FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts: Procedures for End-of-Session Wrap-Up

FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts:
Procedures for End-of-Session Wrap-Up
Updated December 21, 2006
Robert Keith
Specialist in American National Government
Government and Finance Division

FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts:
Procedures for End-of-Session Wrap-Up
Summary
The House and Senate convened in a lame-duck session on November 9, 2006
to resume the consideration of the remaining regular appropriations acts for FY2007
(which began on October 1, 2006) and other legislation. The House and Senate
considered legislation during the week of November 13-17, and again during the
week of December 4-8, before adjourning sine die pursuant to H.Con.Res. 503. (The
Senate completed its legislative business early in the morning of December 9.)
The two chambers were not able to complete action on any of the remaining
regular appropriations acts, and congressional leaders decided to defer the matter to
the 110^th Congress. In order to accommodate this approach, the third continuing
appropriations measure, P.L. 109-383, provides funding through February 15, 2007.
The incoming chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees in the

110^th Congress, Representative David Obey and Senator Robert C. Byrd,

respectively, jointly announced their intention to conclude action on FY2007
appropriations with a “year-long joint resolution” that would include “limited
adjustments” to current funding levels and “no congressional earmarks.”
Two of the 11 regular appropriations acts for FY2007 were enacted into law.
The Defense Appropriations Act, H.R. 5631, was signed into law by President
George W. Bush on September 29, as P.L. 109-289, and the Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, H.R. 5441, was signed into law on October 4, as P.L. 109-295.
With regard to the nine remaining regular appropriations acts, the House passed
all but one of them. The House did not consider the Labor-HHS-Education
Appropriations Act, H.R. 5647, which was reported by the House Appropriations
Committee on June 20 (H.Rept. 109-515). The Senate passed one of the nine
remaining regular appropriations acts, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs
Appropriations Act (H.R. 5385), and all of the others were reported by the Senate
Appropriations Committee. (The Senate initially considers a twelfth regular
appropriations measure, the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, as a separate
measure before it is merged into the Transportation-Treasury-HUD-Judiciary-D.C.
Appropriations Act.)
Continuing appropriations for FY2007 have so far been provided by a series of
three continuing resolutions. The most recent one (P.L. 109-383), as indicated above,
extends through February 15, 2007.
During the period from 1994 to the present, five previous lame duck sessions
were held (in 1994, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004). Regular or continuing
appropriations acts, or both, were considered during the latter three sessions, but not
the first two. Five regular appropriations acts were enacted into law during the lame
duck session in 2000, and nine in 2004; in the case of the 2002 lame duck session,
11 regular appropriations acts were considered and enacted into law early in the next
Congress, in 2003, many weeks after the lame duck session had ended. This report
will be updated as developments warrant.

Contents
Status of FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts......................2
Continuing Appropriations Acts for FY2007........................3
Appropriations Measures Considered in Prior Lame Duck Sessions......5
2000 Lame Duck Session....................................5
2002 Lame Duck Session....................................6
2004 Lame Duck Session....................................6
Omnibus Appropriations Acts....................................6
Enforcement of Discretionary Spending Levels......................8
Limit on FY2007 Appropriations Under Deeming Resolutions......8
Across-the-Board Spending Cuts..............................9
List of Tables
Table 1. Status of FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts..................12
Table 2. Status of FY2007 Continuing Appropriations Acts...............13
Table 3. Appropriations Measures Considered in Lame Duck Sessions:

1994-2006 ..................................................14

FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts:
Procedures for End-of-Session Wrap-Up
The House and Senate convened in a lame-duck session on November 9, 2006
to resume the consideration of the remaining regular appropriations acts for FY2007
(which began on October 1, 2006) and other legislation.¹ The House and Senate
considered legislation during the week of November 13-17, and again during the
week of December 4-8, before adjourning sine die pursuant to H.Con.Res. 503. (The
Senate completed its legislative business early in the morning of December 9.)
The two chambers were not able to complete action on any of the remaining
regular appropriations acts, and congressional leaders decided to defer the matter to
the 110^th Congress. In order to accommodate this approach, the third continuing
appropriations measure, P.L. 109-383, provides funding through February 15, 2007.²
The incoming chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees in the

110^th Congress, Representative David Obey and Senator Robert C. Byrd,

respectively, jointly announced their intention to conclude action on FY2007
appropriations with a “year-long joint resolution” that would include “limited
adjustments” to current funding levels and “no congressional earmarks.”³
Spending controlled by the annual appropriations process, and provided in
regular, continuing, and supplemental appropriations acts under the jurisdiction of
the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, is referred to as discretionary
spending. In contrast, spending controlled by substantive legislation (usually
permanent law) under the jurisdiction of the other committees of the House and
Senate is referred to as mandatory spending or direct spending. Of the total new
budget authority of $2,583 billion enacted for FY2005, $985 billion (38%) was
classified as discretionary spending.⁴ Discretionary spending is used in large measure
to fund the routine activities of federal agencies, while mandatory spending is used
mainly to fund entitlement programs.
This report briefly discusses some of the major procedural features and
historical precedents associated with the consideration of annual appropriations acts

¹ The text of the adjournment resolution providing for the lame duck session, H.Con.Res.

483, is printed in the Congressional Record (daily ed.) of Sept. 29, 2006 at page S10635.

² CQ Today, “Lawmakers Kick 2007 Spending Bills into 110^th Congress,” by Liriel Higa and
Steven T. Dennis, Nov. 20, 2006.
³ The joint statement is available at the Web site of the Senate Appropriations Committee
at: [http://appropriations.senate.gov/demoinfo/record.cfm?id=266863]
⁴ Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year

2007, Historical Tables, February 2006, Table 5-1, p. 99, and Table 5-4, p. 113.

at the end of a Congress, including the use of continuing resolutions, omnibus
appropriations acts, the enforcement of discretionary spending levels (including the
use of across-the-board spending cuts), and the consideration of annual
appropriations acts in previous lame-duck sessions. In addition, the report
summarizes legislative actions in this regard during the 2006 lame-duck session.
Status of FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts
Two of the eleven regular appropriations acts for FY2007 were enacted into law
prior to the beginning of the lame-duck session.⁵ The House and Senate agreed to the
conference report on the Defense Appropriations Act, H.R. 5631, on September 26
and September 29, 2006, respectively.⁶ The measure was signed into law by
President George W. Bush on September 29, as P.L. 109-289. On September 29, the
House and Senate both agreed to the conference report on the Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, H.R. 5441.⁷ On October 4, President Bush signed the measure
into law, as P.L. 109-295.
With regard to the nine remaining regular appropriations acts, the House passed
all but one of them during the six-week period covering May 18 through June 29.
The House did not consider the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Act, H.R.
5647, which was reported by the House Appropriations Committee on June 20
(H.Rept. 109-515).
The Senate considered one of the nine remaining regular appropriations acts, the
Military Construction and Veterans’ Affairs Appropriations Act (H.R. 5385), which
passed on November 14; the two chambers did not take any conference action on the
bill. All of the other regular appropriations acts for FY2007 were reported by the
Senate Appropriations Committee during June and July. The Senate initially
considers a twelfth regular appropriations measure, the District of Columbia
Appropriations Act, as a separate measure before it is merged into the
Transportation-Treasury-HUD-Judiciary-D.C. Appropriations Act. For FY2007, the
Senate Appropriations Committee reported a separate District of Columbia
Appropriations Act, S. 3660, but it was not considered by the Senate.
Information on the status of the FY2007 regular appropriations acts is presented
in Table 1, at the end of the report.

⁵ From the late 1960s through the end of the 108^th Congress (covering the FY2005 budget
cycle), the number of regular appropriations acts was fixed at 13 each year. At the^th
beginning of the 109 Congress, the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees were
restructured. As a consequence, the number of regular appropriations bills considered by
both chambers was reduced from 13 bills to 11 bills, beginning with the FY2006 budget
cycle.
⁶ H.Rept. 109-676, Sept. 25, 2006. The vote on agreeing to the conference report was 394-

22 in the House and 100-0 in the Senate.

⁷ H.Rept. 109-699, Sept. 28, 2006. The vote on agreeing to the conference report was 412-6
in the House; the Senate agreed to the conference report by voice vote.

Continuing Appropriations Acts for FY2007
When action on one or more of the regular appropriations acts is not completed
by the beginning of the fiscal year, Congress turns to continuing appropriations acts
to provide stop-gap funding.⁸ Continuing appropriations acts commonly are referred
to as continuing resolutions (CRs) because usually they provide continuing
appropriations in the form of a joint resolution rather than a bill. Occasionally,
however, continuing appropriations are provided in bill form.
Congressional reliance on continuing resolutions is demonstrated by the fact that
during the 55-year period covering FY1952-FY2006, continuing resolutions were
enacted for all but five fiscal years. In recent years, continuing resolutions were not
needed for FY1989, FY1995, and FY1997, when all of the regular appropriations
acts were enacted on time.
In the absence of regular appropriations, the failure to enact continuing
appropriations in a timely manner results in a funding gap. Funding gaps usually
require that affected federal agencies shut down and furlough many of their
em pl oyees.⁹
In years in which the regular appropriations acts are not all enacted on time, the
House and Senate usually resort to a series of continuing resolutions to “buy time”
to complete legislative action.¹⁰ During the first 30 years that the congressional
budget process under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 was fully in effect,
covering FY1977-FY2006, an average of about five continuing resolutions was
enacted yearly. The largest number of continuing resolutions enacted for a single
fiscal year — 21 — occurred for FY2001.
Just before the beginning of the fiscal year on October 1, the House and Senate
sent President Bush a bill that included continuing appropriations for FY2007. In
order to expedite action, the continuing appropriations were included at the
conference stage in the Defense Appropriations Act for FY2007, as Division B
(entitled “Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007”).¹¹ As indicated previously,
the measure was signed into law on September 29, as P.L. 109-289.
The continuing appropriations provided in Division B of P.L. 109-289, and in
subsequent continuing appropriations acts, as is the case generally with continuing
appropriations, are provided at restrictive levels. The funding formula contained in
P.L. 109-289 sets continuing appropriations for programs and activities generally at

⁸ For general information, see CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Appropriations Acts: Brief
Overview of Recent Practices, by Sandy Streeter.
⁹ Exceptions are made under law so that activities for certain authorized purposes, such as
protecting property and the safety of human life, may continue during a funding gap.
¹⁰ For more information on this topic, see CRS Report RL32614, Duration of Continuing
Resolutions in Recent Years, by Robert Keith.
¹¹ The text of Division B is provided in the Congressional Record (daily ed.) of Sept. 25,

2006 at pp. H7010-H7012.

the lowest level, whether it is the level in the pertinent House-passed bill, Senate-
passed bill, or the current rate (for FY2006). As mentioned previously, the Senate
passed one of the remaining regular appropriations acts. Section 110 of Division B
emphasizes the restrictive nature of the continuing appropriations:
This division shall be implemented so that only the most limited funding action
of that permitted in the division shall be taken in order to provide for
continuation of projects and activities.
On September 29, the Office of Management and Budget issued a bulletin to
federal agencies apprising them of the procedures for operating under continuing
appropriations.¹²
In order to avoid any funding gaps before Congress had an opportunity to
address the FY2007 regular appropriations acts during the lame duck session, the
continuing appropriations did not expire until November 17 (the lame duck session
was scheduled to convene on November 9). This marked the fourth consecutive
election year in which continuing appropriations were provided for an interval
extending into a lame duck session. In 2004, the first continuing resolution for
FY2005, enacted on September 30, expired on November 20. In 2002, the fourth
continuing resolution for FY2003, enacted on October 18, expired on November 22.
Finally, in 2000, the 15^th continuing resolution for FY2001, enacted on November 4,
expired on November 14.
A second continuing appropriations measure for FY2007, H.J.Res. 100, was
introduced on November 14, passed by the House and Senate on November 15, and
signed into law on November 17, as P.L. 109-369. The measure provided continuing
appropriations through December 8, 2006.
A third continuing appropriations measure, H.J.Res. 102, was signed into law
on December 9 as P.L. 109-383. The measure extends continuing appropriations
through February 15, 2007.
Information on the status of the FY2007 continuing appropriations acts is
presented in Table 2, at the end of the report.

¹² Office of Management and Budget, Bulletin 06-04, Apportionment of the Continuing
Resolution(s) for Fiscal Year 2007, Sept. 29, 2006, available on the OMB website at
[ h t t p : / / www.whi t e house.go v/ omb/ bul l e t i n s/ f y2006/ b06-04.pdf ] .

Appropriations Measures Considered in Prior Lame Duck
Sessions
A lame duck session occurs during the period following election day (the
Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each even-numbered year) and before
the convening of a new Congress about two months later in early January.¹³
During the first 30 years that the congressional budget process was fully in
effect (covering FY1977-FY2006), the House, the Senate, or both chambers met in
lame duck session seven times. Although such sessions were rare in the decades
following World War II, they have become more frequent in recent years. Two lame
duck sessions, in 1980 and 1982, occurred during the first half of the 30-year period
(covering FY1977-FY1991); the remaining five lame duck sessions — in 1994,
1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004 — occurred during the second half of the period
(covering FY1992-FY2006).
Table 3, at the end of the report, provides information on annual appropriations
acts considered during the five lame duck sessions that occurred during the period
covering 1994-2004 (as well as on the 2006 lame duck session). As the table shows,
Congress acted on appropriations acts during (or after) three of the five sessions. All
of the regular appropriations acts for FY1995 and FY1999 were enacted into law
prior to the respective lame duck sessions in 1994 and 1998. Consequently, no action
on appropriations measures was needed in those two years.
Five regular appropriations acts were enacted into law during the lame duck
session in 2000, and nine in 2004; in the case of the 2002 lame duck session, 11
regular appropriations acts were considered and enacted into law early in the next
Congress, in 2003, many weeks after the lame duck session had ended.
Most of the regular appropriations acts considered during (or after) lame duck
sessions were incorporated into omnibus appropriations measures. Finally, between
one and six further continuing resolutions were enacted into law during each of these
three sessions.
Action on appropriations measures in connection with the 2000, 2002, and 2004
lame duck sessions is discussed in more detail below.
2000 Lame Duck Session. Five of the 13 regular appropriations acts for
FY2001were considered and enacted into law during the lame duck session at the end^th
of the 106 Congress, three in an omnibus appropriations act and two separately.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2001, P.L. 106-554, covered the
following three regular appropriations acts: (1) Labor-HHS-Education; (2)
Legislative Branch; and (3) Treasury-Postal Service. The two regular appropriations
acts enacted separately were the Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations Act for

¹³ For more information on lame duck sessions, see CRS Report RL33677, Lame Duck
Sessions of Congress, 1935-2004 (74^th-108^th Congresses), by Richard S. Beth.

FY2001, P.L. 106-553, and the District of Columbia Appropriations Act for FY2001,
P.L. 106-522.
The other eight regular appropriations acts for FY2001 became law prior to the
lame duck session (six separately and two as part of another omnibus measure).
Fifteen continuing appropriations acts were enacted into law before the lame
duck session began. Six further continuing appropriations acts were considered and
enacted into law during the lame duck session.
2002 Lame Duck Session. No regular appropriations acts were considered
during the lame duck session at the end of the 107^th Congress.
Two of the regular appropriations acts for FY2003 were enacted into law before
the lame duck session began — the Defense Appropriations Act, P.L. 107-248, and
the Military Construction Appropriations Act, P.L. 107-249; they both became law
on October 23, 2002. All of the remaining 11 regular appropriations acts for FY2003
were considered and enacted into law early in the next Congress as a single measure,
the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution for FY2003, P.L. 108-7 (February 20,

2003), many weeks after the lame duck session had ended.

One further continuing appropriations act for FY2003 was considered and
enacted into law during the lame duck session (P.L. 107-294). Four such acts were
enacted into law before the lame duck session began, and three more were enacted
early in the next Congress.
2004 Lame Duck Session. Nine of the 13 regular appropriations acts for
FY2005 were considered and enacted into law during the lame duck session at the
end of the 108^th Congress as part of an omnibus measure, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act for FY2005, P.L. 108-447.
The other four regular appropriations acts were enacted into law before the lame
duck session began (the Defense, District of Columbia, Homeland Security, and
Military Construction Appropriations Acts).
Two further continuing appropriations acts for FY2005 were considered and
enacted into law during the lame duck session (P.L. 108-416 and P.L. 108-434). One
such measure was enacted into law before the lame duck session began.
Omnibus Appropriations Acts
Omnibus appropriations acts, which provide funding for two or more of the
regular appropriations acts, have become a significant feature of the legislative
process in recent years as Congress and the President have used them more frequently
to bring action on the regular appropriations cycle to a close.¹⁴

¹⁴ For more information on this topic, see CRS Report RL32473, Omnibus Appropriations
Acts: Overview of Recent Practices, by Robert Keith.

During the period covering FY1986-FY2006, a total of 271 regular
appropriations acts were considered. All but one of these acts were enacted into law
either individually or as part of an omnibus measure. Of the 270 measures enacted
into law, 181 (67%) were enacted as freestanding measures and 89 (33%) were
enacted in omnibus legislation. On average, less than nine (8.6) regular
appropriations acts were enacted into law as freestanding measures and more than
four (4.2) were enacted into law in omnibus legislation each year.
During this period, 12 different omnibus measures were enacted into law for 11
different fiscal years (two separate omnibus appropriations acts were enacted for
FY2001). Each of the measures funded between two and 13 of the regular
appropriations acts, on average funding about seven of them. Eight of the omnibus
measures were bills or joint resolutions carrying the designation “consolidated”
appropriations or “omnibus consolidated” appropriations in the title; three were
continuing appropriations acts; and one was the VA-HUD Appropriations Act for
FY2001, which also included the Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Act for FY2001.
As indicated in the preceding section, an omnibus appropriations act was
considered during (or after) three of the last five lame duck sessions:
^!In 2000, the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2001, P.L. 106-

554, covered three of the 13 regular appropriations acts (Labor-

HHS-Education, Legislative Branch, and Treasury-Postal Service);
^!The Consolidated Appropriations Resolution for FY2003, P.L. 108-
7, covered 11 of the 13 regular appropriations acts (all except the
Defense and Homeland Security Appropriations Acts), but it was
considered early in the next Congress and enacted into law on
February 20, 2003, after the 2002 lame duck session had ended; and
^!In 2004, the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2005, P.L. 108-

447, covered nine of the 13 regular appropriations acts.

Although omnibus appropriations acts may offer a means of managing political
conflict and promoting legislative efficiency, their use has been criticized for various
reasons. In 2005, following a realignment of the appropriations subcommittees that
reduced the number of regular appropriations acts considered by both chambers from 13
to 11, the House and Senate Appropriations Committee chairmen pledged to enact the
FY2006 regular appropriations acts individually, thus avoiding an omnibus measure.
The pledge was met successfully, and the final two regular appropriations acts for
FY2006 (Defense and Labor-HHS-Education) became law on December 30, 2005.
With regard to the FY2007 appropriations acts, committee leaders again voiced
a desire to avoid the use of an omnibus appropriations act. Before and during the
2006 lame duck session, there was speculation whether the House and Senate would
be able to enact the remaining regular appropriations acts individually or would
employ an omnibus appropriations act, two or more “mini” omnibus appropriations
acts, a continuing resolution extending into 2007, or some combination thereof. As

previously indicated, congressional leaders decided to defer the matter to the 110^th
Congress and continuing appropriations were provided through February 15, 2007.
Enforcement of Discretionary Spending Levels
The House and Senate are considering regular appropriations acts for FY2007
within the framework of a limit on new budget authority for that fiscal year of $872.8
billion (see discussion below). With the enactment into law of the Defense and
Homeland Security Appropriations Acts for FY2007, providing new budget authority
of $377.4 billion and $31.9 billion, respectively, $463.5 billion remains under the
limit for the remaining annual appropriations acts.¹⁵ The amount remaining under
the limit ($463.5 billion) is about $7 billion above the funding level established by
the current continuing resolution ($456.5 billion).
Limit on FY2007 Appropriations Under Deeming Resolutions. The
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires the annual adoption of a budget
resolution establishing aggregate levels of revenues, spending, the debt limit, and the
surplus or deficit, as well as allocations of spending. With regard to the enforcement
of discretionary spending levels reflected in the budget resolution, the 1974 act relies
mainly on points of order in Sections 302 and 311 of the act dealing with allocations
of discretionary spending by appropriations subcommittee and aggregate spending
(which includes both discretionary and mandatory spending), respectively.
When the House and Senate do not reach final agreement on a budget resolution
in a timely manner (or fail to reach final agreement altogether) during a session, they
may be faced with a difficult situation regarding the enforcement of discretionary
spending levels for upcoming fiscal years. The House and Senate must adopt a new
budget resolution each year in order for the enforcement of annually appropriated
spending levels to be continuous. If a budget resolution is not adopted for a fiscal
year, there are no allocations of spending made to the Appropriations Committees
under Section 302(a), and no basis for them to make the required spending
suballocations under Section 302(b).
Consequently, when the House and Senate have been presented with such
situations, they have resorted to the use of deeming resolutions to provide a basis for¹⁶
updated enforcement. The term “deeming resolution” is not officially defined, nor
is there any specific statute or rule authorizing such legislation. Instead, the use of
a deeming resolution simply represents the House and Senate employing regular
legislative procedures to deal with the issue on an ad hoc basis.
Deeming resolutions were used in one or both chambers when the House and
Senate did not reach agreement on a budget resolution in 1998 (for FY1999), in 2002

¹⁵ See the discussion in the Senate Budget Committee’s online Budget Bulletin of November 7,
2006, no. 12, at [http://www.senate.gov/~budget/republican/analysis/2006/BB-Latest.pdf], and
tables prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, “Current Status of Discretionary
Appropriations,” at [http://www.cbo.gov/budget/approps/approps.pdf].
¹⁶ For additional information on this topic, see CRS Report RL31443, The “Deeming
Resolution”: A Budget Enforcement Tool, by Robert Keith.

(for FY2003), and in 2004 (for FY2005). As indicated previously, lame duck
sessions were held in each of these years.
In 2006, the House and Senate did not reach agreement on the FY2007 budget
resolution (H.Con.Res. 376; S.Con.Res. 83) and again employed a deeming
resolution to provide a basis for enforcement of discretionary spending levels.
On May 18, the House adopted a deeming resolution in the form of a provision
(Section 2) in a special rule providing for consideration of the Interior-Environment
Appropriations Act for FY2007, H.Res. 818. Section 2 provided that upon House
adoption of the FY2007 budget resolution (which occurred on May 18), the
provisions of the House-passed budget resolution and its accompanying report “shall
have force and effect in the House for all purposes of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974 as though adopted by the Congress.” Thus, the deeming resolution
effectively put into play enforcement procedures in the House at levels consistent
with the President’s FY2007 request for $873 billion in total discretionary new
budget authority.¹⁷
The deeming resolution for FY2007 for the Senate was included in the
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror,
and Hurricane Recovery for FY2006, which was signed into law on June 15, 2006,
as P.L. 109-234. Section 7035 of the act (120 Stat. 489-490) also put into effect
enforcement procedures in the Senate at the level of $873 billion for discretionary
spending.
According to the House Budget Committee, the annualized rate of funding
provided under the current continuing resolution (H.J.Res. 102, which became P.L.

109-383) is $457.2 billion in new budget authority, which is $6.1 billion (1.3%)

below the $464.3 billion that can be accommodated under the deeming resolutions.¹⁸
Across-the-Board Spending Cuts. In order to adhere to restraints imposed
by congressional budget resolutions or deeming resolutions, the statutory limits on
discretionary spending (in effect from FY1991-FY2002), or ad hoc budget
agreements between congressional leaders and the President, or to meet other
purposes, Congress and the President from time to time incorporate across-the-board
cuts in discretionary budget authority into annual appropriations acts.¹⁹ During the
six fiscal years covering FY2000-FY2005, five government-wide, across-the-board
spending cuts were included in omnibus appropriations acts. In addition, a
government-wide across-the-board cut was included in the Defense Appropriations

¹⁷ See the discussion in the report of the House Budget Committee to accompany H.Con.Res.

376, Concurrent Resolution on the Budget — Fiscal Year 2007, H.Rept. 109-402 (Mar. 31,

2006), pp. 6-7.

¹⁸ An “Appropriations Update” statement on H.J.Res. 102, issued on December 8, 2006, is
available on the House Budget Committee’s Web site at:
[http://budget.house.gov/ approp/au0614-061208-cr3.pdf]
¹⁹ This topic is discussed in more detail in CRS Report RL32153, Across-the-Board
Spending Cuts in Omnibus Appropriations Acts, by Robert Keith.

Act for FY2006, a year in which all of the regular appropriations acts were enacted
separately.²⁰
The across-the-board spending cuts included in omnibus appropriations acts
ranged in size from 0.22% to 0.80% of covered appropriations, and were estimated
to yield between $1.1 billion to $3.5 billion in savings. In the Defense
Appropriations Act for FY2006, the government-wide across-the-board spending cut
was 1% and was estimated to reduce total budget authority by about $8.5 billion.
The percentage cuts and estimated savings for the three omnibus appropriations acts
associated with the lame duck sessions in 2000, 2002, and 2004 were as follows:
^!the 0.22% cut for FY2001 in P.L. 106-554 saved an estimated $1.1
billion in budget authority;
^!the 0.65% cut for FY2003 in P.L. 108-7 saved an estimated $2.6
billion in budget authority; and
^!the 0.80% cut for FY2005 in P.L. 108-447 saved an estimated $3.5
billion in budget authority.
Omnibus appropriations acts sometimes include other across-the-board spending
cuts (or reductions of fixed dollar amounts) that apply to individual appropriations
acts, as set forth in separate divisions of the omnibus legislation. P.L. 108-447, for
example, included three other provisions requiring across-the-board spending cuts
focused on particular divisions of the act: (1) a 0.54% cut in the Commerce-Justice-
State Appropriations division, estimated to save $229 million; (2) a 0.594% cut in
the Interior Appropriations division, estimated to save $120 million; and (3) a cut of
$18 million in the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations division, applicable to
administrative and related expenses for departmental management (except for the
Food and Drug Administration and the Indian Health Service).
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees initially proposed FY2007
spending allocations at levels $4 billion (House) to $9 billion (Senate) below the
President’s request for defense. During final action on the Defense Appropriations
Act for FY2007 in September, in the face of a veto threat, about $5 billion was
restored to the bill in order to accommodate the President’s request.²¹

²⁰ The act, which became P.L. 109-148 on December 30, 2005, included in Division B,
Section 3801(a), a government-wide spending cut of 1% (118 Stat. 2791-2792). Emergency
requirements and spending for the Department of Veterans Affairs were exempted from the
cut, which was expected to reduce total budget authority by about $8.5 billion. For
additional information, see OMB Bulletin 06-02, Guidance on Implementing the
Government-wide Across-the-Board Reduction in the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, FY 2006 (H.R. 2863), Jan. 5, 2006, available at
[ h t t p : / / www.whi t e house.go v/ omb/ bul l e t i n s/ f y2006/ b06-02.pdf ] .
²¹ The veto threat was conveyed in the Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 5631 of
August 2, 2006 (Senate), available on the Office of Management and Budget website at
[ ht t p: / / www.whi t e house.gov/ omb/ l e gi sl at i ve/ sap/ 109-2/ hr 5631sap-s .pdf ] .

According to media reports, the action on the Defense Appropriations Act for
FY2007 may have complicated the task of securing final passage of regular
appropriations acts dealing with domestic spending:
Both House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) and his
Senate counterpart, Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), attempted to reserve more funds for
domestic programs, which fared poorly in Bush’s February budget. First, Lewis
proposed to cut $4 billion from Bush’s defense request in order to have those
funds for other areas. Cochran and Senate Appropriations Defense
Subcommittee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) went further, shifting $9 billion
away from Defense in order to better fund bills such as that for the departments
of Labor and Health and Human Services. However, in the end, the lawmakers
agreed to restore $5 billion of the funds to Defense in order to avoid a veto of the²²
must-pass legislation.
In the past, across-the-board spending cuts have been used to make room for
spending increases in high-priority programs while maintaining total funding within
an overall limit. While the House Budget Committee has indicated that current
continuing appropriations place total non-emergency discretionary spending about
$6 billion below the $873 billion cap on new budget authority, it is not clear whether
an across-the-board spending cut would be needed to accommodate the “limited
adjustments” envisioned by the incoming House and Senate Appropriations
Committee chairmen in the “year-long joint resolution” expected to conclude action
on the FY2007 appropriations.

²² See “Restoration of Defense Cuts Clouds Outlook For Post-Election Domestic Spending
Efforts,” by Nancy Ognanovich and Jonathan Nicholson, in BNA’s Daily Report for
Executives, no. 185, Monday, Sept. 25, 2006, p. A-16.

CRS-12
Table 1. Status of FY2007 Regular Appropriations Acts
Appropriations ActBillNumberHouseActionSenateActionPublicLawDateSigned
ricultureH.R. 5384PassedReported — —
H.R. 5631Agreed to Conference ReportAgreed to Conference ReportP.L. 109-28909-29-2006
y and WaterH.R. 5427PassedReported — —
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}n OperationsH.R. 5522PassedReported — —
^g/weland SecurityH.R. 5441Agreed to Conference ReportAgreed to Conference ReportP.L. 109-29510-04-2006
^s^.or
^le^akterior-EnvironmentH.R. 5386PassedReported — —
^://wikiHHS-EducationH.R. 5647ReportedReported — —
^h^ttp
islative BranchH.R. 5521PassedReported — —
Quality of Life-VAH.R. 5385PassedPassed — —
State-Justice-CommerceH.R. 5672PassedReported — —
ansportation-Treasury-HUD-Judiciary-D.C. ^aH.R. 5576PassedReported — —
^:^P^r^epared^by^th^{e C}^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice f}^r^omⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^atioⁿ^p^r^o^v^id^edⁱⁿ^th^{e L}^e^gⁱ^slativ^{e I}ⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^Sy^stem^an^d^th^e^FY^{2007 St}^at^us^T^abl^{e of}^Appr^oprⁱ^a^tⁱ^ons^{at th}^{e C}^R^S
^sⁱ^t^e⁽^[^h^t^t^p^:^/^/^www.^c^r^s^.^g^o^v^/^p^r^o^d^u^c^t^s^/^a^p^p^r^o^p^rⁱ^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^/^a^ppov^er.s^h^t^m^l^]).
^t^t^h^e^b^e^giⁿⁿⁱ^{ng o}^f^t^h^e¹⁰⁹^th^C^oⁿ^g^r^e^s^s^,^t^h^e^H^o^u^s^e^aⁿ^d^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^A^p^p^r^o^p^rⁱ^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^s^u^b^c^o^m^m^ittee^s^w^e^r^e^r^e^s^t^r^u^c^t^u^r^e^d^.^A^s^a^c^oⁿ^s^e^q^u^eⁿ^c^e^,^t^h^eⁿ^u^m^b^e^r^o^f^r^e^g^u^l^a^r^a^p^p^r^o^p^rⁱ^atioⁿ^s^b^ills
^s^id^er^ed^b^y^b^o^t^h^ch^am^b^e^r^s^w^a^s^r^e^d^u^c^e^d^f^r^o^m¹³^b^{ills to}¹¹^b^{ills. (}^T^h^eⁿ^u^m^b^e^r^o^f^r^e^g^u^l^ar^ap^p^r^o^p^r^iatioⁿ^s^{acts h}^a^d^b^een^fⁱ^x^e^d^a^{t 13 s}ⁱⁿ^{ce FY1968.) T}^h^{e Sen}^a^{te in}^itially^con^s^iders
^elf^t^h^b^{ill, th}^{e Distr}ⁱ^{ct o}^f^Co^lu^m^b^{ia A}^p^p^r^o^p^r^iatioⁿ^s^A^c^{t, as a sep}^a^r^a^{te m}^easu^r^{e b}^e^f^o^r^e^it^is^m^e^r^g^edⁱⁿ^to^th^e^T^r^an^sp^o^r^tatioⁿ^-^T^r^easu^r^y^-^HUD-^J^u^dⁱ^ciary^-^D.C^.^A^p^p^r^o^p^r^iatioⁿ^s^A^c^t.^Fo^r
^{e Sen}^a^{te A}^ppropriation^s^C^o^m^m^{ittee reported a s}^e^{parate Di}^s^t^{rict of}^C^o^lu^m^b^{ia A}^ppropriation^s^A^c^{t, S. 3660, bu}^{t it h}^a^sⁿ^o^{t been}^con^s^{idered by}^th^{e Sen}^a^te.

CRS-13
Table 2. Status of FY2007 Continuing Appropriations Acts
No. of Regular
MeasureMeasureNumberPublicLaw No.Statutes-at-LargeCitationEnactmentDateExpirationDateDurationin Days ^aAppropriationsActs Initially
Covered ^a
H.R. 5631P.L. 109-289120 Stat. 1311-131609-29-200611-17-20064810
ision B, Continuing
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}H.J.Res. 100 P.L. 109-369 120 Stat. 264211-17-200612-08-2006 219
^g/w
^s^.or
^le^akH.J.Res. 102P.L. 109-383120 Stat. 2678-267912-09-200602-15-2007699
^://wiki
^h^ttp^:^P^r^{epared by}^th^{e C}^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice f}^r^omⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^atioⁿ^p^r^o^v^id^edⁱⁿ^th^{e L}^e^gⁱ^slativ^{e I}ⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^Sy^stem^an^d^th^e^FY^{2007 St}^at^us^T^abl^{e of}^Appr^oprⁱ^a^tⁱ^ons^{at th}^{e C}^R^S
^sⁱ^t^e⁽^[^h^t^t^p^:^/^/^www.^c^r^s^.^g^o^v^/^p^r^o^d^u^c^t^s^/^a^p^p^r^o^p^rⁱ^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^/^a^ppov^er.s^h^t^m^l^]).
^der^P.L^.^109-^{289, con}^tⁱⁿ^uⁱⁿ^g^appropri^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^w^e^{re prov}ⁱ^d^ed^f^o^r^s^e^v^e^ral^day^s^f^o^{r prog}^ram^s^f^uⁿ^d^{ed i}ⁿ^t^h^{e H}^o^m^e^l^aⁿ^d^S^ecu^ri^t^y^A^ppro^p^r^iatioⁿ^s^A^c^{t, u}ⁿ^{til th}^{at act b}^ecam^{e law}^oⁿ^Octo^b^e^r
^{. 109-}^{295). T}^h^{e s}^e^parat^e^r^e^gul^a^r^appropri^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^actⁱⁿ^t^h^{e S}^eⁿ^a^t^e^f^o^{r t}^h^{e D}ⁱ^s^t^ri^ct^of^C^o^l^u^m^bⁱ^a^(w^hⁱ^chⁱ^s^m^e^rg^{ed i}ⁿ^t^o^{a m}^o^r^{e co}^m^p^r^e^h^eⁿ^s^iv^{e Ho}^u^s^e-^p^a^ssed^b^ill)^{is n}^o^{t co}^uⁿ^t^ed
^{is tab}^l^e.

CRS-14
Table 3. Appropriations Measures Considered in Lame Duck Sessions: 1994-2006
StartingEndingAppropriations Act(s)Comment
Date ^aDate ^a
^rd Congress
November 29December 1[none]All 13 of the regular appropriations acts for FY1995 were enacted prior to the
start of the fiscal year on October 1, before the lame duck session.
^th Congress
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}
^g/wDecember 17December 19[none]Over three days, the House considered and passed a resolution of
^s^.orimpeachment against President Bill Clinton; the Senate was not in session.
^le^ak
All 13 of the regular appropriations acts for FY1999 were enacted into law
^://wikiprior to the lame duck session, five separately and eight in an omnibus
^h^ttpappropriations act. The final eight regular appropriations acts for FY1999
were included in the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for FY1999, P.L. 105-277, which became law on October

21.

CRS-15
StartingEndingAppropriations Act(s)Comment
Date ^aDate ^a
^th Congress
November 13December 15P.L. 106-520, Further ContinuingFive of the 13 regular appropriations acts for FY2001were considered and
Appropriations Act for FY2001enacted into law during the lame duck session, three in an omnibus
(November 15, 2000)appropriations act and two separately.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 106-554, covered the followingP.L. 106-522, District of Columbia
three regular appropriations acts: (1) Labor-HHS-Education, (2) LegislativeAppropriations Act for FY2001
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}Branch, and (3) Treasury-Postal Service.(November 22, 2000)
^g/w P.L. 106-537, Further Continuing
^s^.orThe Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations Act, P.L. 106-553, and theAppropriations Act for FY2001
^le^akDistrict of Columbia Appropriations Act, P.L. 106-522, were enacted(December 5, 2000)
separately.
^://wikiP.L. 106-539, Further Continuing
^h^ttpThe remaining eight regular appropriations acts for FY2001 became law priorAppropriations Act for FY2001
to the lame duck session (six separately and two as part of an omnibus(December 7, 2000)
measure).
P.L. 106-540, Further Continuing
Six further continuing appropriations acts were considered and enacted intoAppropriations Act for FY2001
law during the lame duck session. Fifteen continuing appropriations acts(December 8, 2000)
were enacted into law before the lame duck session began.
P.L. 106-542, Further Continuing
Appropriations Act for FY2001
(December 11, 2000)

CRS-16
StartingEndingAppropriations Act(s)Comment
Date ^aDate ^a
P.L. 106-543, Further Continuing
Appropriations Act for FY2001
(December 15, 2000)
P.L. 106-553, Commerce-Justice-State
Appropriations Act for FY2001
(December 21, 2000)
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}P.L. 106-554, ConsolidatedAppropriations Act for FY2001
^g/w(December 21, 2000)
^s^.or
^le^ak^th Congress
^://wikiNovember 7November 22P.L. 107-294, Further ContinuingTwo of the regular appropriations acts for FY2003 were enacted into law
^h^ttpAppropriations Act for FY2003before the lame duck session began — the Defense Appropriations Act, P.L.
(November 23, 2002)107-248, and the Military Construction Appropriations Act, P.L. 107-249;
they both became law on October 23, 2002.
All of the remaining 11 regular appropriations acts for FY2003 were
considered and enacted into law early in the next Congress as a single
measure, the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution for FY2003, P.L. 108-7
(February 20, 2003).
One further continuing appropriations act for FY2003 was considered and
enacted into law during the lame duck session (P.L. 107-294). Four such acts

CRS-17
StartingEndingAppropriations Act(s)Comment
Date ^aDate ^a
were enacted into law before the lame duck session began, and three more
were enacted early in the next Congress.
^th Congress
November 16December 8P.L. 108-447, ConsolidatedNine of the 13 regular appropriations acts for FY2005 were considered and
Appropriations Act for FY2005enacted into law during the lame duck session as part of an omnibus measure,
(December 8, 2004)the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2005, P.L. 108-447.
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}The remaining four regular appropriations acts were enacted into law before
^g/wthe lame duck session began (the Defense, District of Columbia, HomelandP.L. 108-416, Further Continuing
^s^.orAppropriations Act for FY2005
^le^akSecurity, and Military Construction Appropriations Acts).(November 21, 2004)
^://wikiTwo further continuing appropriations act for FY2005 were considered andP.L. 108-434, Further Continuing
^h^ttpenacted into law during the lame duck session (P.L. 108-416 and 108-434).Appropriations Act for FY2005
One continuing appropriations act was enacted into law before the lame duck(December 3, 2004)

session began.

CRS-18
StartingEndingAppropriations Act(s)Comment
Date ^aDate ^a
^th Congress
November 9December 8P.L. 109-369, Further ContinuingTwo of the regular appropriations acts for FY2007 were enacted into law
Appropriations Act for FY2007before the lame duck session began — the Defense Appropriations Act, P.L.
(November 17, 2006)109-289, which became law on September 29, 2006, and the Homeland
Security Appropriations Act, P.L. 109-295, which became law on October 4,

2006.

ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33681}None of the remaining nine regular appropriations acts for FY2007 were
^g/wenacted into law during the lame duck session; they are funded through
^s^.orFebruary 15, 2007 under a continuing resolution.
^le^akP.L. 109-383, Further Continuing
During the lame duck session, the Senate considered and passed the MilitaryAppropriations Act for FY2007
^://wikiConstruction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, but the two chambers(December 9, 2004)
^h^ttpdid not take any conference action on the bill.
Two further continuing appropriations act for FY2007 were considered and
enacted into law during the lame duck session, (P.L. 109-369 and P.L. 109-
383). One continuing appropriations act was enacted into law before the lame
duck session began.
^{: P}^r^{epared by}^th^{e C}^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice f}^r^omⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^p^r^o^v^id^edⁱⁿ^th^{e L}^e^gⁱ^slativ^{e I}ⁿ^f^o^r^m^atioⁿ^Sy^stem^.
^{e star}^tin^g^an^d^en^dⁱⁿ^g^d^a^{tes r}^e^f^e^r^to^th^{e f}ⁱ^r^s^{t d}^a^{te an}^d^th^{e last d}^a^{te th}^{at th}^{e Ho}^u^s^{e, th}^{e Sen}^a^{te, o}^r^b^o^t^h^w^e^r^eⁱⁿ^sessioⁿ^af^t^{er election}^day^(th^e^T^u^es^da^y^af^{ter th}^{e f}ⁱ^rs^{t Mon}^d^ayⁱⁿ
^e^m^b^{er). In}^{2002, t}^h^{e H}^o^u^s^{e an}^{d S}^eⁿ^a^t^e^s^t^ay^{ed i}ⁿ^s^e^s^sⁱ^on^{, rat}^h^{er t}^h^an^adj^o^u^rⁿⁱⁿ^g^pri^o^r^t^o^t^h^e^el^ectⁱ^oⁿ^an^d^t^h^en^recon^v^eⁿⁱⁿ^g^;^No^v^e^m^b^er⁷^w^a^{s th}^{e f}ⁱ^r^s^{t d}^a^y^o^f^sessioⁿ^af^ter^electioⁿ
^,^w^h^ich^w^a^s^Nov^e^m^b^{er 5 th}^{at y}^{ear. In}^{2006, th}^{e Sen}^a^{te adj}^o^u^rⁿ^e^{d s}ⁱⁿ^e^{die af}^{ter th}^{e Hou}^s^{e, bu}^{t n}^o^{t u}ⁿ^{til af}^{ter 4:00 in}^th^{e m}^ornⁱⁿ^g^on^Decem^{ber 9.}