1, 2000. Section. Under the provisions of 5 U.S.C.
5303, the national GS base pay adjustment is to be 3.8%. It is assumed that, since the
President did not present an alternative plan to Congress, that rate will go into effect.
The remaining 1% is to be used for locality-based payments (5 U.S.C. 5304). The
explanatory language for Section 646 of the bill, as found in the conference report
...The conferees have not made the language more specific so that the President
may exercise his discretion to distribute any amount allocated for comparability-
based locality payments in the most appropriate fashion among the pay localities33
established by the President’s Pay Agent.
The President would generally have until the end of November to submit an alternate
plan relating to locality-based comparability payments. However, since the statute
specifies the total pay adjustment and, in effect, limits it to a percentage rate lower
than would be effective under 5 U.S.C. 5304, it may not be necessary for the
President to submit such plan.
Both the House- and Senate-passed versions of the Treasury bill had assumed
a federal civilian pay increase of 4.4% in January 2000. The Senate committee report
stated that, in order to stay within its 302(b) allocations, both budget authority and
outlays had to be reduced without harming essential programs. Therefore, the
committee said that it “was forced to deny all requests for additional funding, to cover
the remaining months of the calendar year 1999 statutory annual pay adjustment.”
Employees whose salaries are administratively determined and who do not receive the
government-wide adjustments were the only exception to this across-the-board
reduction.34 The House-passed, but not the Senate-passed Treasury bill included a
statement relating to the Sense of the Congress on the federal civilian pay adjustment.
President Clinton had proposed a 4.4% pay adjustment for federal employees in his
FY 2000 budget. This amount was the overall average increase, including locality pay
adjustments. Legislation passed the Senate (S. 4 ,106th Congress) providing a 4.8%35
military pay adjustment. That measure and a FY1999 emergency supplemental (P.L.
33H. Report 106-319, p. 87.
34S. Report 106-87, p. 3.
35For an analysis of the military pay raise issue see: CRS Report RL30205, Appropriations
for FY 2000: Defense, by Stephen Daggett.
military pay adjustment and that for civilian personnel.36 The House-passed Treasury
bill included this same Sense of the Congress language.
Federal Wage System. Blue-collar employees paid under the Federal Wage
System have their pay adjustments limited by P.L. 106-58. Section 613 continues the
limitation on those adjustments to a formula based on the GS adjustments. Pay under
this system is supposed to be set subsequent to wage surveys conducted in over 130
wage survey areas throughout the United States. Those surveys are conducted, but
the pay adjustments have been limited through language in the Treasury bill for
Other. The Senior Executive Service (SES) and other pay systems, such as the
Administrative Law Judges, will have the caps raised on their salaries. There are
several systems which are limited to salary rates on the Executive Schedule. Those
increase by 3.4% in January. The President has the responsibility, administratively,
to set the specific SES rates.
Buy Outs and Early Retirement
Section 411 details the procedures under which the General Services
Administrator is authorized to offer voluntary separation incentives in order to
provide the necessary flexibility in carrying out the closing of the Federal Supply
Service distribution centers and other related activities. The authority, carrying with
it a maximum payment of $25,000, is effective through April 30, 2001.
Section 651 authorizes a voluntary early retirement for federal employees. That
authority would be subject to Office of Personnel Management approval and
Major Funding Trends
In summary and prior to scorekeeping adjustments by the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO), the Administration has requested a total of $27,997,054,000 for
accounts within this appropriation. The funding enacted for FY2000 under P.L. 106-
The House and Senate data for FY1999 enacted are different. The House shows
$27,922,712,000 as a grand total in budget authority and the Senate shows
$27,915,604,000. Using either figure, the FY2000 levels approved by the House
Subcommittee and the Senate Committee represent an increase over the FY1999
enacted level of $26,978,249,000. The House Treasury Appropriations
36In addition to S. 4 and P.L. 106-31, other measures in the 106th Congress which express the
desire for parity between the civilian and uniformed military pay adjustments are H.R. 1664
(as passed the House), H. Con. Res. 34 and S. Con. Res. 10.
Subcommittee recommended a FY2000 funding level of $28,095,811,000. And the
Senate Committee on Appropriations reported a funding level of $27,737,971,000.37
FY2000 enacted mandatory funding is $14,533,811,000, according to House
documents, using CBO scorekeeping data. That figure corresponds to the FY2000
request for mandatories, compared to $13,656,152,000 enacted for FY1999..
According to the House documents, the FY2000 request for discretionary
funding is $13,926,438,000, an increase over $13,465,985,000, FY1999 enacted.
The FY2000 enacted is $13,706,000. The House Committee mark for discretionary
funding was $13,466,056,000 and the Senate would have provided $13,434,138,000
in discretionary funding. The Administration is shown to have requested
$132,127,000 for the crime trust fund as compared to the FY1999 enacted level of
$132,000,000. The FY2000 enacted level is $132,000,000. The House committee
recommended that funding level. The Senate, however, would have increased the
amount to $194,000,000 in this account.
37Funding data are derived from a detailed computer printout, dated July 13, 1999, from the
House Committee on Appropriations and from Senate Report 106-87, dated June 24, 1999.
The funding data for FY2000 enacted, as well as House- and Senate-passed were provided
in a similar document dated September 9, 1999.
Table 2. Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive
Office of the President, and General Government, FY1995 to FY1999 a
(in billions of current dollars)
FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999
23.455 23.164 24.102 25.585 27.122
Source for FY1999: U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, as of July 13, 1999.
a These figures, in current dollars, include CBO adjustments for permanent budget authorities,
rescissions, supplementals, as well as other elements factored into the CBO scorekeeping process.
For a brief presentation on CBO scorekeeping see: U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining
Budgetary Discipline: Spending and Revenue Options (Washington: GOP, 1999). The appendix
beginning on p. 281 provides the “Scorekeeping Guidelines” as found in the conference report to the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Also available at [http://www.cbo.gov/].
Table 3. Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President
and General Government Appropriation, FY2000, by Title
(In millions, without CBO scorekeeping)
FY1999 FY2000 House Senate FY2000
Title Enacted Request Reported Passed Enacted
III. EOP 670.1639.5654.8570.1645.5
Total 27,922.7 27,997.1 27,800.1 27,774.6 27,972.4
Source: The source for the House data is the House Committee on Appropriations. The
Senate data are also from the House Committee, as released to them by the Senate July 14,
Table 4. Department of Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of
the President, and General Government Appropriations
(in thousands of dollars)
Bureau or Agency EnactedRequestReportedPassedEnacted
Title I: Department of the Treasury, Selected Accounts
Department Offices a123,151134,630134,206133,168134,034
and capital investments
programs 28,690 53,561 31,017 35,561 43,961
Treasury Building Repairb
and Restoration 27,00023,00023,00015,00023,000
Office of Inspector
Inspector General for Tax
Administration — 112,207 112,207 111,340 112,207
Federal Law Enforcementc
Training Center 110,231107,846107,137101,725105,638
Bureau of Alcohol, e
Tobacco, and Firearms 552,769599,859567,059570,345565,959
U.S. Customs Service f2,049,1541,829,7831,817,5021,782,4351,817,052
Bureau of the Public Debt g172,100177,819176,919176,983177,819
Internal Revenue Service,h
and Management 3,086,2083,312,5353,270,0983,291,9453,312,535
Earned Income Tax Credit
Tax Law Enforcement3,164,1893,336,8383,301,1363,305,0903,336,838
Information Systems j1,770,7681,455,4011,394,5401,450,1001,455,401
U.S. Secret Service k692,873666,235667,235643,739672.235
Violent Crime Reduction
Program (Crime Control
Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms3,0003,00026,80017,84727,920
Bureau or Agency EnactedRequestReportedPassedEnacted
Interagency Crime and
U.S. Secret Service22,6283,1964,20021,9504,200
Education and Training:
Grants 13,000 10,000 10,000 13,000 13,000
U.S. Customs Service65,47264,95264,00052,77461,000
Federal Law Enforcement
Federal Drug Control
Title II: U.S. Postal Service
Payments to Postal Service
Fund 100,195 93,436 29,000 29,000 29,000
(Delay in Obligation)(-71,195)————
FY2001 — — 64,436 64,436 64,436
Total, Postal Service l100,19593,43693,43693,43693,436
Title III: Executive Office of the President (EOP) m and Funds Appropriated to the President
Compensation of then
The White House Office
(salaries and expenses)52,34452,44452,44452,44452,444
Executive Residence at the
White House (operating
expenses) 8,691 9,260 9,260 9,260 9,260
White House Repair and
Restoration — 810 810 810 810
Office of the Vice President
(salaries and expenses)3,5123,6173,6173,6173,617
Official Residence of the
Vice President (operating
expenses) 334 345 345 345 345
Bureau or Agency EnactedRequestReportedPassedEnacted
Council of Economic
Office of Policy
Development 4,032 4,032 4,032 4,032 4,032
National Security Council6,8066,9976,9976,9976,997
Office of Administration o58,14139,19839,44839,19839,198
Office of Management and
Budget 60,617 63,495 63,495 63,495 63,495
Office of National Drugpq
Control Policy (ONDCP) 49,24243,13352,22121,96322,951
Center — — — 31,100 29,250
Federal Drug Control
Program, High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Areas
Federal Drug Control
Funds Appropriated to the
President - Unanticipatedr
Total, EOP and Funds
Appropriated to the
President 670,112 639,498 654,762 570,128 645,489
Title IV: Independent Agencies
Committee for Purchase
from People Who Are Blind
or Severely Disabled2,4642,6742,6742,6572,674
Federal Labor Relations
Authority 22,586 23,828 23,828 23,681 23,828
Federal Buildings Fund450,018————
Policy and Operations u158,001122,158110,448120,198116,223
Office of Inspector
General 32,000 33,917 33,317 33,858 33,317
Bureau or Agency EnactedRequestReportedPassedEnacted
Allowances and Office
for Former Presidents2,2412,2412,2412,2412,241
provision (P.L. 106-5831)1,700————
Merit Systems Protection
Board (salaries and
expenses) 25,805 27,586 27,586 27,422 27,586
Morris K. Udall scholarship
and excellence in national
foundation — 3,000 1,000 — 2,000
National Archives andv
Records Administration 248,589222,372212,318220,108223,468
Operating Expenses w231,276186,452180,398179,738180,398
Reduction of Debt- 4,012-5,598-5,598-5,598-5,598
Repairs and Restoration11,32513,51813,51821,51822,418
Records Center Revolving
Office of Government
Office of Personnel
Salaries and expenses85,35091,58490,58491,58490,584
Office of Inspector
General 960 960 960 960 960
Government Payment for
Government Payment for
Payment to Civil Service
Bureau or Agency EnactedRequestReportedPassedEnacted
Office of Special Counsel y8,8209,7409,7409,6899,740
United States Tax Court32,76536,48936,48934,17935,179
Source: U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, as of September 9, 1999.
Table 4 Notes:
a Treasury Departmental Offices— FY1999 enacted includes the following emergency funding
accounts: Salaries and expenses, $1,500,000 for counterdrug activities and $1,238,000 for Y2K
conversion; and three Automation enhancement funding points for Y2K conversion, totaling
b Treasury Building Fund— FY1999 statute requires delay in obligating the $27,000,000 until the
close of the fiscal year.
c Law Enforcement Training Center— FY1999 enacted includes $3,548,000 in emergency funding
d Financial Management Center— FY1999 enacted includes $6,000,000 in emergency funding for
e ATF—FY1999 enacted includes three Y2K conversion funding points totaling $11,195,000 and
excludes $2,206,000 delayed obligation of appropriated funds. The Y2K funding was subject to a
rescission of $4,500,000. Neither congressional version includes the budget request for $15,000,000
to fund laboratory facilities and headquarters.
f Customs— FY1999 enacted includes three emergency funding counterdrug items totaling
$276,000,000, Y2K conversion emergency funding at $10,200,000, and excludes $9,500,000 delayed
obligation of appropriated funds. Note that the Committee print out provides the total shown for
FY1999 enacted, however, a tally of the individual accounts shown results in a total of
$2,037,953,000. The Senate report shows another $1,701,000.
g Public Debt—FY1999 enacted includes $1,000,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding.
h IRS—Total for IRS reflects funding adjustments presented in notes for specific accounts within the
i Processing—FY1999 enacted does not reflect $130,000,000 delayed obligation of appropriated
j Information Systems—FY1999 enacted includes $483,000,000 and $22,312,000 in Y2K conversion
k U.S. Secret Service—FY1999 enacted includes $80,808,000 in emergency funding for antiterrorism
and two emergency funding items totaling $3,695,000 for Y2K conversion. It does not exclude
$5,000,000 delayed obligation of appropriated funds.
l USPS—FY1999 does not exclude $71,195 delayed obligation.
m The Council on Environmental Quality/Office of Environmental Quality, Office of Science and
Technology Policy, and the Office of the United States Trade Representative are funded under other
n Since 1969, the President’s salary has been $200,000 per annum. Since 1949, the expense
allowance has been $50,000 per annum..
o Off. of Admin.—FY1999 enacted includes three Y2K conversion items of emergency funding
p ONDCP—FY1999 enacted includes counterdrug emergency funding of $1,200,000. P.L. 106-58
creates a new line item which would fund the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center
separately, instead of previous practice of including it in the general ONDCP account.
q ONDCP Federal Drug Control—Since these funds are not for operations of the Executive Office
of the President (EOP), but are to be transferred to federal, state and local agencies for anti-drug
operations, they are not included in the EOP operations funds. The funds are under the control of
the ONDCP. FY1999 enacted for the Special forfeiture fund includes $2,000,000 in counterdrug
r Unanticipated Needs—FY1999 enacted reflects $30,000,000 in emergency funding, as reduced by
a $10,000,000 rescission.
s FEC—FY1999 enacted includes $243,000 in emergency funding for counterdrug.
t GSA total—FY1999 enacted includes $22,503,000 in emergency funding. The FY1999 agency
regular appropriation was $593,853,000.
u GSA Policy and Operations—The House documents show FY1999 enacted with five Y2K
conversion items of emergency funding totaling $48,407,000. The Senate Report shows FY1999
enacted with four Y2K conversion items of emergency funding totaling $41,299,000.
v NARA total—FY1999 enacted includes $6,662,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding, but
does not exclude a total of $11,861,000 delayed obligations.
w NARA Operating expenses—FY1999 enacted includes $6,662,000 in Y2K conversion emergency
funding, but does not exclude $7,861,000 delayed obligations.
x NARA/NHPRC—FY1999 does not include a $4,000,000 obligation delay. The FY2000 totals do
not reflect proposed rescissions of $4,000,000 and $3,800,000 by the House and Senate respectively.
y OSC—FY1999 enacted includes $1,00,000 in Y2K conversion emergency funding.
Glossary of Budget Process Terms
The following definitions are selected from the “Glossary of Budgetary Terms”
as found in Manual on the Federal Budget Process, a CRS report (98-720) by Robert
Keith in consultation with Alan Schick.
Account. A control and reporting unit for budgeting an accounting.
Appropriation. A provision of law providing budget authority that permits federal
agencies to incur obligations and to make payments of the U.S. Treasury for specified
purposes. Annual appropriations are provided in appropriations acts; most permanent
appropriations are provided in substantive law.
Authorization. A provision in law that authorizes appropriations for a program or
Budget Authority. Authority provided by law to enter into obligations that normally
result in outlays. The main forms of budget authority are appropriations, borrowing
authority, and contract authority.
Budget Resolution. A concurrent resolution passed by both Houses of Congress, but
not requiring the signature of the President, setting forth the congressional budget for
at least the next five fiscal years. The budget resolution sets forth various budget
totals and functional allocations, and may include reconciliation instructions, to
designated House or Senate committees.
Continuing Resolution. An act (in the form of a joint resolution) that provides budget
authority to agencies or programs whose regular appropriation has not been enacted
after the new fiscal year has started. A continuing resolution usually is a temporary
measure that expires on a specified date or is superseded by enactment of the regular
appropriations act. Some continuing resolutions, however, are in effect for the
remainder of the fiscal year and are the means of enacting regular appropriations.
Direct Spending. Budget authority, and the resulting outlays, provided in laws other
than annual appropriations acts. Appropriated entitlements are classified as direct
spending. Direct spending is distinguished by the Budget Enforcement Act from
discretionary spending and is subject to the PAGO rules. It is also referred to as
Discretionary Spending. Budget authority, and the resulting outlays, provided in
annual appropriations acts, but not including appropriated entitlements.
Federal Funds. All monies collected and spent by the federal government other than
those designated as trust funds. Federal funds include general, special, public
enterprise, and intragovernmental funds.
Mandatory Spending. See “Direct Spending.”
Obligation. A binding agreement (such as through a contract or purchase order) that
will require payment.
Outlays. Payments made (generally through the issuance of checks or disbursement
of cash) to liquidate obligations. Outlays during a fiscal year may be for payment of
obligations incurred in prior years or in the same year.
PAGO (Pay-as-You-Go) Process. The procedure established by the Budget
Enforcement Act to ensure that revenue and direct spending legislation does not add
to the deficit or reduce the surplus. PAGO requires that any increase in the deficit or
reduction in the surplus due to legislation be offset by other legislation or
sequestration. PAGO is enforced by estimating the five-year budgetary effects of all
new revenue and direct spending laws.
Reconciliation Process. A process established in the Congressional Budget Act by
which Congress changes existing laws to conform tax and spending levels to the levels
set in a budget resolution. Changes recommended by committees pursuant to a
reconciliation instruction are incorporated into a reconciliation bill.
Revolving Fund. An account or fund in which all income derived from its operations
is available to finance the fund’s continuing operations without fiscal year limitation.
Scorekeeping. Procedures for tracking and reporting on the status of congressional
budgetary actions affecting budget authority, receipt, outlays, the surplus or deficit,
and the public debt limit.
Supplemental Appropriation. Budget authority provided in an appropriations act in
addition to regular or continuing appropriations already provided. Supplemental
appropriations acts sometimes include items not included in regular appropriations
acts for lack of timely authorization.
Trust Funds. Accounts designated by law as trust funds for receipts and expenditures
earmarked for specific purposes.
User Fees. Fees charged to users of goods or services provided by the federal
government. In levying or authorizing these fees, Congress determines whether the
revenue should go into the U.S. Treasury or should be available to the agency
providing the goods or services.
For Additional Reading
CRS Issue Briefs
CRS Issue Brief 98024, Federal Employees and the FY1999 Budget, by Sharon S.
CRS Issue Brief 95035, Federal Regulatory Reform: An Overview, by Roger Garcia.
CRS Issue Brief 10014, Gun Control, by Keith Alan Bea and William J. Krouse.
CRS Issue Brief 89148, Item Veto and Expanded Impoundment Proposals, by
Virginia A. McMurtry.
CRS Issue Brief 95083, Postal Service’s Mail Monopoly: Is It Time for Change?,
by Bernevia McCalip.
CRS Issue Brief 97036, The Year-2000 Problem: Congressional Issues, by Richard
CRS Info Packs
CRS Info Pack 517G, Government Performance and Results Act: implementing the
CRS Report 97-635, The Balanced Budget Act of 1997: Retirement and Health
Insurance Provisions for Postal and Federal Personnel, by Carolyn L. Merck.
CRS Report 98-829, Brady Act Firearm Purchase Requirements Summarized, by
CRS Report 98-814, Budget Reconciliation Legislation: Development and
Consideration, by Bill Heniff, Jr.
CRS Report RL30021, Child Care Issues in the 106th Congress, by Karen Spar and
Melinda T. Gish.
CRS Report RS20255, Civil Service Retirement Bills in the 106th Congress, by
Patrick J. Purcell.
CRS Report 97-892, Continuing Appropriations Acts: Brief Overview of Recent
Practices, by Sandy Streeter
CRS Report 97-1008, Federal Pay: FY1999 Salary Adjustments, by Barbara L.
CRS Report 98-956, Federal Pay: FY2000 Salary Adjustment, by Barbara L.
CRS Report RS20403, FY2000 Consolidated Appropriations Act: Reference
Guide, by Robert Keith..
CRS Report RS20257, Government Performance and Results Act: Brief Historyth
and Implementation Activities During the First Session of the 106
Congress, by Genevieve J. Knezo.
CRS Report 97-382, Government Performance and Results Act: Implications for
Congressional Oversight, by Frederick M. Kaiser and Virginia A. McMurtry.
CRS Report 97-70, Government Performance and Results Act, P.L. 103-62:
Implementation Through Fall 1996 and Issues for the 105th Congress, by
Genevieve J. Knezo.
CRS Report RS20183, Immigration and Naturalization Service’s FY2000 Budget,
by William J. Krouse.
CRS Report 98-4, Implementation of P.L. 105-206: Personnel Management
Flexibility for the Internal Revenue Service, by Barbara L. Schwemle.
CRS Report 98-721, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, by Robert
CRS Report 98-720, Manual on the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 97-72, Performance-Based Organizations in the Federal
Government: A Reinvention Innovation, by Harold C. Relyea.
CRS Report 97-974, Reorganization Proposals for U.S. Border Management
Agencies, by Frederick Kaiser.
CRS Report 98-53, Salaries of Federal Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RL30014, Salaries of Members of Congress: Current Procedures
and Recent Adjustments, by Paul E. Dwyer.
CRS Report 97-1011, Salaries of Members of Congress: Payable Rates and
Effective Dates, 1789-1999, by Paul E. Dwyer.
CRS Report RS20114, Salary of the President Compared with That of Other
Federal Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RS20115, Salary of the President: Process for Change, by Sharon S.
CRS Report 98-844, Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Effects, and
Process, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report 97-216, Treasury-Inflation Protection Securities: A Fact Sheet, by
CRS Report 97-134, Treasury-Inflation Protection Securities: Description,
Goals, and Policy Issues, by James Bickley.
CRS Report 98-202, Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President,
and General Government: Appropriations for FY1999, by Sylvia Morrison
and Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report 98-377, Year 2000 Problem: Chronology of Hearings andthth
Legislation in the 104 and 105 Congresses, by Richard Nunno.
CRS Report 98-967, Year 2000 Problem: Potential Impacts on National
Infrastructures, by Richard Nunno.
Syracuse University, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs,
Government Performance Project, Grading Government, (Syracuse, N.Y.:
Syracuse University, February 1999).
U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury and General
Government Appropriation Bill, 2000, report to accompany s. 1282, 106th
Cong., 1st sess., S. Rept. 106-5887 (Washington: GPO, 1999).
U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining Budgetary Discipline: Spending
and Revenue Options (Washington: GPO, 1999). [Available on CBO Web
U.S. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Customs Service
Strategic Plan (FY97-02), by Commissioner of Customs George Weiss,
(Washington: U.S. Customs Service, August 1, 1997).
U.S. General Accounting Office, High Risk Series, IRS Management, GAO
report HR 97-8, (Washington: February 1997).
——-, Customs Service: Comments on Strategic Plan and Resource Allocation
Process, GAO report GGD-98-15, (Washington: October 16, 1998).
——-, Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of the
Treasury, GAO report OCG-99-14, (Washington: October 21, 1998).
U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Progress on Year 2000 Conversion, A
Quarterly Report to Congress, (Washington: March 1999).
Selected World Wide Web Sites
Important information regarding current and past budgets (including budget
documents), the federal budget process, and duties and functions are available at
the following web or gopher sites.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
General Accounting Office (GAO).
National Commission on Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service
Office of Government Ethics
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Office of Management and Budget, Statements of Administration Policy (SAPS)