Military Operations: Precedents for Funding Contingency Operations in Regular or in Supplemental Appropriations Bills

CRS Report for Congress
Military Operations: Precedents for Funding
Contingency Operations in Regular or in
Supplemental Appropriations Bills
Stephen Daggett
Specialist in National Defense
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Summary
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress has appropriated $331
billion for military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. Of that amount, $301
billion, or 91%, has been provided either in supplemental appropriations bills or as
additional “emergency” funding in separate titles of annual defense appropriations acts.
A recurring issue in Congress has been whether funding for ongoing military
operations — such as those in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — should be provided
in supplemental appropriations bills and in additional “emergency” accounts, or should
instead be considered as part of regular annual defense budget requests.
This report briefly reviews the main precedents, including funding for the Korean
conflict, the Vietnam conflict, the Persian Gulf War of 1990-1991, and various smaller
military contingency operations in the 1990s. It will be updated as events warrant.
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress has appropriated,
according to CRS calculations, $331 billion to the Department of Defense (DOD) for
military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere.¹ Congress is now considering an
additional $66 billion for such operations in a pending FY2006 supplemental
appropriations bill (H.R. 4939).
Of the $331 billion provided to date, $301 billion, or 91%, has been provided either
in supplemental appropriations bills or as additional “emergency” funding in separate
titles of annual defense appropriations acts. In all, Congress has approved 9 bills
providing emergency funding for military operations since 9/11. The remaining $30

¹ See CRS Report RL33110, The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror
Operations Since 9/11, by Amy Belasco, Table 3.
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

billion has been provided either as part of regular annual appropriations for the
Department of Defense or by transfer from regular DOD budget accounts.²
A recurring issue in Congress has been whether funding for ongoing operations —
such as those in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — should continue to be provided in
supplemental appropriations bills and in additional “emergency” accounts, or should
instead be considered as part of regular annual defense budget requests. This would
require that the Administration provide the usual extensive budget justification material
prepared in support of regular defense requests, and it would make funding subject to the
usual oversight that Congress carries out in the normal defense authorization and
appropriations process.³
One element of the debate has been what the precedents are. This report briefly
reviews the main precedents, including funding for the Korean conflict, the Vietnam
conflict, the Persian Gulf War of 1990-1991, and smaller military contingency operations
in the 1990s. In brief, the precedents are as follows:
^!Supplementals have been the most frequent means of financing the initial
stages of military operations.⁴
^!In general, however, past Administrations have requested, and Congress
has provided, funding for ongoing military operations in regular
appropriations bills as soon as even a limited and partial projection of
costs could be made.
^!In Vietnam, the Johnson Administration requested supplemental
appropriations of $700 million for FY1965 and then submitted a budget
amendment for $1.7 billion for the regular FY1966 defense
appropriations bill. Subsequently, substantial funding was requested and
provided in regular appropriations bills for FY1967 and FY1968, and
additional funding was also provided in supplemental appropriations.
The amounts the Johnson Administration requested in regular
appropriations bills in those years were sufficient to cover projected costs
of operations for only part of the fiscal year on the premise that additional
costs were uncertain. The FY1967 request was based on the official

² Ibid., Table A1 shows $22.5 billion provided in regular appropriations bills and $8.6 billion
provided through transfers.
³ The FY2005 and FY2006 defense appropriations acts both included provisions expressing the
Sense of the Senate that funding for ongoing operations should be requested and provided in
regular defense funding bills. See Section 8138 of the FY2005 defense appropriations act, P.L.
108-287 and Section 8117 of the FY2006 defense appropriations act, P.L. 109-148. Also, for
several years, defense appropriations acts have included a provision requiring that the President’s
budget request include separate budget justification documents for costs of military contingency
operations — see Section 8100 of the FY2006 defense appropriations act.
⁴ CRS reviewed initial funding for military operations from World War II through Kosovo in
Stephen Daggett, “Budgeting for Wars in the Past,” CRS Congressional Distribution Memo,
March 27, 2003. It is available to congressional offices on request.

premise that the war might be successfully concluded by the end of the
fiscal year. When costs grew, supplementals were requested.
^!In the early 1990s, funding for ongoing operations in Southwest Asia and
in Bosnia was provided in supplementals rather than in regular
appropriations bills. In the FY1996 defense appropriation act, however,
Congress directed the Administration to include subsequent funding for
ongoing military contingency operations in its requests for regular
defense appropriations funding. The Clinton Administration complied
with this directive. Although operations in Kosovo were initially funded
with supplemental appropriations, funds for ongoing missions, including
Kosovo after the initial stages, were requested in regular DOD budget
submissions.
Brief summaries of funding for the Korean conflict, the Vietnam conflict, and
operations in the 1990s follow.
Korea
Following the outbreak of the war in Korea, Congress provided supplemental
appropriations of $32.8 billion for the Department of Defense for FY1951, which covered
costs of operations in Korea and also of a general world-wide buildup of military forces.
In FY1952, almost all of the funding for operations in Korea was provided in regular
appropriations, except for $1.4 billion, which was a deficiency appropriation for
operations in Korea provided on June 28, 1952, after the end of the fiscal year.⁵ For
FY1953, Congress provided all funds for operations in Korea in regular defense
appropriations bills.
Table 1 shows the breakdown of total Department of Defense Appropriations for
FY1951-FY1953 between regular and supplemental appropriations.
Table 1. Regular and Supplemental DOD Appropriations
During the Korean Conflict , FY1951-FY1953
(billions of then-year dollars)
Fiscal YearRegular AppropriationsSupplementalAppropriationsTotalAppropriations
1951 13.0 32.8 45.8
195255.21.456.6
195344.3043.3
^No^te:^{DOD ap}^p^r^o^p^r^iatioⁿ^s^oⁿ^ly^{— d}^o^e^{s n}^o^{t in}^clu^d^{e m}^ilitary^coⁿ^s^tru^c^tioⁿ^.
^Source:^D^e^part^m^eⁿ^t^of^D^e^f^eⁿ^s^{e C}^o^m^p^t^r^ol^l^e^r.

⁵ Deficiency appropriations were common in the 1940s and 1950s but have not been since then.
They provided funds for accounts that had overspent appropriated amounts in prior years.

The following is a chronology of funding for the Korean conflict from FY1951
through FY1953 (the totals may not add exactly to the amounts reported in the table above
because of later rescissions, transfers, etc.).
FY1951
^!September 22, 1950 (cleared Congress): First supplemental
appropriations for FY1951. Provided $11.7 billion for DOD and $4
billion for military assistance for the Korean conflict.
^!January 2, 1951 (cleared Congress): Second supplemental appropriations
for FY1951. Provided $16.8 billion for DOD and $1.8 billion for the
strategic stockpile, mostly for Korea costs.
^!May 28, 1951 (cleared Congress): Fourth supplemental appropriations for
FY1951. Provided $6.4 billion for DOD for Korea.
FY1952
^!October 12, 1951 (cleared Congress): Regular DOD appropriations for
FY1952. Provided $56.9 billion, including funds for costs of the war.
^!June 28, 1952 (cleared Congress): Urgent deficiency appropriations for
FY1952. Provided $1.4 billion for DOD, almost entirely for war costs.
FY1953
^!July 5, 1952 (cleared Congress): Regular DOD appropriations for
FY1953. Provided $46.6 billion, including funds for costs of the war.
Vietnam
For Vietnam, the Johnson Administration requested, and Congress provided, funding
for the war in regular defense appropriations bills as soon those bills were on the calendar,
even before full and accurate estimates of costs could be projected. Subsequently, the
Johnson and Nixon Administrations also requested, and Congress provided, supplemental
appropriations for operations in Southeast Asia for FY1966, FY1967, FY1968, and
FY1969, when costs exceeded the initial estimates. From FY1970 through the end of the
war, funding was provided only in regular appropriations bills.
Table 2 provides a year-by-year estimate of costs, an estimate of the amounts
initially provided for the war in regular appropriations bills (as reported by Congressional
Quarterly), and amounts provided in supplemental appropriations.

Table 2. Methods of Funding the Vietnam Conflict
(billions of then-year dollars)
^Annua^{l Co}^st^Reg^u^la^r^Supplem^ent^a^l
^(from^DOD^Appro^p^s.^Appro^p^s.^No^tes/Co^m^m^e^nts
^Com^p^troller)
^F^Y¹⁹⁶⁵^$0.7^—^$0.7^—
^FY1966^$14.9^$1.7^$12.3^{$1.7 b}^illionⁱⁿ^reg^u^l^{ar bill requ}^es^{ted as}^bu^dg^et
^am^en^dm^en^t.
^FY1967^$17.7^$10.3^$12.2^R^eg^u^l^{ar bill in}^clu^d^{ed s}^u^f^fⁱ^cien^{t f}^uⁿ^d^s^f^o^{r th}^e
^estim^ated^co^{sts o}^f^SEA^s^{ia o}^p^e^r^a^tioⁿ^s^oⁿ^th^e
^assu^m^p^tioⁿ^th^{at th}^{e co}ⁿ^f^{lict w}^o^u^l^d^en^d^b^y^J^uⁿ^e
^{30, 1967, t}^h^o^{ugh t}^h^e^a^m^o^unt^w^a^{s no}^t^sp^e^cⁱ^fi^e^d^.
^FY1968^$19.3^$20.0^$3.8^R^eg^u^l^{ar bill in}^clu^d^{ed s}^u^f^fⁱ^cien^{t f}^uⁿ^d^s^f^o^r
^estim^ated^co^{sts o}^f^SEA^s^{ia o}^p^e^r^a^tioⁿ^s^th^r^o^u^g^h
^Decem^{ber 1968.}
^FY1969^$19.8^$25.5^$1.3^A^m^o^uⁿ^t^f^o^{r SEA}^s^{ia in}^reg^u^l^{ar bill es}^tim^ated.
^FY1970^$14.4^$23.2^—^A^m^ouⁿ^t^f^o^{r SEA}^s^{ia in}^reg^u^l^{ar bill es}^tim^ated.
^FY1971^$9.6^{$15.0 -}^$20.0^—^A^m^ouⁿ^t^f^o^{r SEA}^s^{ia in}^reg^u^l^{ar bill es}^tim^ated.
^F^Y¹⁹⁷²^$7.0^A^l^l^—^A^m^ouⁿ^t^s^f^o^{r S}^E^A^sⁱ^aⁿ^o^t^s^e^parat^e^l^yⁱ^d^en^tⁱ^fⁱ^e^d.
^F^Y¹⁹⁷³^$5.2^A^l^l^—^A^m^ouⁿ^t^s^f^o^{r S}^E^A^sⁱ^aⁿ^o^t^s^e^parat^e^l^yⁱ^d^en^tⁱ^fⁱ^e^d.
^F^Y¹⁹⁷⁴^$1.3^A^l^l^—^A^m^ouⁿ^t^s^f^o^{r S}^E^A^sⁱ^aⁿ^o^t^s^e^parat^e^l^yⁱ^d^en^tⁱ^fⁱ^e^d.
^F^Y¹⁹⁷⁵^$0.3^A^l^l^—^A^m^ouⁿ^t^s^f^o^{r S}^E^A^sⁱ^aⁿ^o^t^s^e^parat^e^l^yⁱ^d^en^tⁱ^fⁱ^e^d.
^Sources^:^{CRS fr}^o^m^C^ongr^es^sⁱ^onal^Q^uar^t^e^r^l^y^,^C^Q^Al^m^anac^,^a^nnua^{l e}^d^itio^{ns; De}^p^a^r^t^m^e^{nt o}^f^De^fe^nse^A^nnua^{l Re}^p^o^r^ts
^t^o^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^s^,^F^Y^1966-^F^Y^1969;^D^e^part^m^eⁿ^t^of^D^e^f^eⁿ^s^{e C}^o^m^p^t^r^ol^l^e^{r (}^f^o^r^a^nnua^l^cos^t^dat^a^{). F}^Y^{1967 reg}^u^l^ar
^appropri^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^f^r^om^U^.^S^.^Bu^reau^of^t^h^{e Bu}^dg^et^{, T}^h^{e Bu}^dg^et^of^th^e^Un^{ited States}^Gov^e^rn^m^eⁿ^t^f^o^{r th}^{e Fis}^cal^Year^En^din^g
^Juⁿ^e^{30, 1967, Jan}^u^a^ry^{24, 1966.}
^No^te:^T^h^{e am}^o^uⁿ^t^{s sh}^o^wⁿ^{as b}^eⁱⁿ^g^p^r^o^v^id^edⁱⁿ^r^e^g^u^l^ar^ap^p^r^o^p^r^iatioⁿ^s^b^ills^a^r^e^e^s^tⁱ^m^a^{tes m}^a^d^e^{at th}^{e tim}^{e b}^y^th^e
^C^ongr^es^sⁱ^onal^Q^uar^t^e^r^l^y^bas^e^{d on}ⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^atⁱ^oⁿ^f^r^om^t^h^{e D}^e^part^m^eⁿ^t^of^D^e^f^eⁿ^s^{e an}^{d con}^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^al^com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^{. T}^h^os^e
^estim^ated^am^o^uⁿ^t^{s d}^oⁿ^o^{t co}^{rrelate d}ⁱ^rectly^w^ith^co^{sts o}^f^th^{e w}^a^{r th}^{at w}^e^{re co}^m^p^iled^{later b}^y^th^{e DOD C}^o^m^p^tro^ller.
The following is a chronology of funding for operations in Southeast Asia.
^!In May of 1965, the Administration first asked for, and Congress provided,
a $700 million supplemental.
^!In the summer of 1965, the Administration requested, and Congress
agreed to, a budget amendment of $1.7 billion for Vietnam in the then-
pending regular FY1966 defense appropriations bill.
^!In January of 1966, as troop levels in Southeast Asia were climbing, the
Administration requested a supplemental of $12.3 billion for the
remainder of FY1966 and regular appropriations for operations in
Southeast Asia of $10.3 billion for FY1967. Both were requested when
the FY1967 budget was submitted. The premise of the FY1967 request
was that operations might be successfully concluded by the end of the
fiscal year, although it was widely expected that an increase in the number
of troops deployed to Vietnam would be needed.
^!Later, the Johnson and Nixon Administrations requested funding for
operations in Southeast Asia in the regular appropriations bills for FY1968

and FY1969 and later requested additional supplemental appropriations
for specific unfunded costs.
^!Subsequently, funding for operations in Southeast Asia was provided only
in regular, not in supplemental, appropriations bills.
In sum, in the case of Vietnam, the Johnson Administration asked for emergency
supplementals at the onset of the war, but also requested funds in regular appropriations
bills as soon as those bills were on the congressional agenda, even though troop levels were
in flux and the duration of the conflict was not foreseen.
Later Overseas Contingency Operations
Persian Gulf War of 1990-1991: The bulk of funding for the first Persian Gulf War
was provided in supplemental appropriations of $42 billion for FY1991. Costs declined
rapidly after combat operations were over, so additional funds were not needed, either in
supplemental or in regular appropriations bills.
Somalia, Southwest Asia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo: In the early 1990s, operations in
Somalia, Southwest Asia (including Operations Provide Comfort, Southern Watch, and
Northern Watch), Haiti, and Bosnia were funded annually in successive supplemental
appropriations acts.
In action on the FY1996 defense appropriations bill, however, Congress decided to
include funding for ongoing operations in Southwest Asia in regular appropriations bills
rather than in supplementals, and it directed the Administration to request funding for
ongoing military operations in regular bills in the future.⁶
Subsequently, in the FY1997 defense budget and in later requests, the Clinton
Administration included funding for ongoing operations, including operations in Southwest
Asia and in Bosnia, in the regular defense budget. In action on the FY1997 defense
appropriations bill, Congress established a transfer fund, called the Overseas Contingency
Operations Transfer Fund (OCOTF), appropriated funds for operations in Bosnia into the
OCOTF, and required reports on transfers from the fund.
Later, funding for operations in Kosovo was initially provided in supplemental
appropriations bills, but, as soon as an ongoing peacekeeping operation was underway,
Administrations requested and Congress provided funding in regular defense
appropriations bills.

⁶ For a detailed discussion of the congressional mandate that funding for ongoing operations be
provided in regular appropriations bills, and the Clinton Administration’s response, see Stephen
Daggett, “Funding for Military Contingency Operations in the Regular Defense Appropriations
Bills in the 1990s,” CRS Congressional Distribution Memo, April 6, 2005. Available to
congressional offices on request.