43–428 PDF 

Calendar No. 877 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 110–417 

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2009 

JULY 14, 2008.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DURBIN, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3260] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 3260) making appropriations for financial services and general government 

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do 

pass. 

Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2009 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $44,755,883,000 

Amount of 2008 appropriations ............................... 43,658,154,000 

Amount of 2009 budget estimate ............................ 44,226,913,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2008 appropriations .......................................... ∂1,097,729,000 

2009 budget estimate ........................................ ∂528,970,000 
(2) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Summary of Bill ....................................................................................................... 4 

Title I: Department of the Treasury: 

Departmental Offices ....................................................................................... 8 

Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Program .................... 12 

Office of the Inspector General ........................................................................ 12 

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration ..................................... 13 

Air Transportation Stabilization Program Account ....................................... 00 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ........................................................ 14 

Financial Management Service ....................................................................... 16 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau .................................................. 17 

United States Mint ........................................................................................... 17 

Bureau of the Public Debt ............................................................................... 18 

Community Development Financial Institutions Fund ................................. 18 

Bureau of Engraving and Printing ................................................................. 19 

Internal Revenue Service ................................................................................. 20 

Taxpayer Services ..................................................................................... 23 

Enforcement ............................................................................................... 26 

Operations Support ................................................................................... 28 

Business Systems Modernization ............................................................. 29 

Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration ......................................... 30 

Administrative Provisions—Department of the Treasury ............................. 31 

Title II: Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the 

President: 

Compensation of the President ....................................................................... 33 

White House Office ........................................................................................... 33 

Executive Residence at the White House ....................................................... 34 

White House Repair and Restoration ............................................................. 34 

Council of Economic Advisers .......................................................................... 35 

Office of Policy Development ........................................................................... 35 

National Security Council ................................................................................ 36 

Office of Administration ................................................................................... 37 

Office of Management and Budget .................................................................. 37 

Office of National Drug Control Policy ........................................................... 38 

Funds Appropriated to the President: 

High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas ................................................... 41 

Other Federal Drug Control Programs .................................................... 42 

Unanticipated Needs ........................................................................................ 45 

Special Assistance to the President ................................................................ 46 

Official Residence of the Vice President ......................................................... 46 

Title III: The Judiciary: 

Supreme Court of the United States .............................................................. 48 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ............................... 49 

U.S. Court of International Trade ................................................................... 50 

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services ................. 50 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund ................................................................ 52 

Defender Services ............................................................................................. 52 

Fees of Jurors and Commissioners ................................................................. 53 

Court Security ................................................................................................... 53 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts ........................................ 54 

Federal Judicial Center .................................................................................... 54 

Judicial Retirement Funds .............................................................................. 55 

United States Sentencing Commission ........................................................... 55 

Administrative Provisions—The Judiciary ..................................................... 55 

Title IV—District of Columbia: 

Federal Funds: 

Federal Payment for Resident Tuition Support ...................................... 57 
Page

3 

Title IV—District of Columbia—Continued 

Federal Funds—Continued 

Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the 

District of Columbia .............................................................................. 58 

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts ............................ 59 

Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts .................................. 60 

Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency for the District of Columbia ..................................................... 61 

Federal Payment to the Public Defender Service for the District 

of Columbia ............................................................................................ 62 

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority ..................................................................................................... 62 

Federal Payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council .......... 63 

Federal Payment to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the 

District of Columbia .............................................................................. 63 

Federal Payment for School Improvement .............................................. 64 

Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility ......................... 66 

Federal Payment to Jump Start Public School Reform ......................... 67 

Federal Payment for Central Library and Branch Locations ................ 68 

Federal Payment to Reimburse the Federal Bureau of Investigation .. 68 

Federal Payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor of the District 

of Columbia ............................................................................................ 69 

District of Columbia Local Operating Budget ................................................ 00 

Title V—Independent Agencies: 

Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation .............................................. 71 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ...................................................... 71 

Consumer Product Safety Commission ........................................................... 73 

Election Assistance Commission ..................................................................... 74 

Federal Communications Commission ............................................................ 74 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General .......... 77 

Federal Election Commission .......................................................................... 77 

Federal Labor Relations Authority ................................................................. 78 

Federal Trade Commission .............................................................................. 79 

General Services Administration .................................................................... 81 

Merit Systems Protection Board ..................................................................... 91 

Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental 

Policy Foundation ......................................................................................... 91 

National Archives and Records Administration ............................................. 92 

National Historical Publications and Records Commission .......................... 95 

National Credit Union Administration ........................................................... 96 

Office of Government Ethics ............................................................................ 98 

Office of Personnel Management ..................................................................... 98 

Office of Special Counsel .................................................................................. 104 

Postal Regulatory Commission ........................................................................ 105 

Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board ................................................. 106 

Securities and Exchange Commission ............................................................ 106 

Selective Service System .................................................................................. 108 

Small Business Administration ....................................................................... 109 

Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation ..................................................... 114 

United States Postal Service ........................................................................... 115 

United States Postal Service: Office of Inspector General ............................ 117 

United States Tax Court .................................................................................. 118 

Title VI—General Provisions—This Act ................................................................ 120 

Title VII—General Provisions—Government-Wide .............................................. 122 

Title VIII—General Provisions—District of Columbia ......................................... 126 

Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate .......................................................................................................................... 128 

Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 129 

Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 130 

Budgetary Impact of Bill ......................................................................................... 145 

Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items ...................................... 145 
(4) 

SUMMARY OF THE BILL 

Fiscal year 2009 marks the second year for the Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill. The bill provides 

funding for the Department of the Treasury, including the Internal 

Revenue Service; the Executive Office of the President; the Judiciary; the District of Columbia; and more than two dozen independent Federal agencies. The Committee recommends $44,755,883,000 in discretionary 

and mandatory appropriations. This represents an increase of 

$1,097,729,000 over the fiscal year 2008 enacted level, and an increase of $528,970,000 over the budget request. Of the total, 

$22,870,000,000 is provided in discretionary appropriations, 

$502,726,000 above the budget request of $22,367,274,000. Mandatory appropriations total $21,885,883,000. 

The Committee-recommended bill is consistent with the allocation for the Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill. The Committee has made difficult but necessary decisions to craft a bill that is within strict fiscal limitations. The 

President’s budget request for the agencies funded by this bill 

leaves gaps in funding for community development financial assistance, valuable drug control programs, tax systems modernization, 

regulatory oversight and enforcement of financial and futures markets, repair of historical buildings, inspector general audits, and 

support for small businesses. 

PROJECT FUNDING 

Agency 

Items in Senate bill 

at President’s 

request 

Congressionally 

directed spending in 

Senate bill 

District of Columbia ................................................................................................... .............................. $5,250,000 

General Services Administration ................................................................................. $925,846,000 146,872,000 

National Archives and Records Administration .......................................................... .............................. 24,000,000 

Office of National Drug Control Policy ....................................................................... .............................. 2,250,000 

Small Business Administration .................................................................................. .............................. 34,725,500 

Total ............................................................................................................... 925,846,000 213,097,500 

Combined Total Project Funding in bill ........................................................ 1,138,943,500 

The Small Business Administration account includes congressionally directed spending totaling $34,725,000 for 74 projects. 

Total funding for congressionally directed spending in the Small 

Business Administration account is the same as the fiscal year 

2008 enacted level. The President did not request any specific 

projects. The Committee includes two congressionally directed 

spending items for the District of Columbia. Within the General 

Services Administration, the President requested $925,846,000, of 

which $620,119,000 is for construction of Federal buildings and of 

which $305,727,000 is for repair of Federal buildings. The Com-
5 

mittee includes $146,872,000 above the budget request for two Federal building construction projects, one to complete the project and 

the other to help keep the project on schedule. Within the National 

Archives and Records Administration, the President requested 

$9,211,000 for basic repairs and the Committee provides an additional $24,000,000 in additional funding for repair of presidential 

libraries. The Committee includes funding for two drug programs 

within the Office of National Drug Control Policy that were zeroed 

out by the President. 

PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY 

During fiscal year 2009, for the purposes of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99–177), as 

amended, with respect to appropriations contained in the accompanying bill, the terms ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ [PPA] shall 

mean any item for which a dollar amount is contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations, or accompanying conference reports 

and joint explanatory statements of the committee of conference. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES 

The Committee includes a provision (sec. 608) establishing the 

authority of agencies to reprogram funds and the limitation on that 

authority. The provision specifically requires the advance approval 

of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any proposal to reprogram funds that: (1) creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, project, or activity [PPA]; (3) increases funds or 

personnel for any PPA for which funds have been denied or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to redirect funds that were 

directed in such reports for a specific activity to a different purpose; (5) augments an existing PPA in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 

percent, whichever is less; (6) reduces an existing PPA by 

$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or (7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures offices different from the congressional budget justifications or the table at the end of the Committee report, 

whichever is more detailed. 

The Committee retains the requirement that each agency submit 

an operating plan to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not later than 60 days after enactment of this act to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 

authorities provided in this act. Specifically, each agency should 

provide a table for each appropriation with columns displaying the 

budget request; adjustments made by Congress; adjustments for rescissions, if appropriate; and the fiscal year enacted level. The table 

shall delineate the appropriation both by object class and by PPA. 

The report must also identify items of special congressional interest. 

The Committee expects the agencies and bureaus to submit reprogramming requests in a timely manner and to provide a thorough explanation of the proposed reallocations, including a detailed 

justification of increases and reductions and the specific impact the 

proposed changes will have on the budget request for the following 
6 

fiscal year. Except in emergency situations, reprogramming requests should be submitted no later than June 30. 

The Committee expects each agency to manage its programs and 

activities within the amounts appropriated by Congress. The Committee reminds agencies that reprogramming requests should be 

submitted only in the case of an unforeseeable emergency or a situation that could not have been anticipated when formulating the 

budget request for the current fiscal year. Further, the Committee 

notes that when a Department or agency submits a reprogramming 

or transfer request to the Committees on Appropriations and does 

not receive identical responses from the House and the Senate, it 

is the responsibility of the Department to reconcile the House and 

the Senate differences before proceeding, and if reconciliation is not 

possible, to consider the request to reprogram funds unapproved. 

RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES 

Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its inquiries and requests for information and assistance through the 

budget offices of the various departments, agencies, offices, and 

commissions. The Committee has often pointed to the natural affinity and relationship between the budget offices and the Committee 

which makes such a relationship workable. The Committee reiterates its longstanding position that while the Committee reserves 

the right to call upon any office or officer in the departments, agencies, and commissions, the primary conjunction between the Committee and these entities must be through the budget offices. To 

help ensure the Committee’s ability to perform its responsibilities, 

the Committee insists on having direct, unobstructed, and timely 

access to the budget offices and expects to be able to receive forthright and complete responses from those offices and their employees. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS 

Budget justifications are prepared not for the use of the agency, 

but instead are the primary tool used by the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations to evaluate the resource requirements and fiscal needs of agencies. The Committee is aware that 

the format and presentation of budget materials is largely left to 

the agency within presentation objectives set forth by OMB. In 

fact, OMB Circular A–11, part 6 specifically states that the ‘‘agency 

should consult with your congressional committees beforehand to 

ensure their awareness of your plans to modify the format of agency budget documents.’’ The Committee expects all the budget justifications to adhere to this directive and provide the data needed 

to make appropriate and meaningful funding decisions. 

The Committee directs that justifications submitted with the fiscal year 2010 budget requests by agencies funded under this act 

must contain the customary level of detailed data and explanatory 

statements to support the appropriations requests at the level of 

detail contained in the funding table included at the end of the report. Among other items, agencies shall provide a detailed discussion of proposed new initiatives, proposed changes in the agency’s 

financial plan from prior year enactment, and detailed data on all 
7 

programs and comprehensive information on any office or agency 

restructurings. At a minimum, each agency must also provide adequate justification for funding and staffing changes for each individual office and materials that compare programs, projects, and 

activities that are proposed for fiscal year 2010 to the fiscal year 

2009 enacted level. 

The Committee is aware that the analytical materials required 

for review by the Committee are unique to each agency in this act. 

Therefore, the Committee expects that each agency will coordinate 

with the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in advance on its planned presentation for its budget justification materials in support of the fiscal year 2010 budget request. 
(8) 

TITLE I 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $248,360,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 273,895,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 273,895,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Departmental Offices consist of the Office of the Secretary 

and Deputy Secretary, the Office of International Affairs, the Office 

of Domestic Finance, the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, the Office of Tax Policy, the Office of Economic Policy, the 

Office of the General Counsel, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the 

Office of Public Affairs, the Office of the Treasurer, and the Office 

of Management. The Secretary of the Treasury has the primary 

role in formulating and managing the domestic and international 

tax and financial policies of the Federal Government. The Secretary’s responsibilities funded by the Salaries and Expenses appropriation include: recommending and implementing United 

States domestic and international economic and tax policy; formulating fiscal policy; governing the fiscal operations of the Government; executing the Nation’s financial sanction policies; disrupting 

and dismantling terrorist financial infrastructure; protecting the 

United States and international financial system from terrorist financing, money laundering, and other financial crimes; managing 

the public debt; managing international development policy; representing the United States on international monetary, trade and 

investment issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury overseas 

operations; and directing the administrative operations of the Department of the Treasury. The majority of the Salaries and Expenses appropriation provides resources for policy formulation and 

implementation in the areas of domestic and international finance, 

terrorist financing and financial crimes, tax, economic, trade, financial operations and general fiscal policy. This appropriation also 

provides resources to support the Secretary, policy components, and 

departmental administrative policies in financial and personnel 

management, procurement operations, and information systems 

and telecommunications. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $273,895,000 for the Salaries and 

Expenses appropriation of the Departmental Offices account of the 
9 

Department of the Treasury for fiscal year 2009. This amount is 

equal to the budget request and $25,535,000 above the fiscal year 

2008 enacted level. Within the funds provided under this account, 

the Committee has provided $3,000,000 for information technology 

modernization; $200,000 for official reception and representation 

expenses; $258,000 for unforeseen emergencies; and $5,232,443 for 

the Treasury-wide financial statement audits and other Treasury 

office and bureau audits. 

The following table compares the fiscal year 2008 enacted level 

to the fiscal year 2009 budget estimate and the Committee’s recommendation for each office: 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Fiscal year 2008 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2009 

budget estimate 

Committee 

recommendation 

Executive direction ..................................................................................... 10,840 11,097 11,097 

General counsel ......................................................................................... 9,909 10,495 10,495 

Economic policies and programs .............................................................. 44,242 45,853 45,853 

Financial policies and programs ............................................................... 29,464 34,735 34,735 

Terrorism and financial intelligence ......................................................... 56,775 61,712 61,712 

Treasury-wide management and programs ............................................... 18,505 19,009 19,009 

Administration ............................................................................................ 78,625 90,994 90,994 

The Committee has approved the following significant program 

increases in the bill: 

State Sponsored Terrorism (Terrorism and Financial Intelligence): ∂$1,380,000/∂4 FTE.—Building on resources provided in 

fiscal year 2008, the Committee recommends an increase of 

$1,380,000 for the Office of Foreign Asset Control [OFAC] to further enhance capacity to administer and implement economic sanctions to State sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran and Sudan, as 

well as terrorists, terrorist groups, and their support networks. Additional resources shall support the hiring of additional sanctions 

investigators, enforcement, compliance, licensing, blocking, and 

civil penalties officers, Freedom of Information Act specialists, and 

program advisor and records management specialists to support 

these efforts. 

Counterintelligence and Security Capabilities (Terrorism and Financial Intelligence): ∂$1,433,000/∂3 FTE.—The Committee recommends an increase of $1,433,000 above the fiscal year 2008 level 

for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis to address current and 

emerging threats affecting the Department’s national security mission. Additional resources will enhance efforts to prevent espionage 

in the Department; thwart adversarial threats to its personnel, programs, and facilities; and identify and mitigate threats from compromise of Treasury critical programs. 

Global Finance Initiative (Terrorism and Financial Intelligence): 

∂$1,000,000/∂10 FTE.—The Committee recommends an increase 

of $2,000,000, including a realignment of $1,000,000 in base resources, for the Office of Intelligence and Analysis to improve the 

Department’s coordination of global finance intelligence issues with 

the intelligence community. Targeted financial measures supported 

by financial intelligence have become one of the most effective 

weapons against national security threats, and Treasury’s efforts in 

this area have been instrumental in disrupting terrorist financing. 

Additional resources shall focus on developing and capitalizing on 
10 

new sources of information, enhancing analysis in coordination 

with the intelligence community, expanding the Department’s role 

and relationships within the intelligence community, and ensuring 

Treasury’s infrastructure is sufficient to support these expanding 

responsibilities. This initiative is aligned with key tasks and objectives of the National Security Strategy, the National Intelligence 

Strategy, and the National Implementation Plan for the War on 

Terror. 

Support for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United 

States (Office of General Counsel): ∂$483,000/∂2 FTE.—The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States [CFIUS] is responsible for investigating the merger or acquisition of U.S. companies by foreign persons for national security implications. Building 

on resources provided in fiscal year 2008, the Committee recommends an increase of $483,000 for the Office of General Counsel 

to hire additional legal support needed as a result of the continuing 

increase in the number and significance of CFIUS cases. 

Improving Security of U.S. Financial Services Sector (Financial 

Policies and Programs): ∂$1,300,000/∂0 FTE.—The Committee 

recommends an increase of $1,300,000 above the fiscal year 2008 

level to support the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection in 

continuing improvement to the security of the American financial 

services sector against natural and man-made disasters. Ongoing 

initiatives support cooperative, public-private sector efforts to identify threats and vulnerabilities, share critical information, and 

mitigate risks to the financial services sector in order to protect the 

U.S. economy and national security. Additional resources shall support extensive mapping of the financial sector, the establishment of 

secure communications with financial institutions, and further 

international exercises with entities such as the European Central 

Bank. 

Debt Management Analytical Support (Financial Policies and 

Programs): ∂$3,000,000/∂2 FTE.—The Committee recommends 

an increase of $3,000,000 above the fiscal year 2008 level to overhaul the Office of Debt Management’s [ODM] information technology systems to improve the accuracy, reliability, and speed of 

the financial models used to manage the Federal Government’s 

$9,000,000,000,000 debt portfolio. A successful overhaul of ODM’s 

systems will improve the financial data that capital markets and 

Treasury decisionmakers rely upon daily, significantly reduce the 

risk of operational failure, improve national security, and create potential cost savings for taxpayers as the Federal debt is managed 

more efficiently. 

Operations Center (Administration): ∂$6,200,000/∂24 FTE.— 

The Committee recommends an increase of $6,200,000 above the 

fiscal year 2008 level to establish a 24/7 Operations Center to centralize and enhance crisis management at the Department. The 

new Operations Center shall expand the existing Market Room’s 

capacity to monitor international and domestic financial markets, 

coordinate actions with Federal agencies, foreign governments, and 

global financial markets, including the financial analysis of terrorist organizations, and manage the Department’s global operations on a daily basis. 
11 

The Committee is encouraged by reports from the Treasury Office of Inspector General [IG] indicating that the Department is 

making progress in building a stronger and more sustainable corporate management structure. However, the Committee remains 

concerned with the significant management challenges faced by the 

Department, particularly regarding management of capital investments. 

Management of Capital Investments.—The Committee recognizes 

efforts the Department has made to emphasize capital investment 

management Department-wide and agrees that effective management of major capital investments is the responsibility of all executives. The Committee directs the Department to continue improving the management of capital investments, specifically focusing on 

integrating all of the Department’s bureaus into improvement efforts and institutionalizing improvements so that taxpayers will 

benefit from better management of future capital projects. The 

Committee directs the Office of the Chief Information Officer to ensure that adequate resources are devoted both to projects in the 

capital phase, such as the Enterprise Content Management system, 

and to proper maintenance and modernization of existing systems, 

such as the Treasury Secure Data Network. 

Information Security.—The IG continues to cite the Department’s 

information security as a top management and performance challenge. While the IG notes that Treasury has made improvements 

regarding information security, significant challenges remain, including protection of certain personally identifiable information and 

configuration management. The Committee urges the Department 

to address the IG’s findings and undertake prompt and meaningful 

corrective action. 

Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007.—The Committee directs the Department to fully implement all sanctions and 

divestment measures, particularly those applicable to Burma, Iran, 

and Sudan. The Committee notes that the signing statement accompanying the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 

raised serious concerns about the administration’s willingness to 

enforce this law. The Committee expects full and unfettered implementation of the provisions of this law and directs the Department 

to promptly notify the Committee of any resource constraints that 

adversely impact the implementation of any sanctions program. 

Nuclear Proliferation.—The Committee is concerned that the 

World Bank is contractually obligated to execute certain contracts 

with entities in Iran, despite Iran’s failure to fully cooperate with 

International Atomic Energy Agency inspections and various resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council. Therefore, 

the Committee directs the Department to work with the World 

Bank to include in the International Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development’s General Conditions for Loans a clause that provides 

for the termination of future contracts if the recipient state fails to 

cooperate with International Atomic Energy Agency inspections, 

violates international laws related to the proliferation of weapons 

of mass destruction, or is sanctioned for failing to cooperate with 

the International Atomic Energy Agency or for the proliferation of 

nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons technology by the United Nations Security Council. 
12 

Subprime Crisis.—The Committee is concerned with the rising 

number of foreclosures associated with subprime mortgages. In an 

attempt to address the subprime crisis, the Department created the 

HOPE NOW alliance within the financial services sector, including 

mortgage counselors, mortgage servicers, and investors. The Committee is concerned, however, that HOPE NOW may be an inadequate response to address the magnitude of the foreclosure crisis. 

The Committee urges the Department to expand its efforts to address the subprime housing crisis beyond the scope of HOPE NOW 

and to keep the Committee promptly and regularly apprised of 

such efforts. 

DEPARTMENT-WIDE SYSTEMS AND CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $18,710,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 26,975,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 26,975,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The 1997 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 

established this account, which is authorized to be used by or on 

behalf of Treasury bureaus, at the Secretary’s discretion, to modernize business processes and increase efficiency through technology investments, as well as other activities that involve more 

than one Treasury bureau or Treasury’s interface with other Government agencies. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,975,000 for 

Department-wide systems and capital investment programs 

[DSCIP]. This amount is equal to the budget request and 

$8,265,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

The following table compares the Committee recommendation 

with the budget request and the fiscal year 2008 enacted levels. 

DSCIP Initiative Fiscal year 2008 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2009 

budget estimate 

Committee 

recommendation 

Cyber Security—Critical Infrastructure Program ...................................... $400,000 ........................ ........................

DO/Treasury Backup Disaster Recovery ..................................................... 4,000,000 ........................ ........................

Integrated Wireless Network ...................................................................... 2,000,000 ........................ ........................

E-Government Enterprise Architecture ....................................................... 300,000 ........................ ........................

Cyber Security—Information Security ....................................................... 1,844,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 

E-Government Initiatives ........................................................................... 2,166,000 2,057,000 2,057,000 

Enterprise Content Management ............................................................... 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 

Treasury Secure Data Network ................................................................... 2,000,000 4,400,000 4,400,000 

Annex Repair and Renovation ................................................................... ........................ 11,518,000 11,518,000 

Total .............................................................................................. 18,710,000 26,975,000 26,975,000 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $18,450,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 19,356,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 19,356,000 
13 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

As a result of the 1988 amendments to the Inspector General 

[IG] Act, the Secretary of the Treasury established the Office of Inspector General [OIG] in 1989. 

The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the Secretary and Congress 

fully and currently informed of problems and deficiencies in the administration of departmental programs and operations. The audit 

function provides program audit, contract audit, and financial 

statement audit services. Contract audits provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and 

settlement of contracts. Program audits review and audit all facets 

of agency operations. Financial statement audits assess whether financial statements fairly present the agency’s financial condition 

and results of operations, the adequacy of accounting controls, and 

compliance with laws and regulations. These audits contribute significantly to improved financial management by helping Treasury 

managers identify improvements needed in their accounting and 

internal control systems. The evaluations function reviews program 

performance and issues critical to the mission of the Department. 

The investigative function provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $19,356,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General. This 

amount is the same as the budget request and $906,000 above the 

fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $140,533,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 145,736,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 145,736,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration [TIGTA] 

was established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 

(Public Law 105–206). TIGTA was created to provide independent 

audit and investigative services necessary to improve the quality 

and credibility of oversight of the Internal Revenue Service [IRS]. 

Funding was first appropriated for this account in the fiscal year 

2000 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act (Public 

Law 106–58). 

TIGTA conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to assess 

the operations and programs of the IRS and related entities, the 

IRS Oversight Board and the Office of Chief Counsel to (1) promote 

the economic, efficient and effective administration of the Nation’s 
14 

tax laws and to detect and deter fraud and abuse in IRS programs 

and operations; and (2) recommend actions to resolve fraud and 

other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these programs 

and operations, and keep the Secretary and Congress fully and currently informed of these issues and the progress made in resolving 

them. TIGTA reviews existing and proposed legislation and regulations relating to the programs and operations of the IRS and related entities and makes recommendations concerning the impact 

of such legislation and regulations on the economy and efficiency 

in the administration of programs and operations of the IRS and 

related entities. The audit function provides program audit, limited 

contract audit, and financial audit services. Program audits review 

and audit all facets of the IRS and related entities in an effort to 

improve IRS systems and operations, while ensuring fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers. Contract audits focus on invoices/ 

vouchers submitted to the IRS to determine whether charges are 

valid and to identify erroneous and improper payments. The investigative function provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities involving IRS programs and operations 

and protects the IRS and related entities against external attempts 

to corrupt or threaten the administration of the tax laws. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $145,736,000 for 

the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. This 

amount is an increase of $5,203,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee commends TIGTA for its ongoing review of the 

IRS’s business systems modernization program and other information technology projects. The Committee also acknowledges the critical importance of the priorities TIGTA has identified for fiscal year 

2009, including ensuring the privacy and security of taxpayer information from internal and external threats. The Committee shares 

TIGTA’s concern that the IRS is developing and launching its modernized systems without adequately contemplating the security implications. The Committee urges continued TIGTA oversight of tax 

gap issues, including data reliability, tax law enforcement, and taxpayer assistance, to ensure that the IRS enhances voluntary compliance by balancing taxpayer services and enforcement without 

jeopardizing taxpayer rights. 

FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $85,844,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 91,335,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 91,335,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN], a bureau 

within the Treasury Department’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, is the largest overt collector of financial intelligence in the United States. FinCEN’s mission is to safeguard the 

financial system from the abuses of financial crime, including ter-
15 

rorist financing, money laundering, and other illicit activity. 

FinCEN accomplishes its mission by administering the Bank Secrecy Act, a collection of statutes that form the Nation’s anti-money 

laundering/counter-terrorist financing regulatory regime. As the 

delegated administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act, FinCEN is responsible for the development and implementation of regulations, 

rules, and guidance issued under the Bank Secrecy Act. FinCEN 

also oversees the work of eight Federal agencies that have been 

delegated responsibility to examine various sectors of the financial 

industry for compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act’s requirements. 

FinCEN is responsible for collecting, maintaining, and disseminating the information reported by financial institutions under the 

Bank Secrecy Act through a Government-wide access service. 

FinCEN is the United States’ Financial Intelligence Unit [FIU] and 

a founding member of the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence 

Units. As the United States FIU, FinCEN routinely shares information and cooperates with other FIUs around the world to address the global problems of terrorist financing, money laundering, 

and other illicit activity. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $91,335,000 for the Financial 

Crimes Enforcement Network [FinCEN]. This amount is $5,491,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee is concerned with the Treasury Inspector General’s finding that a large share of Suspicious Activity Reports filed 

with FinCEN under the Bank Secrecy Act are missing critical data 

elements. Incomplete data limits the ability of FinCEN, regulators, 

and other law enforcement agencies to detect trends and ultimately 

identify money laundering or terrorist activity. The Committee directs FinCEN to focus management, regulatory, and enforcement 

efforts on the consistency of Suspicious Activity Reports. 

The bill includes the following program increases for fiscal year 

2009: 

Improve BSA Effectiveness/Consistency: ∂$1,139,000/∂5 

FTE.—The Committee recommends an increase of $1,139,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level to support the implementation of the Bank Secrecy Act [BSA]. Administration of the BSA requires timely exchange of information, consistent application of 

laws and regulations, and tailored outreach to regulated industries. 

Additional resources are provided to enable FinCEN to bring certain sectors subject to a mandate under the USA PATRIOT Act, 

such as the insurance sector, under the BSA administration and 

compliance framework. Funds also shall support management of 

regulatory requirements imposed on the financial industry and enhanced communication with law enforcement and State and Federal regulators to combat the financing of terrorism and money 

laundering. 

Strengthen Global Anti-Money Laundering Efforts: ∂$865,000/ 

∂2 FTE.—The Committee recommends an increase of $865,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level to improve collaboration 

with other Financial Intelligence Units around the world regarding 

international anti-money laundering and terrorist financing. 
16 

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $234,423,000 

Supplemental appropriation, 2008 ....................................................... 64,175,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 239,344,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 239,344,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In 1940, the United States Department of the Treasury established the Fiscal Service, which consisted of the Bureau of Accounts, the Bureau of the Public Debt, and the Office of the Treasurer. A 1974 reorganization of the Fiscal Service created the Bureau of Government Financial Operations, which was formed from 

a merger of the Bureau of Accounts and most functions of the Office of the Treasurer. In 1984, the Bureau of Government Financial 

Operations was renamed the Financial Management Service 

[FMS]. 

FMS implements payment policy and procedures for the Federal 

program agencies, issues and distributes payments, promotes the 

use of electronics in the payment process, and assists agencies in 

converting payments from paper checks to electronic funds transfer 

[EFT]. FMS provides debt collection operational services to client 

agencies, implements collections policy, regulations, standards, and 

procedures for the Federal Government, and assists agencies in 

converting collections from paper to electronic media. 

FMS provides financial accounting, reporting, and financing services to the Federal Government and the Government’s agents who 

participate in the payments and collections process by generating 

a series of daily, monthly, quarterly, and annual Government-wide 

reports. FMS also works directly with agencies to help reconcile reporting differences. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $239,344,000 for salaries and expenses for FMS. This amount is the same as the budget request 

and $4,921,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level, excluding 

emergency supplemental appropriations. Emergency supplemental 

funding of $64,175,000 was provided for FMS to support the administration of economic stimulus payments under the Economic 

Stimulus Act (Public Law 110–285). 

A number of Federal agencies accept credit and debit cards as 

payment for goods and services provided by the Federal Government. FMS processes credit and debit card transactions on behalf 

of agencies in all three branches of the Federal Government and 

a host of other associated entities. The Committee is concerned 

that Federal agencies may be paying excessive fees for accepting 

credit and debit cards for these transactions. GAO reported that 

credit card interchange fees and merchant discount fees cost the 

Federal Government over $400,000,000 in fiscal year 2007 (GAO– 

08–558). The Committee is pleased that FMS has initiated a program to identify potential cost savings and efficiencies regarding 

such fees at several Federal agencies and directs FMS to continue 
17 

its plans to expand the program to other Federal agencies so that 

credit card transaction costs can be minimized for taxpayers. 

ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO TAX AND TRADE BUREAU

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $93,515,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 96,900,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 98,900,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Homeland Security Act created the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau [TTB] within the Department of the Treasury 

and charged TTB with collecting revenue and protecting the public. 

TTB enforces the Federal laws and regulations relating to alcohol 

and tobacco. TTB works directly and in cooperation with others to 

maintain a sound revenue management and collection system that 

continues to reduce the regulatory burden, improve service, collect 

the revenue due, and prevent tax evasion and other criminal conduct. The TTB is also responsible for preventing consumer deception, ensuring that regulated products comply with Federal commodity, safety, and distribution requirements, and providing customer service. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $98,900,000 for TTB for fiscal year 

2009. This amount is an increase of $2,000,000 over the budget request and an increase of $5,385,000 over the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. The increase over the budget request is provided to enable TTB to begin implementation of comprehensive lifecycle planning for IT equipment. 

UNITED STATES MINT

UNITED STATES MINT PUBLIC ENTERPRISE FUND

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic 

and investment products, and provides for security and asset protection. Public Law 104–52 established the U.S. Mint Public Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the previous Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage Metal Fund, and 

the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The Mint submits annual 

audited business-type financial statements to the Secretary of the 

Treasury and to Congress in support of the operations of the revolving fund. 

The operations of the Mint are divided into two major activities: 

Manufacturing and Sales (including circulating coinage and numismatic and investment products); and Protection. The Mint is credited with receipts from its circulating coinage operations, equal to 

the full cost of producing and distributing coins that are put into 

circulation, including depreciation of the Mint’s plant and equipment on the basis of current replacement value. Those receipts pay 

for the costs of the Mint’s operations, which include the costs of 
18 

production and distribution. The difference between the face value 

of the coins and these costs is a profit, which is deposited as seigniorage to the general fund. In fiscal year 2007, the Mint transferred $825,000,000 to the general fund. Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint’s capital acquisitions is recorded as budget authority in the year that funds are obligated for this purpose and as receipts over the life of the asset. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a spending level of $42,150,000 for 

circulating coinage and protective service capital investments for 

the Mint. This amount is an increase of $8,950,000 above the fiscal 

year 2008 enacted level and is equal to the budget request. 

BUREAU OF THE PUBLIC DEBT

ADMINISTERING THE PUBLIC DEBT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $172,871,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 177,054,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 177,054,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Debt Service was formed in 1919 with the appointment of the first Commissioner of the Public Debt. The Public Debt 

Service took general charge of debt operations including debt accounting and securities issue and retirement, which had been conducted by several independent divisions within the Treasury. Acting under the authorization of the Reorganization Act of 1939, the 

President created the Bureau of the Public Debt, which was established as part of the Fiscal Service in the Department of the Treasury effective June 30, 1940 (31 U.S.C. 306). In 1993, the Savings 

Bonds Division, a separate organization, was made part of the Bureau. 

This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all public 

debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S. savings-type 

securities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $177,054,000 for the Bureau of the 

Public Debt for fiscal year 2009. This amount is an increase of 

$4,183,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and is equal to 

the budget request. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM

ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $94,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 28,620,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 100,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes 

investments in the form of grants, loans, equity investments, de-
19 

posits, and technical assistance grants to new and existing community development financial institutions [CDFIs] through the CDFI 

program. CDFIs include community development banks, credit 

unions, venture capital funds, revolving loan funds, and microloan 

funds, among others. Recipient institutions engage in lending and 

investment for affordable housing, small business, and community 

development within underserved communities. The CDFI Fund administers the Bank Enterprise Award [BEA] Program, which provides a financial incentive to insured depository institutions to undertake community development financing activities. The CDFI 

Fund also administers the New Markets Tax Credit Program, a 

program that provides an incentive to investors in the form of a tax 

credit, which is expected to stimulate private community and economic development activities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the CDFI Fund, 

which is $6,000,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$71,380,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee is again concerned about the proposed reductions 

to CDFI and the respective programs within CDFI, such as the 

Bank Enterprise Award [BEA]. These programs play an important 

role in providing financial services to underserved communities in 

both urban and rural areas across the country, a role that is particularly crucial during times of economic downturn. The Committee expects the BEA program to be funded in accordance with 

the authorizing statute, 12 U.S.C. 4718(a)(4). The Committee recommends a set-aside of $8,280,000 for grants, 

loans, and technical assistance and training programs to benefit 

Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiian communities in the coordination of development strategies, increased access to equity investments, and loans for development activities. 

Leveraging outside funds is a fundamental goal of the CDFI program. The Committee encourages CDFI to improve its measurement of the extent that Federal program funds leverage other nonFederal funds for CDFIs across the country. GAO found that the 

current method used by CDFI may be underestimating how Federal funding attracts other sources of funding for CDFIs (GAO 08– 

136). The Committee stresses the importance of accurately measuring the return on the Federal contribution to CDFIs for use in 

future funding decisions. 

BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing [BEP] has been the sole 

manufacturer of U.S. paper currency for almost 150 years. The origin of the BEP is traced to an Act of Congress passed on February 

25, 1862, 12 Stat. 345, authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury 

to issue a new currency—United States notes. While this law was 

the cornerstone authority for the operations of the engraving and 

printing division of the Treasury for many years, it was not until 

an Act of June 20, 1874, 18 Stat. 100, that the Congress first referred to this division as the ‘‘Bureau of Engraving and Printing.’’ 
20 

The Bureau’s status as a distinct bureau within the Department of 

the Treasury was solidified by section 1 of the Act of June 4, 1897, 

30 Stat. 18, which placed all of the business of the BEP under the 

immediate control of a director, subject to the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury. The 1897 law is now codified in 31 U.S.C. 

303. 

The BEP designs, manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve 

notes and other security documents issued by the Federal Government. 

The operations of the BEP are currently financed by means of a 

revolving fund established in accordance with the provisions of 

Public Law 656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181), which requires the 

BEP to be reimbursed by customer agencies for all costs of manufacturing products and services performed. The BEP is also authorized to assess amounts to acquire capital equipment and provide 

for working capital needs. 

No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities of the 

BEP. 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Internal Revenue Service [IRS] administers the Nation’s tax 

laws and collects the revenue that funds over 96 percent of the 

Federal Government’s operations and public services. The IRS’s 

mission is to provide taxpayers with quality service by helping 

them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all. The IRS focuses 

its enforcement programs toward increasing voluntary tax compliance by deterring taxpayers inclined to evade their tax obligations 

while vigorously pursuing those who violate the law. Each year, 

IRS employees deal directly with more American taxpayers than 

any other institution, public or private. In 2007, the IRS collected 

more than $2,400,000,000,000 in revenue, net of refunds, and processed more than 235 million tax returns. During the 2007 filing 

season, more than half of all individual taxpayers (over 78 million) 

filed electronically. Also, in fiscal year 2007, the IRS customer assistance call centers answered 33.2 million assistor telephone calls 

and 21.1 million automated calls. Over 129 million taxpayers were 

assisted through taxpayer education programs. There were over 7 

million contacts at Taxpayer Assistance Centers, and nearly 215 

million visits to the IRS website. An important focus for the IRS 

in recent years has been to undertake a major modernization of its 

systems, including expanding its Internet services, and business 

operations to better serve taxpayers and enforce the law. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $11,524,848,000 for the Internal 

Revenue Service for fiscal year 2009. This is an increase of 

$430,329,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$163,339,000 above the budget request. 

Tax Gap.—The vast majority of Americans pay their fair share 

of taxes, yet there is still a ‘‘tax gap.’’ The tax gap is the difference 

between what taxpayers are supposed to pay and what they actu-
21 

ally do pay. In its update of the results of a 3-year study, the IRS 

found that for tax year 2001, about 84 percent of owed taxes were 

paid voluntarily and timely. However, a significant number of taxpayers do not comply with the Tax Code resulting in an estimated 

gross tax gap of $345,000,000,000. The IRS estimates that after enforcement and other late payments are factored into the gross tax 

gap, the net tax gap is about $290,000,000,000. The most current 

estimate of the tax gap remains largely unchanged from the IRS’s 

initial update conducted in 2006, and has remained relatively stable for the past three decades based on previous IRS studies. The 

accuracy of the tax gap, however, is uncertain given the use of outdated and incomplete information and questionable methodology. 

Some experts, including the GAO and TIGTA, believe that the tax 

gap may actually be higher than estimated by the IRS. The Committee strongly believes that the IRS must and can reduce the tax 

gap if the IRS is given additional resources and is able to improve 

its operational capabilities (most notably through the Business Systems Modernization program). 

To reduce the tax gap, experts recommend a number of approaches, including: improving information reporting, improving 

taxpayer services, increasing research on noncompliance, improving 

the partnership between the IRS and the tax administration community, and leveraging technology to improve IRS’s systems. The 

Committee supports all of these approaches in combination. 

The Committee acknowledges the Department of the Treasury 

and the IRS’s August 2007 publication, ‘‘Reducing the Tax Gap: A 

Report on Improving Voluntary Compliance.’’ The Committee 

shares the concern that the steps outlined in that report are preliminary, and that absent a better understanding of the current 

sources of noncompliance, efforts to improve compliance may be 

hampered, misdirected, and difficult to measure. To gain meaningful insights into taxpayer behavior, the Committee strongly supports the work of the National Research Program. 

The Committee notes that as part of its budget submission, the 

IRS proposes 16 legislative reforms in four categories, to recoup 

$36,000,000,000, or 12 percent of the $290,000,000,000 net tax gap 

over 10 years. The Committee is concerned that such an approach 

is far from aggressive, and amounts to a meager return of just 

slightly more than a penny on the dollar. 

Operating Plan and Notification.—In addition to the normal operating plan requirements detailed in the introduction in this report, the Committee directs the IRS to include details on any 

planned reorganization, job reductions or increases to offices or activities within the agency, and modifications to any service or enforcement activity. Some past examples that would qualify under 

this directive include: the Modernization and Information Technology Systems [MITS] reorganization and the proposed closure of 

taxpayer assistance centers. The Committee also directs the IRS to 

obtain and include comments of the IRS Oversight Board as part 

of its operating plan submission to the Committee. Further, the 

IRS should promptly notify the Committee and the IRS Oversight 

Board if there are any substantial changes to these plans. 

The Committee remains concerned about any efforts to reduce 

specific taxpayer services, including face-to-face services. Therefore, 
22 

the Committee directs that if the IRS proposes further reductions 

in taxpayer services, such reductions must be consistent with the 

budget justification, operating plan, and Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint, and the IRS must demonstrate that such reductions will not 

result in a decline in voluntary compliance. Where such reductions 

involve a reduction in face-to-face service, the IRS must demonstrate that the proposed reductions do not adversely impact compliance by taxpayers who are dependent on such services, by showing, through such means as a successful pilot program, survey, or 

other empirical study, that there is an effective and viable service 

alternative available. 

Administration of the Economic Stimulus Act.—As part of the enactment of the Economic Stimulus Act (Public Law 110–285) to 

spur economic growth, Congress approved payments to approximately 128 million Americans. Emergency supplemental funding of 

$202,135,000 was provided for the IRS to administer the program, 

of which $50,720,000 was designated for the Taxpayer Services account and $151,415,000 was allocated for the Operations Support 

account. 

The Committee acknowledges the enormous challenges posed by 

the timing of this law at the height of the 2008 filing season, particularly the need to hire, train, and deploy staff. The Committee 

is pleased that, while the IRS administered two filing seasons concurrently, the initial distribution of stimulus payments occurred 

ahead of schedule, and that through June 13, 2008, the IRS has 

processed payments to over 76 million taxpayers totaling almost 

$64,000,000,000. The Committee commends IRS’s ‘‘It’s Not Too 

Late’’ program to identify and reach individuals who are eligible for 

the stimulus payment but who have not filed a 2007 tax return. 

The Committee is concerned that in order to quickly implement 

and manage the economic stimulus program, the IRS was forced to 

reassign some employees from its Accounts Management and Automated Collection System functions to respond to a surge in the volume of telephone calls and visits to walk-in centers related to the 

economic stimulus payment program. The Committee understands 

that as a result of these temporary staffing reassignments, the IRS 

estimates that the loss in collection revenue will be approximately 

$565,000,000. 

The Committee is also concerned about the problems encountered 

in the child tax credit area, the misdirection of some direct deposits 

into wrong accounts, and delays experienced by taxpayers who arranged Refund Anticipation Loans [RALs] or Refund Anticipation 

Checks [RACs]. 

The Committee directs the IRS to provide an assessment of lessons learned from the administration of the 2008 economic stimulus program, including recommendations for managing similar 

programs in the future and minimizing declines in level of core 

services, to the Committees on Appropriations no later than 120 

days after enactment of this act. As part of such report, the Committee requests that the IRS include an analysis of the feasibility, 

including costs savings, of converting taxpayers who receive paper 

checks to electronic or debit card payment systems. 

IRS Staffing Plans.—The Committee continues to support adequate staffing levels for effective tax administration and supports 
23 

the staffing plans for the Internal Revenue Service facilities in the 

communities of Martinsburg and Beckley, West Virginia. Therefore, 

the Committee urges the IRS, within the constraints of the fiscal 

year 2009 funding levels, to make no staffing reductions at the 

Martinsburg National Computing Center and the programmed 

level at the Finance Center in Beckley, West Virginia. Further, the 

Committee directs the IRS to provide an annual report to the Committee on its efforts to protect and increase staffing levels at the 

Martinsburg and Beckley IRS facilities. 

Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii.—Given the remote distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the U.S. mainland and the difficulty experienced by Alaska and Hawaii taxpayers in receiving 

needed tax assistance by the national toll-free line, it is imperative 

that the Taxpayer Advocate Service Center in each of these States 

is fully staffed and capable of resolving taxpayer problems of the 

most complex nature. The Committee directs the Internal Revenue 

Service to continue to staff each Taxpayer Advocate Service Center 

in each of these States with a Collection Technical Advisor and an 

Examination Technical Advisor in addition to the current complement of office staff. 

TAXPAYER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,150,000,000 

Supplemental appropriation, 2008 ....................................................... 50,720,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 2,150,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,213,350,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Taxpayer Services appropriation provides for taxpayer services, including forms and publications; processing tax returns and 

related documents; filing and account services; taxpayer advocacy 

services; and assisting taxpayers to understand their tax obligations, correctly file their returns, and pay taxes due in a timely 

manner. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,213,350,000 for Taxpayer Services, which is $63,350,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level, 

excluding emergency supplemental appropriations, and $63,350,000 

above the budget request. Bill language is included providing not 

less than $4,000,000 for the tax counseling for the elderly program, 

not less than $9,000,000 for low-income taxpayer clinic grants, not 

less than $8,000,000, to be available for 2 years, for a community 

volunteer income tax assistance matching grant program for tax return preparation assistance and $194,073,500 for the Taxpayer Advocate Service. 

The Committee disagrees with the President’s proposal to provide no increase in funding for Taxpayer Services. The Committee 

is concerned that maintaining this account at the fiscal year 2008 

enacted level will pose a considerable challenge to the ability of the 

IRS to fully implement the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint. The 

Committee observes that one of the four core principles of the 

Treasury Department’s comprehensive strategy for reducing the 

tax gap is to combine enforcement activities with a commitment to 
24 

taxpayer service. The Committee finds that proposed program decreases to Taxpayer Assistance Centers and outreach and reduced 

funding for pre-filing taxpayer assistance and education disregard 

that commitment. 

The Committee strongly believes that ‘‘Service ∂ Enforcement = 

Compliance’’ and provides an additional $63,350,000 above the 

President’s request for Taxpayer Services. The Committee directs 

the IRS to restore appropriated resources devoted to the pre-filing 

taxpayer assistance and education component of this account to not 

less than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level of $645,375,000. In addition, the Committee expects the IRS to devote not less than 

$6,300,000 to maintain its processing of essential pension plan return information while transitioning to a new mandated electronic 

filing system in 2010. 

Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint.—In response to the Committee’s 

directive in the fiscal year 2006 Treasury Appropriations Act, the 

IRS, in consultation with the IRS Oversight Board and the National Taxpayer Advocate, developed a ‘‘Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint’’ to institute a 5-year strategic plan for taxpayer services. As 

directed by the Committee, the IRS reviewed its portfolio of taxpayer services and explored other types of services to meet the 

needs of taxpayers. The plan details how the IRS plans to meet the 

service needs on a geographic basis (by State and major metropolitan area), including proposals to realign existing resources to improve taxpayer access to services, and addresses how the IRS will 

improve taxpayer service based on reliable data on taxpayer service 

needs. The plan incorporates activities to expand efforts to partner 

with State and local governments and private entities to improve 

taxpayer services. The Committee commends the IRS, the IRS 

Oversight Board, and the National Taxpayer Advocate for their efforts to produce the Blueprint. The Committee supports ongoing efforts to conduct research on taxpayer needs and taxpayer service 

performance. 

The Committee directs the IRS, the IRS Oversight Board, and 

the National Taxpayer Advocate to submit to Congress annual updates to the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint identifying any changes 

to its strategic plan for taxpayer service, including the results of 

any new research and relevant findings, and any open issues requiring additional research. 

E-Filing.—The Committee is heartened by the IRS’s improved 

performance in increasing the number of tax filers who submit 

their returns electronically and without additional cost. Eighty million tax returns were e-filed in 2007. While the IRS did not meet 

its congressionally mandated goal of having 80 percent of tax returns filed electronically by 2007 it achieved an overall e-file rate 

of 65 percent, up over 9 percent. The Committee directs the IRS, 

in consultation with stakeholders, including the National Taxpayer 

Advocate, to implement a strategy to achieve the 80 percent e-file 

goal. This plan should address alternate electronic filing strategies, 

including Telefile and 2–D Bar Coding and methods of e-filing directly with the IRS for free. 

The Committee believes that the IRS will deliver better taxpayer 

service, achieve improved compliance, and reduce the tax gap if 

taxpayer behavior is better understood and applied research is in-
25 

tegrated into the development of taxpayer service and enforcement 

initiatives. Toward that end, the Committee looks forward to the 

results of the study by the National Taxpayer Advocate and the 

IRS Office of Research on factors that influence taxpayer compliance behavior, including how and the extent to which various factors influence such behavior, as well as any recommendations made 

in the report for the establishment of a cognitive learning and applied research laboratory. 

EITC.—The Committee is concerned that many low-income taxpayers and their families are having their Earned Income Tax 

Credit [EITC] benefits unnecessarily diminished through high-cost, 

short-term products such as refund anticipation loans [RALs]. The 

Committee directs the Internal Revenue Service, in consultation 

with the National Taxpayer Advocate, to educate consumers about 

the costs associated with these products and expand access to alternative methods of obtaining timely tax refunds. 

IRS data reflect that in 2006, 22,400,000 households received a 

total of $43,700,000,000 through the EITC through reduced taxes 

and refunds. Concerns have been raised that an estimated 

7,500,000 families failed to take advantage of the credit because 

they did not know they were eligible, leaving about 

$14,500,000,000 in the Treasury. The Committee strongly urges the 

IRS to take immediate steps to increase outreach and education to 

increase the number of eligible taxpayers who may benefit from 

this program. 

Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance.—The Volunteer Income Tax Assistance [VITA] program is an important aspect of IRS 

efforts to provide income tax preparation assistance programs for 

low-income taxpayers. The Committee provides $8,000,000 to the 

IRS to be available for 2 years specifically for exclusive use as part 

of continuing a matching grant program established and administered by the IRS, in consultation with the Taxpayer Advocate Service, for not for profit organizations which provide volunteer income 

tax return preparation services for lower income individual taxpayers. 

As outlined in the Explanatory Statement for Division D, Financial Services and General Government Appropriations, 2008 (Public 

Law 110–161), this program shall provide direct funds to enable 

VITA programs to extend services to underserved populations and 

hardest-to-reach areas, both urban and non-urban, as well as to increase the capacity to file returns electronically, heighten quality 

control, enhance training of volunteers, and significantly improve 

the accuracy rate of returns prepared by VITA sites. The Committee reinforces its expectation that the IRS should employ an equitable selection methodology which takes into account geographic 

diversity, and include an evaluation component to measure the 

overall effectiveness of the program and the results achieved. 

The IRS is not permitted to treat any in-kind contributions from 

the IRS as counting toward the $8,000,000 appropriation nor shall 

the IRS reduce any current contributions toward tax return preparation services. As the IRS promotes this grant program, the Committee strong urges the IRS to take steps to address the concerns 

identified by both the GAO and the TIGTA regarding the accuracy 

of tax preparation services provided at VITA sites in the past. 
26 

Charitable Exempt Organizations.—The Committee is encouraged by recent IRS actions to invest greater resources in activities 

that educate charitable exempt organizations about their obligations under the tax code, helping to increase voluntary compliance 

and strengthen charities’ ability to improve lives and communities. 

The Committee anticipates that the IRS will utilize the increased 

resources in this appropriation to continue to expand outreach to 

and education of charitable organizations, particularly in light of 

significant changes to tax-exempt laws in the Pension Protection 

Act and other statutes. 

A recent TIGTA audit found that efforts by the IRS to educate 

tax-exempt organizations about prohibited political activities were 

increased, and several internal processes were enhanced. The Committee urges the IRS to incorporate TIGTA’s recommendations to 

improve the effectiveness of efforts as a way to increase the likelihood that tax-exempt organizations will discontinue prohibited activities before the relevant election and that tax-exempt organization activities will be evaluated consistently and fairly. 

IRS Free File Program.—The Free File Program allows taxpayers 

meeting certain income requirements to electronically prepare and 

file their income tax returns free of charge. The IRS administers 

the Program as a partnership with the Free File Alliance, a consortium of tax software companies. The Committee is encouraged that 

usage has increased over 18 percent. The Committee has had longstanding concern that eligible taxpayers are not taking full advantage of this program. The Committee expects IRS to place a high 

priority on improving marketing and administration of the program 

as outlined by TIGTA. The Committee further urges the IRS to devote the resources necessary to ensure that individual taxpayers 

who access the IRS Website are not subjected to cross-marketing 

and selling activity when utilizing Free File. The IRS should likewise promote public awareness of the availability of this program 

among those who can most benefit from its free services, particularly lower income, disadvantaged, the working poor and other underserved populations. 

ENFORCEMENT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,780,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 5,117,267,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,117,267,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Enforcement appropriation provides for the examination of 

tax returns, both domestic and international; the administrative 

and judicial settlement of taxpayer appeals of examination findings; technical rulings; monitoring employee pension plans; determining qualifications of organizations seeking tax-exempt status; 

examining tax returns of exempt organizations; enforcing statutes 

relating to detection and investigation of criminal violations of the 

internal revenue laws; identifying underreporting of tax obligations; securing unfiled tax returns; and collecting unpaid accounts. 
27 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request level of 

$5,117,267,000 for enforcement activities for fiscal year 2009. This 

amount is $337,267,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level 

and the same as the budget request. Bill language is included to 

transfer not less than $57,252,000 to the Interagency Crime and 

Drug Enforcement [ICDE] program and to transfer up to 

$10,000,000 from the Enforcement account to the Operations Support account to support the ICDE program. 

National Research Program.—As noted previously, the Committee strongly supports the work of the National Research Program [NRP] to increase understanding of the tax gap. While the 

IRS’s NRP has done a commendable job in updating the tax gap 

estimates, significant challenges remain in obtaining complete and 

timely data and in developing reliable methods for interpreting the 

data. The IRS and others have expressed concerns with the certainty of the overall tax gap estimate in part because some aspects 

of the estimate rely on data from the 1970s and 1980s and in other 

areas, no estimates are available. The Committee agrees with 

GAO, TIGTA, the National Taxpayer Advocate, and the IRS Oversight Board which have all recommended greater and more frequent data collection and studies of the tax gap. 

The Committee believes that an understanding of the causes of 

inadvertent noncompliance and the role of preparers in facilitating 

both inadvertent and intentional noncompliance will improve tax 

administration and should inform IRS’s allocation of resources. 

Thus, in administering its NRP for fiscal year 2009, the Committee 

directs the IRS to collect information on the causes of noncompliance, including inadvertent noncompliance, the type of return preparation method (self, volunteer, paid preparer, or IRS preparer), 

whether the taxpayer was represented during the examination, and 

the extent to which that taxpayer sought and received IRS services. 

The Committee further directs the IRS to use an independent external survey firm to conduct interviews with NRP taxpayers in 

order to identify the causes of taxpayer noncompliance. The Committee directs the National Taxpayer Advocate to assist with this 

effort. 

Misclassification of Contractors.—The Committee continues to be 

highly concerned with the misclassification of workers as independent contractors, who file using IRS Form 1099. Many of these 

workers should be correctly classified as employees and should file 

using W–2 forms. This misclassification leads to the underreporting 

and underpayment of employment and payroll taxes by employers 

and individuals, which accounts for a substantial portion of the 

gross tax gap. Therefore, the Committee strongly urges the IRS to 

provide increased tax enforcement in industries where 

misclassification of employees is widespread. 

The Committee is also concerned about disturbing reports about 

companies establishing offshore subsidiaries to hire employees so 

as to avoid payment of U.S. payroll taxes, and strongly urges the 

IRS to investigate and take action in response to such schemes, 

which constitute an estimated annual loss to the Treasury of 

$100,000,000. 
28 

Charitable Exempt Organizations.—The Committee notes enactment of sweeping changes to the tax laws governing charitable exempt organizations designed to strengthen the accountability and 

transparency of the nonprofit community. The Committee is aware 

that funding for Internal Revenue Service oversight of exempt organizations has remained relatively constant over the past 20 years 

while the nonprofit community has nearly doubled in size and 

grown in complexity. 

OPERATIONS SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,680,059,000 

Supplemental appropriation, 2008 ....................................................... 151,415,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 3,856,172,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,896,650,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Operations Support appropriation provides for overall planning and direction of the IRS including shared service support related to facilities services, rent payments, printing, postage, and security; other support functions that are considered overhead but essential to the successful operation of IRS programs including resources for headquarters management activities, including IRSwide support for strategic planning, communications and liaison, finance, human resources, EEO and diversity; research and statistics 

of income; and necessary expenses for information systems and 

telecommunication support, including developmental information 

systems and operational information systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $3,896,650,000 for Operations Sup- port for fiscal year 2009. This amount is $216,591,000 above the 

fiscal year 2008 enacted level, excluding emergency supplemental 

appropriations and $40,478,000 above the budget request. Bill language is included allowing $75,000,000 of these funds to remain 

available until September 30, 2010 for information technology support and not to exceed $1,000,000 to remain available until September 30, 2011, for research; not less than $2,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Oversight Board; and $25,000,000 for official reception and representation. The Committee has provided additional reception and representation funds due to the IRS’s growing role in 

international tax administration. These funds will be used to host 

meetings with international tax organizations such as the Joint 

International Tax Shelter Information Centre, Inter-American Center for Tax Administrators, and others. 

Information Technology [IT] Management and Oversight.—The 

IRS has made significant strides in improving the management 

and oversight of its business systems modernization [BSM] program. The IRS needs to vigilantly address major systemic problems 

with its non-BSM portfolio of information technology projects. 

TIGTA has identified problems in several areas of IT management 

and oversight including, but not limited to, such areas as classification of investment projects, oversight and governance structure, 

risk management, contingency planning, and contractor performance and accountability. 
29 

The Committee expects the IRS to monitor its entire non-BSM IT 

portfolio (regardless of tier classification) and make any changes as 

necessary to ensure that each project has (1) been properly classified for investment decision and management purposes, (2) the appropriate governance structure in place (such as an executive steering committee), (3) a risk management plan, (4) a contingency plan 

in case of breakdowns or failures in scheduled deliverables, (5) adequate provisions in the contracts to ensure penalties and repayment to the agency if performance is not met, (6) adequate contractor staffing and management in place to fulfill the contract 

terms and deliverables, and (7) been certified by the head of the 

relevant IRS business unit that the project is deemed necessary for 

its operations and meets its requirements. 

BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $267,090,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 222,664,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 282,175,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Business Systems Modernization account provides for revamping business practices and acquiring new technology. The IRS 

has undertaken a multi-year, multi-billion dollar effort to migrate 

from its antiquated legacy system to bring the IRS tax administration system to a level of public and private sector best practices. 

The IRS is using a formal methodology to prioritize, approve, fund, 

and evaluate its portfolio of business systems modernization investments. This methodology is designed to enforce a documented, repeatable, and measurable process for managing investments 

throughout their life cycle. The process is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office on a regular basis as part of the submission requirements for expenditure plans to the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations. The expenditure plan approval 

process prior to the use of appropriated funds continues for fiscal 

year 2009. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $282,175,000 for Business Systems 

Modernization [BSM] for fiscal year 2009. This amount is 

$15,085,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$59,511,000 above the budget request. The Committee concurs with 

the belief, espoused by the IRS Oversight Board in its March 2008 

Special Report on its Fiscal Year 2009 IRS Budget Recommendation, that when fully implemented, modernized IRS information 

systems will save billions of dollars in burden reduction for American taxpayers and significantly improve the efficiency of the IRS. 

For example, the replacement of the aging, vintage 1969 Individual 

Master File with the new Customer Account Data Engine [CADE] 

will permit daily rather than weekly updating of individual tax accounts. With CADE as its centerpiece, systems modernization by 

the IRS promotes enhanced customer service, more expeditious refund processing, and better administration of the tax system. 

The Committee views a reduction in funding for Business Systems Modernization as highly imprudent and short-sighted given 
30 

the progress made to date and the long-term benefits that the new 

systems will provide. The Committee expects that of the funds recommended for the Business Systems Modernization account, not 

less than $78,000,000 should be for continued development of the 

Customer Account Data Engine [CADE] project, not less than 

$35,500,000 should be for Accounts Management Services, and not 

less than $35,000,000 should be for Modernized e-File. 

The Committee continues to believe that BSM is the IRS’s highest management and administrative priority. As one of the Federal 

Government’s largest, most visible, and sensitive modernization efforts, managing the risks inherent in BSM will require vigilant 

management attention for several years. To the IRS’s credit, the 

program has made steady progress over the past few years. 

The Committee is dismayed that the budget request fails to reflect the criticality of continued progress in modernizing IRS’s outmoded tax administration and financial systems. The Committee is 

concerned about potential setbacks to needed progress as a result 

of reduced funding. Furthermore, the Committee is cognizant of the 

cost implications of any delays in releasing components of the BSM 

deliverables and appreciates regular progress updates and quarterly briefings. 

HEALTH INSURANCE TAX CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $15,235,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 15,406,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 15,406,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides operating funds to administer the 

advance payment feature of a refundable Trade Adjustment Assistance health insurance tax credit program to assist dislocated workers with their health insurance premiums. The tax credit program 

was enacted by the Trade Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–210) and 

became effective in August 2003. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides the budget request 

level of $15,406,000 for the Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration in fiscal year 2009. This amount is $171,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level, and the same as the budget request. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

The Committee has included four administrative provisions carried in prior appropriations acts and two new administrative provisions. The administrative provisions are as follows: 

Section 101 continues a provision allowing the IRS to transfer up 

to 5 percent of any appropriation made available to the Agency in 

fiscal year 2009 to any other IRS account, with the exception of the 

Enforcement account, which is limited to 3 percent. The IRS is directed to follow the Committee’s reprogramming procedures outlined earlier in this report. 

Section 102 continues a provision maintaining a training program in taxpayers’ rights and cross-cultural relations. 
31 

Section 103 continues a provision requiring the IRS to institute 

and enforce policies and procedures, which will safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information. 

Section 104 continues a provision directing that funds shall be 

available for improved facilities and increased staffing to support 

a 1–800 help line service for taxpayers. 

Section 105 is a new provision designating not less than $6,997,000,000 for enhanced tax enforcement to address the Federal tax gap and an additional $490,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Service for enhanced tax enforcement activities. This provision is consistent with section 312(c)(2)(B) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2009 (House Report 110–659). 

Section 106 is a new provision that prohibits the use of funds in 

this act to enter into, renew, extend, administer, implement, enforce, provide oversight of, or make any payment related to any 

qualified tax collection contract. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

The Committee includes 10 administrative provisions carried 

over from prior appropriations acts and two new administrative 

provisions. The administrative provisions are as follows: 

Section 107 authorizes certain basic services within the Treasury 

Department in fiscal year 2009, including purchase of uniforms; 

maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of insurance for official motor vehicles operated in foreign countries; and contracts 

with the Department of State for health and medical services to 

employees and their dependents serving in foreign countries. 

Section 108 authorizes transfers, up to 2 percent, between Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Financial Management Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Bureau of the Public 

Debt appropriations under certain circumstances. 

Section 109 authorizes transfer, up to 2 percent, between the Internal Revenue Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 

Administration under certain circumstances. 

Section 110 requires that the purchase of law enforcement vehicles be consistent with departmental vehicle management principles. 

Section 111 prohibits the Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing from redesigning the $1 Federal 

Reserve Note. 

Section 112 authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to transfer 

funds from Salaries and Expenses, Financial Management Service, 

to the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover the costs of debt 

collection. Such amounts shall be reimbursed to the Salaries and 

Expenses account from debt collections received in the Debt Collection Fund. 

Section 113 extends for 1 year the authority to conduct a personnel management demonstration project. 

Section 114 requires prior approval for the construction and operation of a museum by the United States Mint. 

Section 115 prohibits the merger of the United States Mint and 

the Bureau of Engraving and Printing without prior approval of 

the committees of jurisdiction. 
32 

Section 116 is a provision that authorizes the Department’s intelligence activities. 

Section 117 permits the Department of the Treasury to transfer, 

among the Treasury Financial Management Services, Internal Revenue Service Taxpayer Services, and Internal Revenue Service Operations Support accounts, funds provided in Public Law 110–185 

to carry out the stimulus tax rebates. Such transfer authority is intended to facilitate administration of the program and is subject to 

advance notification to the Committees on Appropriations. However, any transfer of funds exceeding $5,000,000 is subject to advance approval of the Committee on Appropriations. 

Section 118 permits the Bureau of Engraving and printing to use $5,000 from the Industrial Revolving Fund for reception and representation expenses. 
(33) 

TITLE II 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS 

APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

COMPENSATION OF THE PRESIDENT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $450,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 450,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 450,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the compensation of the President, including an expense allowance as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 102. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $450,000 for 

compensation of the President, including an expense allowance of 

$50,000. This is the same as the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

the same as the budget estimate. The expense account is for official 

use as authorized by title 3, United States Code and is not considered taxable to the President. The bill specifies that any unused 

amount shall revert to the Treasury consistent with 31 U.S.C. 

1552. 

WHITE HOUSE OFFICE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $51,656,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 52,499,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White House of $190,078,000, 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The ‘‘Salaries and Expenses’’ account of the White House Office 

provides staff assistance and administrative services for the direct 

support of the President. The office also serves as the President’s 

representative before the media. In accordance with 3 U.S.C. 105, 

the office also supports and assists the activities of the spouse of 

the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $52,499,000 for 

White House Office Salaries and Expenses. The recommendation is 

$843,000 more than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and is equal 

to certain assumptions in the budget estimate. 
34 

The Committee has rejected the administration’s request to include many of the offices under the Executive Office of the President under a single, consolidated account, including this account. 

The Committee objects to the overall proposal since it would undermine the ability of the Congress to exercise adequate oversight regarding how these funds are expended. 

EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $12,814,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,363,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White House of $190,078,000 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds provide for the care, maintenance, repair, alteration, 

refurnishing, improvement, air-conditioning, heating, and lighting 

of the White House and the official and ceremonial functions of the 

President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,363,000 for 

the Executive Residence at the White House. The Committee recommendation is $549,000 more than the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level and is equal to certain assumptions in the budget estimate. 

The administration’s request includes many of the accounts under 

the Executive Office of the President under a single, consolidated 

account, including this account. The Committee objects to the overall proposal since it would undermine the ability of the Congress 

to exercise adequate oversight regarding how these funds are expended. The accompanying bill also continues certain restrictions 

on reimbursable expenses for use of the Executive Residence. 

WHITE HOUSE REPAIR AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,600,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,600,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White House of $190,078,000 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account funds the repair, alteration, and improvement of 

the Executive Residence at the White House. A separate account 

was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and track expenditures for the capital improvement projects at the Executive Residence at the White House. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,600,000 for 

White House Repair and Restoration, the same amount as assumed 

in the overall budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2008 

enacted level. 
35 

COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,118,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,118,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts for the White House of $190,078,000 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Council of Economic Advisers analyzes the national economy 

and its various segments, advises the President on economic developments, recommends policies for economic growth and stability, 

appraises economic programs and policies of the Federal Government, and assists in the preparation of the annual Economic Report of the President to Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,118,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers. This 

amount is the same as the amount assumed in the overall budget 

request and is equal to the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

OFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,482,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,250,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts of the White House of $190,078,000 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Policy Development supports the National Economic Council and the Domestic Policy Council in carrying out 

their responsibilities to advise and assist the President in the formulation, coordination, and implementation of economic and domestic policy. The Office of Policy Development also provides support for other domestic policy development and implementation activities as directed by the President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $5,250,000 for the Office of Policy 

Development. This is $1,700,000 higher than the amount assumed 

in the budget request and $1,768,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. The administration’s request includes many of the accounts under the Executive Office of the President under a single, 

consolidated account, including this account. The Committee objects to the overall proposal since it would undermine the ability 

of the Congress to exercise adequate oversight regarding how these 

funds are expended. 

The recommendation includes $1,400,000 for the Office of Policy 

Development to develop and implement a domestic AIDS strategy. 

The Committee is concerned that the Office of National AIDS Pol-
36 

icy has been eliminated under the current administration. Yet, reports indicate that HIV infection rates in the United States have 

not declined in over a decade and that half of those living with 

HIV/AIDS in the United States are not receiving adequate health 

care. The Committee is perplexed that although countries receiving 

assistance from the United States are required develop an AIDS 

strategy for improving results, the administration has made no 

such effort for the United States in recent years. The Committee 

directs the Office of Policy Development to coordinate a government-wide effort to develop and implement a domestic AIDS strategy, including targets for improved prevention and treatment outcomes, and to issue a report to the Committee on Appropriations 

within 180 days of enactment on the activities the administration 

is conducting to develop a national AIDS strategy. 

Tobacco remains the number one preventable cause of death in 

the world, claiming the lives of more than 5 million people each 

year. In the United States, every year, tobacco causes the death of 

more than 438,000 Americans and costs more than 

$167,000,000,000 in both direct health care costs and lost productivity. The Committee believes that the Framework Convention on 

Tobacco Control is a comprehensive and coordinated approach to 

address the impact of tobacco on the public’s health. The United 

States is one of 168 countries that have signed the Framework 

Convention on Tobacco Control. The Committee urges the President to send the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control to the 

Senate for ratification. 

The Committee has provided $300,000 within the White House 

Office of Policy Development to support international symposiums 

to discuss ways to improve the relationship between faith and 

science. The participants shall include as many as 30 internationally-renowned scientists and theologians, equally divided. The symposiums should be open to the public. At the end of each symposium, the participants shall produce a written record of their discussions and the progress made in furthering the mutual respect 

of science and faith. The Committee directs that these reports be 

made available on www.whitehouse.gov. 

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $8,640,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,029,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts of the White House of $190,078,000 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Security Council advises the President in integrating domestic, foreign, and military policies related to national 

security. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,029,000 for 

the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council. This 
37 

amount is the same as assumed in the budget request and 

$389,000 more than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $91,745,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ( 1 ) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 95,633,000 

1The budget proposes a consolidation of most accounts of the White House of $190,078,000 

including this account. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Administration’s mission is to provide high-quality, 

cost-effective administrative services to the Executive Office of the 

President. These services, defined by Executive Order 12028 of 

1977, include financial, personnel, library and records services, information management systems support, and general office services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $95,633,000 for 

the Office of Administration for fiscal year 2009, an increase of 

$3,888,000 over the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and equal to the 

amount assumed in the budget request. 

The Committee has not included space rental costs for the Office 

of Management and Budget [OMB] and the Office of National Drug 

Control Policy [ONDCP] in this account. Funding for these costs is 

included within the accounts of the respective offices. 

The Committee supports the National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] in its efforts to make all appropriate electronic records public regardless of original formatting. The Committee is concerned, however, about the lack of information from 

the White House on the format and volume of records to be transferred for the current administration. This poses a significant challenge to NARA as it works to complete the documentation effort for 

the current administration. The Committee directs the Office of Administration to work closely to meet NARA requirements and deadlines so that a complete record is available for the next administration, the Congress, and the public. 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $78,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 72,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 80,172,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Management and Budget [OMB] assists the President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and other executive responsibilities. 
38 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $80,172,000 for 

the Office of Management and Budget which is $2,172,000 more 

than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $7,372,000 more than 

the amount specified in the budget request. 

Of the increase over the budget request, the Committee provides 

$200,000 for printing paper copies of the documents associated 

with the President’s annual budget request for submission to the 

Congress. The Committee has included space rental costs in this 

account, rather than in the Office of Administration as assumed in 

the budget request, which accounts for the remainder of the increase over the budget estimate. 

The Committee urges the President to establish the Task Force 

on International Cooperation for Clean and Efficient Technologies 

as required under section 916 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–140). 

The Committee reminds OMB of the report due to Congress no 

later than March 1, 2009, regarding the extent to which executive 

departments and agencies that administer directed funding allocate 

the designated amounts to intended recipients at a level less than 

specified in any enacted bill or accompanying report. 

The bill includes a general provision that directs all departments 

and agencies to include information in the fiscal year 2010 budget 

justifications submitted to Congress regarding redirection of congressionally directed funding. 

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $26,402,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 23,697,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 27,900,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of National Drug Control Policy [ONDCP], established 

by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and reauthorized by Public 

Law 109–469, is charged with developing policies, objectives, and 

priorities for the National Drug Control Program. In addition, 

ONDCP administers the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, the Drug-Free Communities Program, and several other related initiatives. 

This account provides funding for personnel compensation, travel, and other basic operations of the Office, and for general policy 

research to support the formulation of the National Drug Control 

Strategy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,900,000 for 

ONDCP’s salaries and expenses. This amount is $1,498,000 above 

the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $4,203,000 above the budget 

request. 
39 

An amount of $3,114,000 is provided under this heading for rental payments to the General Services Administration [GSA] instead 

of providing these funds under the heading ‘‘Office of Administration’’. 

The Committee does not agree with ONDCP’s proposal to reorganize 3 of the agency’s 12 components, therefore the Committee has 

again included a provision to continue the prohibition against the 

reorganization. 

Last year, the Committee requested numerous reports from 

ONDCP, many of which were considerably late, and one of which 

remains overdue as of the writing of this report. Furthermore, the 

Committee stated in various communications (orally and by bicameral and bipartisan letter) both last year and this year, that 

consultation with the Committee was expected prior to decisions regarding HIDTA funding, yet that still did not occur. 

ONDCP often disregards the intent of Congress; defying statutory law and directives enacted in previous legislation, such as not 

undoing the reorganization of the budget and CTAC offices. The 

Committee is aware that other entities requiring interaction with 

ONDCP have troubled relationships as well. 

Over a number of years, the Committee has asked ONDCP for 

information relating to such items as staffing levels, political appointees, and agency travel, and has received other input as well. 

The Committee is disturbed by such data as a result of these inquiries. In particular, the Committee finds that: 

From fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2008, ONDCP staffing 

levels have declined by approximately 14 percent to a current 

level of 106 employees, and both racial/ethnicity and female 

representation have declined significantly as a percentage of 

the total workforce. Political appointments (with the largest 

portion being Schedule C appointments) constitute almost a 

quarter of the workforce at this ‘‘non-partisan’’ organization, a 

level greater than other EOP components. Among career staff, 

the level of turnover in some years has raised concerns about 

continuity of leadership as well as sufficiency of expertise. 

Management policies and practices, particularly those relating 

to human capital, have resulted in a highly centralized and 

non-transparent structure. More than one-half of ONDCP employees report directly or secondarily to the chief of staff (a 

non-career SES position), while the deputy director of ONDCP, 

a Senate-confirmed Presidential appointee, has no supervisory 

responsibilities. With the likely departure of all political appointees by January 20, 2009, there will be a void in seniorlevel decisionmaking and institutional knowledge. 

Since its ill-advised and unapproved reorganization, staffing 

at ONDCP appears mismatched when comparing statutory responsibilities to funding. In particular, the Office of Performance and Budget, given its role in budget review and certification, is understaffed; and the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, given its limited annual budget, is excessively staffed. 

Like all components of the Executive Office of the President 

except OMB, ONDCP does not participate in OPM’s human 

capital survey. Nor does it conduct a comparable internal sur-
40 

vey of its employees to gain their input. While ONDCP conducts a customer service survey, it does not measure morale, 

job satisfaction, career development opportunities, leadership, 

or Equal Employment Opportunity issues. Furthermore, 

ONDCP does not conduct exit interviews, as recommended by 

PriceWaterhouseCoopers in its 2000 report to ONDCP. Therefore, neither ONDCP nor the Committee has a solid basis upon 

which to measure the health of the organization or the quality 

of the work environment. 

During the period from fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 

2007, travel by ONDCP political appointees increased disproportionately as a percentage of total ONDCP travel. Travel 

expenditures by political appointees for the agency peaked in 

fiscal year 2006. 

As a result of these concerns as well as others, the Committee directed in the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill that 

the National Academy of Public Administration and GAO conduct independent reviews of ONDCP. 

In addition, the Committee believes that an independent review 

of ONDCP’s grant-based programs is necessary to determine 

whether Federal resources are being adequately utilized to develop 

common metrics against which program health and outcomes can 

be assessed, and to facilitate the transfer of effective practices. 

Given that ONDCP has not consistently maintained an internal 

program review capability, the Committee believes that this type 

of evaluation is long overdue. Therefore, the Committee includes a 

provision in the bill providing funding for ONDCP to contract with 

the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA] to develop 

a framework and test it against selected ONDCP grant-based programs. The study shall be completed by the end of fiscal year 2009. 

COUNTERDRUG TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CENTER

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center [CTAC] was established by the Counter-Narcotics Technology Act of 1990 (Public 

Law 101–510) and reauthorized in 1998 (Public Law 105–277) to 

serve as the central counterdrug technology research and development organization for the United States Government. Historically, 

CTAC has encompassed two separate functions: (1) the Research 

and Development program [R&D], which supports improvements to 

counterdrug capabilities that transcend the need of any single Federal agency; and (2) the Technology Transfer Program [TTP], which 

provides state-of-the-art, affordable, easily integrated and maintainable tools to enhance the capabilities of State and local law enforcement agencies for counterdrug missions. 
41 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Due to the lackluster performance of, and lack of confidence in, 

the current director of this program, the Committee continues to 

refuse to invest higher levels of funding in the two stated functions 

of the CTAC program. 

Due to the need to augment reduced requested funding levels in 

other important drug control programs in the fiscal year 2009 

budget, the Committee is constrained to provide additional resources for this program. However, the Committee remains hopeful 

that the fiscal year 2010 budget will reinvigorate the CTAC program with additional requested funds and new leadership, allowing 

this once valuable program to again flourish. The Committee notes 

that the fiscal year 2003 funding level for CTAC was $46,538,000. 

FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $230,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 200,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 235,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas [HIDTA] program 

was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 

100–690) and the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s reauthorization (Public Law 109–469) to provide assistance to Federal, 

State, and local law enforcement entities operating in those areas 

most adversely affected by drug trafficking. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $235,000,000 for 

the HIDTA program, an increase of $5,000,000 over the fiscal year 

2008 level and $35,000,000 more than the budget request. With the 

increased funding, the Committee expects ONDCP to provide a program adjustment for HIDTAs that qualify under performance 

measurement criteria to be distributed on an equal percent basis 

for qualifying HIDTAs, excluding HIDTAs that received at least a 

$100,000 program adjustment bringing them up to $3,000,000 in 

fiscal year 2007. ONDCP is directed to consult with the HIDTAs 

in advance of deciding programmatic spending allocations for discretionary (supplemental) funding. As a result of the many new 

counties established with fiscal year 2007 funds, ONDCP provided 

no funding for new counties in fiscal year 2008 with the Committee’s concurrence, and for fiscal year 2009, the Committee suggests 

that $500,000 may be provided for new counties if the need is warranted and the criteria has been met. 

The Committee recommendation specifies that up to $2,100,000 

may be used for auditing services and associated activities, and up 

to $250,000 shall be used to ensure the continued operation and 

maintenance of the Performance Management System. 
42 

The Committee directs that funding shall be provided for the existing HIDTAs at no less than the fiscal year 2008 initial allocation 

level (as revised by the letter from the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy to the Committees on Appropriations of 

the House of Representatives and the Senate dated April 8, 2008) 

or $3,000,000, whichever is greater; and no High Intensity Drug 

Trafficking Area shall receive more than $47,457,447 as its fiscal 

year 2009 initial allocation level, unless the Director submits to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, and the Committees approve, a request for reprogramming of the funds based on 

clearly articulated priorities for the HIDTA program, as well as 

published ONDCP performance measures of effectiveness. The 

Committee directs that the HIDTA funds be transferred to the appropriate drug control agencies expeditiously and includes provisions in the bill to prevent delay. 

The Committee recognizes the National HIDTA Assistance Center for providing programmatic support to the HIDTA program to 

include training, financial management/audit review, and other essential services. 

The Committee includes a new provision allowing unexpended 

funds obligated prior to 2 years ago for programs addressing the 

treatment or prevention of drug use to be used for other approved 

HIDTA activities upon 30-days notification to the Committee. 

In allocating HIDTA funds, the Committee expects the Director 

of ONDCP to ensure that the entities receiving these limited resources make use of them strictly for implementing the strategy for 

each HIDTA, taking into consideration local conditions and resource requirements. In this regard, methamphetamine is a primary illicit drug threat across the country. Its widespread use and 

resulting addiction, combined with the overwhelming availability of 

high purity, low cost methamphetamine is cause for serious concern. Cocaine and heroin also represent significant threats and Ecstasy is an increasing danger. Marijuana is readily available and 

widely abused across the United States. The prevalence of Canadian-produced marijuana, commonly known as BC Bud, and potent 

marijuana from the Appalachian States are two examples that 

demonstrate the need for and value of marijuana eradication programs. 

The HIDTA funds should not be used to supplant existing support for ongoing Federal, State, or local drug control operations 

normally funded out of the operating budgets of each agency. 

ONDCP is directed to withhold all HIDTA funds from a State until 

such time as a State or locality has met its financial obligation. 

OTHER FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $164,300,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 189,685,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 204,250,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100–690), and the 

Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act (Public 
43 

Law 109–469) established this account to be administered by the 

Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. The funds 

appropriated to the program support high-priority drug control programs and may be transferred to drug control agencies. 

This account includes the following programs: National Youth 

Anti-Drug Media Campaign, Drug-Free Communities Support Program, National Drug Court Institute, U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, 

World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] membership dues, National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws, and Performance Measures Development. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $204,250,000 for 

Other Federal Drug Control Programs, which is $39,950,000 more 

than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $14,565,000 more than 

the budget request. Within this amount, the Committee provides 

the following funding levels: 

Amount 

National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign ........................................................................................................ $100,000,000 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program ........................................................................................................... 90,000,000 

National Community Anti-Drug Coalition training .............................................................................................. 2,000,000 

National Drug Court Institute .............................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 

U.S. Anti-Doping Agency ...................................................................................................................................... 9,600,000 

World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA] ....................................................................................................................... 1,900,000 

National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws ..................................................................................................... 1,250,000 

Performance Measures Development ................................................................................................................... 500,000 

National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.—The Committee 

has provided consistent monetary support for the National Youth 

Anti-Drug Media Campaign since it was initially funded by Congress in fiscal year 1998. The Committee continues to be concerned 

about the direction and efficacy of the Media Campaign as it is currently structured, and notes that independent reports have concluded that the Media Campaign has not had a demonstrable nationwide effect on reducing drug use among the Campaign’s target 

population. Furthermore, the GAO confirms that the Media Campaign has not been effective in reducing youth drug use. The Committee is concerned that meth is having a disproportional impact 

on our rural communities, rendering the addiction an epidemic in 

the lives of so many Americans from the Nation’s farmlands, reservations, and small towns. Most of these communities, because 

they are located outside of urban areas, lack the comprehensive 

support services needed to effectively address the addiction and its 

devastating grip on so many families. The Committee provides 

$100,000,000 for the Media Campaign, of which at least 

$10,000,000 shall be for meth prevention ads. The Committee directs that no more than 10 percent of the funding provided for the 

Media Campaign be used for administrative costs. ONDCP is encouraged to work with State and local governments to increase visibility of the Media Campaign. In order to combat methamphetamine abuse within scarce resources, the Committee encourages 

ONDCP, to the degree possible, to focus meth prevention advertising on geographic areas with the highest level of drug problem 

within a State. ONDCP is encouraged to use research-based adver-
44 

tising campaigns and to collaborate with statewide or regional 

meth prevention programs when possible. 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program.—ONDCP directs the 

Drug-Free Communities Support Program [DFCSP] in partnership 

with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. DFCSP provides dollar for dollar matching grants of up to 

$125,000 to local coalitions that mobilize their communities to prevent youth alcohol, tobacco, illicit drug, and inhalant abuse. Such 

grants support coalitions of youth; parents; media; law enforcement; school officials; faith-based organizations; fraternal organizations; State, local, and tribal government agencies; healthcare professionals; and other community representatives. The DFCSP enables these coalitions to strengthen their coordination and prevention efforts, encourage citizen participation in substance abuse reduction efforts, and disseminate information about effective programs. The Committee provides $90,000,000 for the continuation of 

the DFCSP. 

The Committee includes a provision in the bill directing ONDCP to provide $2,000,000 of DFCSP funds for training and related purposes as authorized by section 4 of Public Law 107–82, as amended 

by Public Law 109–469. 

The Committee includes a provision, at the request of the authorizing committee, clarifying the intent of sec. 802 of Public Law 

109–469 (21 U.S.C. § 1521, et seq.) that renewal grantees found to 

be ineligible for continuation funding under the Drug Free Communities Act are required to be afforded a fair, timely, and independent appeals process prior to any determination that a renewal 

grantee is ineligible or otherwise not entitled to continuation funding. 

United States Anti-Doping Agency.—The United States AntiDoping Agency [USADA] is the independent anti-doping agency for 

Olympic sports in the United States, and is responsible for managing the testing and adjudication process for U.S. Olympic, Pan 

Am and Paralympic athletes. As a nonprofit corporation under the 

leadership of an independent Board of Directors, USADA has the 

authority to set forth guiding principles in anti-doping policy and 

to enforce any doping violations. In addition to managing collection 

and testing procedures, USADA is also responsible for enhancing 

research efforts and promoting educational programs to inform athletes of the rules governing the use of performance enhancing substances, as well as the ethics of doping and its harmful health effects. 

The Committee provides $9,600,000 for USADA, which is the 

same as the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $2,315,000 more 

than the budget request. 

World Anti-Doping Agency.—ONDCP represents the United 

States in the World Anti-Doping Agency [WADA], which promotes 

and coordinates international activities against doping in all forms 

of sports. The Committee provides $1,900,000 for membership dues 

to the WADA. 

National Drug Court Institute.—The National Drug Court Institute facilitates the growth of the drug court movement by promoting and disseminating education, research, and scholarship concerning drug court programs and providing a comprehensive drug 
45 

court training series for practitioners. Drug courts provide an effective means to fight drug-related crime through the cooperative efforts of State and local law enforcement, the judicial system, and 

the public health treatment network. The Committee provides 

$1,000,000 for the National Drug Court Institute. 

National Alliance For Model State Drug Laws.—The National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws [NAMSDL] is a national organization that drafts, researches, and analyzes model drug and alcohol 

laws and related State statutes, provides access to a national network of drug and alcohol experts, and facilitates working relationships among State and community leaders and drug and alcohol 

professionals. In doing so, NAMSDL encourages States to adopt 

and implement laws, policies, and regulations to reduce drug trafficking, drug use, and their related consequences. The Committee 

provides $1,250,000 to NAMSDL and directs ONDCP to provide the 

entire amount directly to NAMSDL within 30 days after enactment 

of this act. 

National Drug Control Performance Measures.—Performance 

Measures funding is used to conduct evaluation research for assessing the effectiveness of the National Drug Control Strategy. The 

Committee provides $500,000 for this program and directs ONDCP 

to outline and submit to the Committee a detailed plan for projects 

that assess the effectiveness of the strategy in achieving its goals 

and objectives, and develop and improve needed data sources, including specific funding levels, no later than 120 days after enactment of this act. 

UNANTICIPATED NEEDS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds enable the President to meet unanticipated exigencies in support of the national interest, security, or defense. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 which is equal to the 

amount appropriated in fiscal year 2008 and the same as the budget request. 

PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... $8,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 8,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account supports the Office of Administration for expenses 

associated with the transition to the next Presidential administration. 
46 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,000,000 for 

Presidential Transition Administrative Support, which is equal to 

the budget estimate. The account was not funded in fiscal year 

2008 because there was no presidential transition in that year. 

SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE PRESIDENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,432,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 4,496,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,496,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides for staff and expenses to enable the 

Vice President to provide assistance to the President in connection 

with the performance of executive duties and responsibilities. The 

Vice President also has a staff funded by the Senate to assist him 

in the performance of his legislative duties. These funds also support the official activities of the spouse of the Vice President. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,496,000 for 

special assistance to the President. This amount is the same as the 

budget request and $64,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level. 

OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $320,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 323,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 323,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account supports the care and operation of the Vice President’s residence on the grounds of the Naval Observatory. These 

funds specifically support equipment, furnishings, dining facilities, 

and services required to perform and discharge the Vice President’s 

official duties, functions, and obligations. 

Funds to renovate the residence are provided through the Department of the Navy budget. The Committee has had a longstanding interest in the condition of the residence and expects to 

be kept fully apprised by the Vice President’s office of any and all 

renovations and alterations made to the residence by the Navy. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $323,000 for the 

official residence of the Vice President. This amount is the same as 

the budget request and $3,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level. 
47 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE

PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

Section 201 continues a provision that provides flexibility in the 

use of funds in accounts under the Executive Office of the President. 

Section 202 requires a detailed financial plan by the Director of 

the ONDCP prior to the obligation of funds in fiscal year 2009. 

Section 203 allows for the transfer of up to 2 percent among programs within ONDCP. 

Section 204 establishes reprogramming requirements for 

ONDCP. 

Section 205 provides that in fiscal year 2009 and thereafter, 

funds provided for the Office of Management and Budget shall support the costs of the printing of a sufficient number of copies of the 

documents associated with the President’s annual budget request 

for submission to the Congress. 
(48) 

TITLE III 

THE JUDICIARY 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Established under Article III of the Constitution, the judicial 

branch of Government is a separate but equal branch. The Federal 

Judiciary consists of the Supreme Court, United States Courts of 

Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, Court of International Trade, Court of Federal Claims, and several other entities 

and programs. The organization of the judiciary, the district and 

circuit boundaries, the places of holding court, and the number of 

Federal judges are legislated by the Congress and signed into law 

by the President. 

The Committee’s recommended funding levels support the Federal judiciary’s role of providing equal justice under the law and include sufficient funds to support this critical mission. The recommended funding level includes the salaries of judges and support staff and the operation and security of our Nation’s courts. 

The judicial branch is reminded that it, too, is subject to the 

same funding constraints facing the executive and legislative 

branches and continues to urge the Federal judiciary to devote its 

resources primarily to the retention of staff. Further, the judiciary 

is encouraged to contain controllable costs such as travel, construction, and other non-essential expenses. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $66,526,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 69,777,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 69,776,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices appointed under Article III of the Constitution of the United States, 

one of whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United States. 

The Supreme Court acts as the final arbiter in the Federal court 

system. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $69,776,000 for 

the Justices, their supporting personnel, and the costs of operating 

the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the building and grounds. 

The recommendation is $3,250,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and approximately the same as the request. 
49 

CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $12,201,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 18,447,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 18,447,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Care of the Building and Grounds, for expenditure by the Architect of the Capitol, provides for the structural and mechanical care 

of the Unites States Supreme Court Building and Grounds, including maintenance and operation of mechanical, electrical, and electronic equipment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,447,000 for 

personnel and other services related to the Supreme Court building 

and grounds, which is supervised by the Architect of the Capitol. 

The recommendation is $6,246,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and identical to the budget request. The Committee directs the Court to report to the Committee no later than 90 days 

after enactment of this act on its construction and modernization 

plans and to update the Committee as the Court becomes aware of 

any changes in schedule or budgetary needs. 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $27,072,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 32,357,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 31,482,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was 

established under Article III of the Constitution on October 1, 

1982. The court was formed by the merger of the United States 

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the appellate division of 

the United States Court of Claims. The court consists of 12 judges 

who are appointed by the President, with the advice and consent 

of the Senate. Judges are appointed to the court under Article III 

of the Constitution of the United States. 

The Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction in a variety of 

subject matter, including international trade, government contracts, patents, certain claims for money from the United States 

Government, Federal personnel, and veterans’ benefits. Appeals to 

the court come from all Federal district courts, the United States 

Court of Federal Claims, the United States Court of International 

Trade, and the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. The court 

also takes appeals of certain administrative agencies’ decisions, including the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Board of Contract 

Appeals, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and the 

Trademark Trial and Appeals Board. Decisions of the United 

States International Trade Commission, the Office of Compliance of 

the United States Congress, and the Government Accountability 

Office Personnel Appeals Board are also reviewable by the court. 
50 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,482,000. 

The recommendation is $4,410,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level, and $875,000 below the budget request. 

Of the amount provided, the Committee has provided funding for 

leased space for three senior judges and associated staffing for one 

senior judge instead of providing leased space for five judges eligible for senior status but who have not yet expressed an intention 

to do so in fiscal year 2009, and associated staffing for three judges. 

The Committee urges judges eligible for senior status to declare 

their intention at the earliest possible opportunity in order to maximize leased space opportunities. 

U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $16,632,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 19,622,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 19,605,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Court of International Trade, located in New 

York City, consists of nine Article III judges. The court has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions brought against the 

United States, its agencies and officers, and certain civil actions 

brought by the United States, arising out of import transactions 

and the administration and enforcement of the Federal customs 

and international trade laws. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $19,605,000. 

The recommendation is $2,973,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and consistent with the Judiciary’s re-estimate of fiscal 

year 2009 requirements. 

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL

SERVICES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 1 ........................................................................... $4,619,262,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 4,963,091,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,832,760,000 

1Of this amount, $14,500,000 was designated as emergency funding. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Salaries and Expenses is one of four accounts that provide total 

funding for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services. In addition to funding the salaries of judges and support staff, this account also funds the operating costs of appellate, 

district, and bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, and 

probation and pretrial services offices. 
51 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,832,760,000. 

The recommendation is $213,498,000 above the fiscal year 2008 

funding level and $130,331,000 below the budget request. 

Judiciary’s Efforts To Contain Costs and Control Rent.—The 

Committee has long noted its concern about the rising costs associated with the Judiciary’s rent bill. For example, in Senate Report 

109–109, accompanying the fiscal year 2006 appropriations bill, the 

Committee expressed support for the Judiciary’s efforts to work 

with the General Services Administration to find ways to reduce 

rising rent costs and to reduce this rapidly-growing burden, and 

urged the Judicial Conference to continue to carefully consider the 

size and scope of future construction projects as well as to consider 

other remedies. 

In Senate Report 109–495, accompanying the fiscal year 2007 appropriations bill, the Committee encouraged the Judicial Conference to ensure that adequate checks remain in place to guarantee that future construction requests and projects are subjected 

to the highest standards of cost-efficiencies. A June 2006 GAO report noted that there were then no incentives for district and circuit courts to make more efficient use of their space. The Administrative Office was directed to report on steps taken to encourage 

more efficient use of space by district and circuit courts. 

In Senate Report 110–129, accompanying the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill, the Committee acknowledged the cost containment measures undertaken by the judiciary and strongly urged the 

continuation of those efforts. The Administrative Office was directed to report on steps taken to encourage more efficient use of 

space by district and circuit courts. 

In its report, the Administrative Office indicated the following 

initiatives were underway to further control rent costs and to encourage more efficient use of space by district and circuit courts: 

—In September 2006, the Judicial Conference set an annual rent 

cap for future rent requirements at an average annual growth 

rate of 4.9 percent for fiscal years 2009 through 2016. 

—In September 2007, the Judicial Conference approved creation 

of the Circuit Rent Budget [CRB] program. The CRB is designed to promote greater discipline in the management of the 

Judiciary’s use of space by aligning, at the circuit council level, 

the budget responsibility for rent, with the authority to determine space need. 

With the Judicial Conference’s adoption of the CRB program, 

rent budgets are now allocated to the circuits to cover the cost of 

space, and each circuit council must now choose to fund only those 

space expansion projects which the council can afford. The CRB initiative provides several incentives to encourage efficient space use 

decisions by circuit and district courts. For example, an incentive 

for space relinquishment allows the circuit to capture the value of 

rental costs savings associated with space relinquishment, for use 

to pay for new space in another location. This enables the court 

units to surrender nonutilized or underutilized space, and capture 

the value of the rent savings for use where space is truly needed. 
52 

The Committee understands that, at its September 2008 meeting, the Judicial Conference will act on the recommendations of its 

Space and Facilities Committee with regard to the Circuit Rent 

Budget program, including the Third Circuit’s rent budget request. 

The Committee expects the Easton Courthouse to remain open 

until the opening of the new court facility in Lancaster County, 

Pennsylvania. 

VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,099,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 4,253,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,253,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Enacted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 

(Public Law 99–660), the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is 

a Federal no-fault program designed to resolve a perceived crisis in 

vaccine tort liability claims that threatened the continued availability of childhood vaccines nationwide. The statute’s primary intention is the creation of a more efficient adjudicatory mechanism 

that ensures a no-fault compensation result for those allegedly injured or killed by certain covered vaccines. This program protects 

the availability of vaccines in the United States by diverting a substantial number of claims from the tort arena. 

Not only did this act create a special fund to pay judgments 

awarded under the act, but it also created the Office of Special 

Masters [OSM] within the United States Court of Federal Claims 

to hear vaccine injury cases. The act stipulates that up to eight 

special masters may be appointed for this purpose. The special 

masters expenditures are reimbursed to the judiciary for vaccine 

injury cases from a special fund set up under the Vaccine Act. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,253,000. The 

recommendation is $154,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding 

level and consistent with the budget request. 

DEFENDER SERVICES

Appropriations, 2008 1 ........................................................................... $846,101,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 911,408,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 854,204,000 

1Of this amount, $10,500,000 was designated as emergency funding. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Defender Services program ensures the right to counsel 

guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, the Criminal Justice Act (18 

U.S.C. 3006A(e)) and other congressional mandates for those who 

cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense services. The Criminal Justice Act provides that courts appoint counsel 

from Federal public and community defender organizations or from 

a panel of private attorneys established by the court. The Defender 

Services program helps to maintain public confidence in the Nation’s commitment to equal justice under the law and ensures the 
53 

successful operation of the constitutionally based adversary system 

of justice by which Federal criminal laws and federally guaranteed 

rights are enforced. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $854,204,000. 

The recommendation is $8,103,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and $57,204,000 below the budget request. 

Panel Attorney Pay Rates.—The Committee has increased the 

non-capital panel attorney rate per hour from $100 to $102 as well 

as the capital panel attorney rate per hour from $170 to $174 in 

fiscal year 2009. 

FEES OF JURORS AND COMMISSIONERS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $63,081,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 62,206,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 62,206,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the statutory fees and allowances of 

grand and petit jurors and for the compensation of jury and land 

commissioners. Budgetary requirements depend primarily upon the 

volume and the length of jury trials demanded by parties to both 

civil and criminal actions and the number of grand juries being 

convened by the courts at the request of the United States Attorneys. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,206,000. 

The recommendation is $875,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 

funding level and consistent with the budget request. 

COURT SECURITY

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $410,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 439,915,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 428,004,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Court Security appropriation was established in 1983 and 

funds the necessary expenses incident to the provision of protective 

guard services, and the procurement, installation, and maintenance 

of security systems and equipment for United States courthouses 

and other facilities housing Federal court operations, including 

building access control, inspection of mail and packages, directed 

security patrols, perimeter security provided by the Federal Protective Service, and other similar activities as authorized by section 

1010 of the Judicial Improvement and Access to Justice Act (Public 

Law 100–702). 
54 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $428,004,000. 

The recommendation is $18,004,000 above the fiscal year 2008 

funding level and $11,911,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee recommends funding for new U.S. Marshals 

Service positions as well as requested reimbursements to the Marshals Service. 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $76,036,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 81,959,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 79,049,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Administrative Office [AO] of the United States Courts was 

created in 1939 by an Act of Congress. It serves the Federal judiciary in carrying out its constitutional mission to provide equal justice under the law. Beyond providing numerous services to the Federal courts, the AO provides support and staff counsel to the Judicial Conference of the United States and its committees, and implements Judicial Conference policies as well as applicable Federal 

statutes and regulations. The AO is the focal point for communication and coordination within the judiciary and with Congress, the 

executive branch, and the public on behalf of the judiciary. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $79,049,000. 

This recommendation is $3,013,000 above the fiscal year 2008 

funding level and $2,910,000 below the budget request. 

FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $24,187,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 25,759,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 25,468,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Judicial Center, located in Washington, DC, improves the management of Federal judicial dockets and court administration through education for judges and staff and research, 

evaluation, and planning assistance for the courts and the Judicial 

Conference. The Center’s responsibilities include educating judges 

and other judicial branch personnel about legal developments and 

efficient litigation management and court administration. Additionally, the Center also analyzes the efficacy of case and court management procedures and ensures the Federal judiciary is aware of 

the methods of best practice. 
55 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,468,000. 

The recommendation is $1,281,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and $291,000 below the budget request. 

The Committee has included half the funds requested for both 

education, research, and technology, as well as education and training enhancements. The Committee directs the Federal Judicial 

Center to keep the Committee apprised of staff brought on board 

throughout fiscal years 2008 and 2009. 

JUDICIAL RETIREMENT FUNDS

PAYMENT TO JUDICIARY TRUST FUNDS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $65,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 76,140,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 76,140,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The funds in this account cover the estimated future benefit payments to be made to retired bankruptcy judges and magistrate 

judges, claims court judges, and spouses and dependent children of 

deceased judicial officers. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,140,000 for 

payments to the Judicial Officers’ Retirement Fund and the Claims 

Court Judges Retirement Fund. The recommendation is 

$10,740,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and consistent 

with the budget request. 

UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $15,477,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 16,257,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 16,225,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Sentencing Commission establishes, reviews, 

and revises sentencing guidelines, policies, and practices for the 

Federal criminal justice system. The Commission is also required 

to monitor the operation of the guidelines and to identify and report necessary changes to the Congress. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,225,000. The recommendation is $748,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level and consistent with the Judiciary’s re-estimate of fiscal 

year 2009 requirements. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—THE JUDICIARY

The Committee recommends the following administrative provisions for the judiciary. 
56 

Section 301 allows the judiciary to expend funds for the employment of experts and consultative services. 

Section 302 allows the judiciary, subject to the Committee’s reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the amount that can be transferred into any one appropriation. 

Section 303 limits official reception and representation expenses 

incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United States to no 

more than $11,000. 

Section 304 requires the Administrative Office to submit an annual financial plan for the judiciary within 90 days of enactment 

of this act. 

Section 305 grants the judicial branch the same tenant alteration 

authorities as the executive branch. 

Section 306 provides authority for a court security pilot program. 

Section 307 authorizes the Director of the Administrative Office 

of the U.S. Courts to pay premium rate increases in the cost of 

Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance imposed after April 24, 

1999 for bankruptcy judges and territorial district court judges, 

upon reaching age 65, consistent with Article III judges and magistrate judges, effective January 7, 2008. 

Section 308 repeals the sunset provision in Section 407(a) of Public Law 109–115, making permanent certain contracting authorities 

to the Judiciary. 

Section 309 amends the Director of the Administrative Office of 

the U.S. Courts’ authorities with regard to the expenditure of funds 

for offender supervision. 

Section 310 allows for a salary adjustment for Justices and 

judges. 
(57) 

TITLE IV 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

FEDERAL PAYMENTS

FEDERAL FUNDS

A total of $722,023,000 in Federal funds are estimated to be 

available to the District of Columbia government, the District of 

Columbia Courts, the District of Columbia Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and other D.C. entities. This is 

$112,170,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$55,105,000 above the budget request. A total of $2,177,373,000 in 

Federal funds will be received by the District government from the 

various Federal grant programs, including Federal reimbursements 

from such programs as Medicaid and Medicare. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RESIDENT TUITION

SUPPORT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $33,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 35,100,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 35,100,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Resident Tuition Support program was created by the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–98), 

expanded through the District of Columbia College Access Improvement Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–157), and amended and reauthorized through Public Law 110–97. This program provides eligible college-bound District residents the opportunity to expand their 

higher education choices. 

Under the program, financial assistance is available to qualified 

District residents who attend public colleges outside of the District 

of Columbia, private postsecondary institutions in the District of 

Columbia, Maryland, or Virginia, or any historically black college 

or university. The private-school tuition grants are restricted to 

nonprofit institutions. Students who attend public schools receive 

assistance equal to the difference between the tuition paid by residents of the State in which the institution is located and the tuition charged to nonresident students, with an annual limit of 

$10,000 and a lifetime limit of $50,000. Private-school students receive a $2,500 maximum annual grant, with a lifetime limit of 

$12,500. 

Since its inception, the program has disbursed over $160,000,000 

for the benefit of over 12,775 District of Columbia residents. Thirty-eight percent of the grantees are the first members of their families to attend college. 
58 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $35,100,000 

for the resident tuition support program, an increase of $2,100,000 

over the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same as the budget 

request. The Committee understands that the program will have 

$200,000 in carryover funds available in fiscal year 2009. The Committee urges the State Education Office to continue its efforts to 

improve the college graduation rate of program participants. Because program costs have the potential of growing beyond a level 

for which increased Federal funding may be available and sustainable, the Committee directs the Mayor and the State Education Office to institute effective cost containment measures and regularly 

report to Congress on the effects of these efforts. The Committee 

further directs the District to fully explore non-Federal sources of 

additional funds to augment the Federal investment to meet program needs. As specified in Public Law 106–98 which established 

the program, the Committee directs the Mayor to address any insufficiency in funding through ratable reductions and other adjustments or prioritization considerations based on the income and 

need of eligible students. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND SECURITY COSTS

IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,352,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 15,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 15,400,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Due to the fact that the District of Columbia is the seat of the 

Federal Government and headquarters of many international organizations, District police, fire, and emergency personnel have had 

to provide security for a number of events. As the need for the District of Columbia to provide security increases, overtime costs for 

personnel escalate and divert local police from neighborhood patrols. The President has supported reimbursing the District for 

these costs. 

In addition, the District of Columbia National Guard, under the 

exclusive jurisdiction of the President of the United States, is specifically trained to support law enforcement during critical missions, such as demonstrations, Presidential inaugurations and funerals, and emergency services for weather-related contingencies. 

The D.C. Air Guard patrols the skies over the District on roundthe-clock alert. However, residency restrictions preclude a significant number of Guard members from eligibility for tuition assistance programs, which has severely hampered recruitment and retention efforts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a payment of $15,000,000 to the 

District of Columbia for the costs of providing public safety at 

events related to the presence of the national capital in the District 

of Columbia, for the costs of providing support requested by the 

United States Secret Service Division in carrying out their protec-
59 

tive duties under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for the costs of providing support to respond to immediate 

and specific terrorist threats or attacks in the District of Columbia 

or surrounding jurisdictions. 

In addition, the District may use any funds remaining from prior 

year appropriations under this heading. The District may use the 

payment to cover the costs of Executive transportation support including motorcades sand helicopter landings. The Committee directs the Mayor to provide an annual report to the Committee outlining the purposes and amounts expended using those funds, with 

the first report due no later than June 1, 2009. In addition, the Committee recommends $400,000 for a tuition 

assistance program for non-resident District of Columbia National 

Guard members. The total funding is $12,048,000 above the fiscal 

year 2008 enacted level and $400,000 above the budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $223,920,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 223,920,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 251,625,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33, title XI), the Federal 

Government is required to finance the District of Columbia Courts. 

This Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts funds the 

operations of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Superior 

Court, the Court System, and the Capital Improvement Program. 

Capital improvements include a complete renovation of the historic 

Old Courthouse, as well as design and renovation work on the H. 

Carl Moultrie I Courthouse and several other buildings in Judiciary Square. By law, the annual budget includes estimates of the 

expenditures for the operations of the Courts prepared by the Joint 

Committee on Judicial Administration and the President’s recommendation for funding the Courts’ operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts of $251,625,000, which is $27,705,000 above the 

fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $27,705,000 above the President’s budget request. This amount includes $13,983,000 for the 

Court of Appeals, $110,135,000 for the Superior Court, $57,002,000 

for the Court System, and $70,505,000 for capital improvements to 

courthouse facilities. 

For the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the Committee recommendation is $1,353,000 above the President’s recommended 

funding of $12,630,000, and will permit the Court of Appeals to 

make investments in equipment and furniture for the restored Old 

Courthouse scheduled to reopen in 2009, and to provide an increase 

in public transit subsidy benefits. The Committee recommendation 

for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia is $5,858,000 

above the President’s recommended funding of $104,277,000, and 

will permit the Court to enhance juvenile probation services 

through a community-based drop-in center to supervise youth, en-
60 

hance services for defendants with mental illness, and provide a 

rate increase for court interpreters. The Committee recommendation for the District of Columbia Court System is $1,576,000 above 

the President’s recommended funding of $55,426,000, and will permit the Court System to enhance juror technology and address 

human resources workforce planning in light of the increasing 

number of employees eligible for retirement. 

The Committee is disappointed that the President’s recommended funding for capital improvements does not adequately 

provide for critical renovations and improvements, particularly in 

the adult holding facilities and space occupied by the United States 

Marshals Service in the H. Carl Moultrie I Courthouse. The Committee recommendation for capital improvements provides 

$18,918,000 above the President’s recommendation of $51,587,000 

to address this concern. 

The Committee acknowledges that the courts have taken steps to 

address concerns about the substandard working conditions of the 

United States Marshals Service at the Moultrie Courthouse. The 

Committee provides as additional $18,918,000 above the President’s recommendation of $11,000,000 for renovation of the adult 

holding facility and the United States Marshals Service workspace. 

The Committee urges the District of Columbia Courts to continue 

progress on the plan to upgrade the conditions to an acceptable 

level. The Committee directs the District of Columbia Courts to 

keep the Committee regularly informed on the status of the renovations, including prompt notification of any significant cost increases 

or schedule delays. 

DEFENDER SERVICES IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $47,975,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 47,975,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 52,475,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The District of Columbia Courts appoint and compensate attorneys to represent persons who are financially unable to obtain such 

representation. The Defender Services programs provide counsel 

for indigent persons who are charged with criminal offenses, for 

family proceedings involving child abuse, neglect, and termination 

of parental rights, and for guardianship proceedings for protection 

of mentally incapacitated individuals and minors whose parents 

are deceased. 

In addition to legal representation, these programs provide indigent persons with services such as transcripts of court proceedings, 

expert witness testimony, foreign and sign language interpretation, 

and investigations and genetic testing. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $52,475,000 

for Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts. This is 

$4,500,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $4,500,000 

above the budget request. 

To promote access to justice and ensure that high quality legal 

representation remains available to the indigent in the District of 
61 

Columbia Courts, the Committee’s recommended increase provides 

for a compensation adjustment from $80 to $90 per hour for attorneys appointed to represent persons under the Criminal Justice Act 

[CJA], the Counsel for Child Abuse and Neglect [CCAN] program, 

and the Guardianship program. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER

SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $190,343,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 202,490,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 203,490,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA] 

for the District of Columbia is an independent Federal agency created by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105–33, title XI). CSOSA acquired the operational responsibilities for the former District agencies in charge of probation and parole, and houses the Pretrial 

Services Agency within its framework. The mission of CSOSA is to 

increase public safety, prevent crime, reduce recidivism, and support the fair administration of justice in close collaboration with 

the community. The CSOSA appropriation supports the Community Supervision Program which monitors or supervises approximately 15,000 offenders on a daily basis and the Pretrial Services 

Agency which monitors approximately 5,500 defendants at any 

given time. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $203,490,000, which is $13,147,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$1,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee notes that 

the increased resources will enable CSOSA to enhance the information technology capability and resources for the Community Supervision Program’s offender case management system [SMART] infrastructure and improve critical data sharing with CSOSA’s law enforcement partners. In addition, funds are provided to enable the 

Pretrial Services Agency to collaborate with the District of Columbia Superior Court and the Office of the Attorney General to address the unique problems and service requirements of mentally ill 

and substance abusing arrestees in misdemeanor and traffic cases. 

The Committee is concerned that even with the proposed budget 

increase, funding for CSOSA for offender contract treatment, including substance abuse, halfway-back residential sanctions, mental health and sex offender assessments, and transitional housing 

is constrained. 

The Committee is supportive of CSOSA’s efforts to successfully 

return ex-offenders to their communities. For a number of years, 

CSOSA has worked with grassroots, nonprofit providers of transitional housing, including faith-based organizations, that offer counseling, mentoring, and life skills training to men and women returning home from prison. The Committee notes that this is a 

model program for the Nation. The Committee provides an additional $1,000,000 above the President’s request and intends that 
62 

not less than $2,000,000 be available to continue and expand this 

important work. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $32,710,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 35,659,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 35,659,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Defender Service [PDS] for the District of Columbia, 

an independent organization established by a District of Columbia 

statute (16 D.C. Code 2–1601–1608), has a distinct mission to provide and promote quality legal representation services within the 

District of Columbia justice system. PDS provides legal representation to indigent adults and children facing loss of liberty and provides support in the form of training, consultation, and legal reference services to members of the local bar appointed as counsel 

in criminal, juvenile, and mental health cases involving indigent 

individuals. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment to the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia of $35,659,000, which 

is $2,949,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. The increased funding will support a new 

case management system as well as costs to secure space for relocation of the Public Defender Service’s Mental Health Division. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND

SEWER AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $8,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 14,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 16,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Approximately one-third of the District is served by a combined 

sewer system, constructed by the Federal Government in 1890, in 

which both sanitary waste and storm water flow through the same 

pipes. When the collection system or the Blue Plains treatment 

plant reach capacity, typically during periods of heavy rainfall, the 

system is designed to overflow the excess water. This mixture of 

sewage and storm water runoff is discharged to the Anacostia and 

Potomac Rivers, Rock Creek and tributary waters between 60 and 

75 times each year. Under a judicial consent decree, the Water and 

Sewer Authority is undertaking a 20-year, $2,200,000,000 sewer 

construction program to reduce combined sewer overflows [CSO]. 

The program includes deep underground storage tunnels, side tunnels to reduce flooding, pump station rehabilitation, and the elimination of over a dozen CSO outfalls along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers and Rock Creek. When completed in 2025, this project 

is expected to vastly improve water quality and significantly reduce 

debris in our Nation’s capital waterways. 
63 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $16,000,000, 

to be matched by at least $8,000,000 provided by the Water and 

Sewer Authority, to continue implementation of the Long-Term 

Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan. This is an increase of 

$8,000,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $2,000,000 

above the budget request. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING

COUNCIL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,300,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,774,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,774,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council for the District of Columbia [CJCC] is the primary forum in which District of Columbia 

criminal justice agencies can identify and address interagency coordination issues. Its mission is to address coordination difficulties 

among District of Columbia criminal justice agencies and address 

criminal justice issues, such as drugs, juvenile justice, halfway 

houses, information technology, and identification of arrestees. The 

CJCC was originally established pursuant to a Memorandum of 

Agreement in May 1998 and operates as an independent working 

group to foster cooperation among the more than a dozen Federal 

and local governmental agencies which have law enforcement responsibility in our Nation’s Capital. As part of a local enactment 

in August 2001, the CJCC was established as an independent agency within the District of Columbia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $1,774,000 to 

the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council [CJCC]. This is 

$474,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same as 

the budget request. The Committee directs the CJCC to submit annual performance measures in an annual report, which should also 

describe progress made on individual CJCC initiatives. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $5,453,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,000,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $5,000,000 to 

the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia. 

This is $453,000 below the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$5,000,000 above the budget request. These funds are for health, 

education, environmental, social service, and economic development 

initiatives in the District of Columbia. The Committee directs that 

of this amount, $3,000,000 be allocated to the Children’s National 

Medical Center in Washington, DC, as a contribution toward con-
64 

struction of new and renovated operating rooms and additional procedure rooms to address the growing demand for pediatric services 

throughout the region, meet architectural standards for complex 

surgical care, and expand sterile processing space to comply with 

new infection control standards. 

The Committee directs each grantee of funding under this account to submit a detailed budget and a comprehensive description 

of the activities to be carried out with the funds no later than 

March 15, 2009 to the Chief Financial Officer and the Committees 

on Appropriations. The Committee further directs that any funds 

made available to any grantee under this account must be spent 

primarily in the District of Columbia to benefit District of Columbia residents. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $40,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 54,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 54,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Committee continues and enhances a three-sector funding 

arrangement to provide resources for the District of Columbia Public Schools, public charter schools, and for a scholarship program 

for low-income students to attend private schools. The Committee 

is encouraged by the progress to date to implement the Mayor’s initiative to chart a new management course for the District’s troubled public school system in response to Public Law 110–33, which 

vested authority over the school superintendent, operating budget, 

and capital program in the mayor. The Committee acknowledges 

the daunting challenges this undertaking presents, given that District of Columbia public school students chronically perform well 

below national averages in reading and mathematics, fewer than 

half of the core courses in District schools are taught by teachers 

who have earned a degree or passed competency classes in their 

subjects, antiquated administrative recordkeeping system falls woefully short of any reasonable standards, and school buildings 

throughout the city suffer from disrepair, including hazardous defects, and delays of months or even years for necessary repairs. 

Public charter schools in the District of Columbia have grown 

considerably since the first two opened in 1996 and served 160 students. Today, there are 55 tuition-free, autonomous public charter 

schools on 82 campuses operating in the District, enrolling approximately 22,000 students, 30 percent of all District of Columbia public school students. The District of Columbia School Reform Act of 

1995 (Public Law 104–134), one of the strongest charter school 

laws in the Nation, guarantees charter school autonomy from the 

District of Columbia Public Schools and from the District government and mandates uniform per student funding of all public 

school students, both traditional and charter. 

Congress established the private school scholarship program as 

a 5-year pilot in 2003. The intent of this program, operated by the 

Washington Scholarship Fund under a grant from the Department 

of Education, is to help increase the District of Columbia’s capacity 

to provide parents, particularly low-income parents whose children 
65 

attend low-performing schools, more options for quality education. 

In school year 2007–2008, over 1,900 students participated in the 

program at 54 non-public schools. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $54,000,000, which is $13,200,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

the same as budget request. These funds are allocated as follows: 

$20,000,000 for the District of Columbia Public Schools to improve 

public school education; $20,000,000 to expand quality charter 

schools; and $14,000,000 to the Secretary of Education for opportunity scholarships for low-income students in the District of Columbia, $1,000,000 of which may be used for administrative expenses. The Committee believes that any school enrolling a scholarship participant should satisfy certain minimum reasonable expectations as an educational setting. Therefore, the Committee expressly provides that none of the funds provided for opportunity 

scholarships shall be used by an eligible student to enroll in any 

participating school under the D.C. School Choice Incentive Act of 

2003 unless (1) the participating school has and maintains a valid 

certificate of occupancy issued by the District of Columbia; and (2) 

the core subject matter teachers of the eligible students hold 4-year 

bachelor’s degrees. 

The Committee emphasizes that the authorization for the private 

scholarship program expires on September 30, 2008. Accordingly, 

the Committee directs that funds provided for the scholarship program shall be used for currently enrolled participants rather than 

new scholarship applicants. The Committee is particularly sensitive to the potential impact of disrupting students’ educational 

settings without reasonable notice. Therefore, the Committee does 

not eliminate funding for fiscal year 2009 but makes abundantly 

clear its intent that use of any funds in this act or any other act 

for opportunity scholarships after school year 2009–2010 shall only 

be available upon enactment of reauthorization of that program by 

Congress and the adoption of legislation by the District of Columbia approving such reauthorization. The Committee expects the 

Chancellor of the District of Columbia Public Schools to promptly 

take steps to ensure smooth transition for any students seeking enrollment in the public school system as a result of any changes 

made to the private scholarship program. 

The Committee is aware that seven of the participating private 

schools have recently closed but have been approved to reopen as 

public charter schools for school year 2008–2009. These schools enrolled several hundred students, many of whom received scholarships through the Federal program. The Committee notes that potentially 600 private school students will become public charter 

students in the fall of 2008 which imposes an estimated additional 

$7,000,000 impact on the District’s local budget and demand on the 

uniform per pupil funding. In recognition of these circumstances, 

the Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 above the 

$18,000,000 requested for the public charter school Federal funding 

segment. 

In November 2007, the Government Accountability Office [GAO] 

detailed several program shortcomings in some of the participating 
66 

schools in the scholarship program, including unsuitable learning 

environments, teachers without bachelor’s degrees, and lack of occupancy permits. GAO also cited concerns about the sufficiency of 

financial controls and management issues, including failure to determine accreditation of participating schools. A federally mandated evaluation of the program is being conducted by the Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences [IES]. Results 

assessing the overall impact of the program after the first 2 years 

of implementation, released by IES in June 2008, reflect that student test scores in reading and math showed no statistically significant difference between voucher students and non-voucher students; reading scores were slightly higher for students from three 

subgroups of the voucher program consisting of students who were 

already achieving at a higher level or had previously attended better schools; and the program had a positive impact on parents’ perception of safety and satisfaction. 

The Committee supports the District’s proposed use of the funds 

for public charter schools facilities, school-level grants to improve 

academic performance, and the replication of existing high-quality 

charter school programs to expand the supply of high-quality public 

charter schools in the District. The Committee directs the District 

to submit a detailed budget proposal outlining specific activities no 

later than 60 days after enactment of this act. The Committee is 

concerned about the diminishing availability of Federal funding for 

public charter schools and is pleased to provide these additional 

funds to augment the public charter schools in the District. 

Over the years, public charter schools have moved into and revitalized 14 former District of Columbia Public School [DCPS] school 

buildings that otherwise would have been developed into condominiums or used for other commercial purposes. These buildings, including several historic structures, often long-abandoned and severely blighting neighborhoods, have been converted to public charter schools. The Committee expects the Mayor to implement the 

District of Columbia School Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104– 

134) with regard to the many DCPS school buildings that were 

closed at the end of the 2007–2008 school year. Under that law, the 

District’s public charter schools are to be given the right of first 

offer on former DCPS school buildings that are slated to be sold, 

leased, transferred, or used in a new way. The Committee is concerned that since enactment of the 1995 act, the right of first offer 

requirement has not been consistently followed. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR CONSOLIDATED LABORATORY FACILITY

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 21,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The District’s forensics laboratory capacity has not kept pace 

with the innovations in the field and is therefore unable to meet 

the demands of the current workload. As a result, the District is 

forced to seek help from the FBI crime laboratory in Quantico, Virginia. Because the FBI has its own workload capacity, it strictly 

limits the evidence it will process for the District in violent crime 
67 

cases. The lack of capacity and outmoded technology have led to 

many so-called ‘‘cold’’ or unsolved crime cases in the District. The 

District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department has a backlog 

of thousands of sexual assault and homicide cases, and the volume 

continues to grow. A new comprehensive laboratory, housing both 

anti-terrorism and criminal forensic components under one roof, 

will not only allow the District to more effectively and efficiently 

process crime cases, but it will be an essential element in processing evidence associated with potential bioterrorism attacks. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $21,000,000 

for costs associated with the construction of a new comprehensive 

laboratory facility in the District of Columbia. This is $16,000,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level, and $16,000,000 above the 

budget request. The Committee believes that enhanced funding will 

help avoid schedule delays and escalating construction costs and 

expedite completion of this vital project. The Committee directs 

that this Federal payment be equally matched with local funds. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO JUMP START PUBLIC SCHOOL REFORM

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... $20,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 20,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

With the enactment of Public Law 110–33 providing the Mayor 

of the District of Columbia with authority over the budget and administrative functions of the District of Columbia school system, 

the District of Columbia has launched an aggressive and comprehensive reform of its failing public school system. Under the direction of the Chancellor of the District of Columbia Public Schools, 

a multitude of critical initiatives are underway. A one-time Federal 

contribution toward those efforts will support the recruitment and 

training of principals and other school leaders; the development of 

optimal school programs; and the enhancement of the District’s 

data reporting capabilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a one-time Federal payment of $20,000,000 to jump start public school reform in the District of Columbia. This is an increase of $20,000,000 above the fiscal year 

2008 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The funds include $3,500,000 to support the recruitment, development and training of principals and other school leaders; 

$7,000,000 to develop optimal school programs and intervene in 

low performing schools; $7,500,000 for a customized data reporting 

and accountability system on student performance as well as increased outreach and training for parents and community members; and $2,000,000 to support data reporting requirements associated with the District of Columbia Public Schools’ teacher incentive 

program. This one-time payment is in addition to funds provided 

through the ‘‘Federal Payment for School Improvement’’ account 

within this title. 
68 

FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR CENTRAL LIBRARY AND BRANCH LOCATIONS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $9,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 7,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 7,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The District’s libraries are in a state of significant disrepair and 

are poorly equipped. The adult illiteracy rate in the District of Columbia is 37 percent. In many major metropolitan areas around the 

country, new libraries have revitalized many distressed neighborhoods. A Blue Ribbon Task Force of local and national experts recommended the creation of a state-of-the-art library system to add 

multi-lingual support, hundreds of new computers with broadband 

technology, and deep reference materials and children’s programs. 

The District of Columbia Public Library is undergoing a transformation that includes services, programs, collections, and buildings. The Library is in the process of rebuilding four neighborhood 

libraries—Anacostia, Benning, Tenley-Friendship, and Watha T. 

Daniel/Shaw. Old buildings have been razed and library services 

are being provided by interim facilities in the four neighborhoods. 

Construction of the new state-of-the-art libraries is scheduled to 

begin in late summer 2008 and expected to be completed by the 

end of 2009 in order to open to the public in the spring of 2010. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $7,000,000 as 

a Federal contribution toward the costs associated with the renovation and rehabilitation of District of Columbia libraries. This is 

$2,000,000 below the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. 

The Committee is pleased that the District library system is beginning a long-needed, multi-year facilities modernization project, 

with four new libraries under construction, and investing in literacy initiatives that will complement and support the Mayor’s 

education reform agenda. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO REIMBURSE THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF

INVESTIGATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Due to lack of capacity at its laboratory, the District of Columbia 

has relied on the services of the Federal Bureau of Investigations 

[FBI] to perform evidence examination and analysis in criminal 

cases to help process backlogged cases and help solve cold cases. 

Nearly one third of the FBI’s lab analytical capacity at its Quantico 

facility is dedicated to the local needs of the District of Columbia. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee does not recommend a Federal payment for fiscal 

year 2009 to the District of Columbia to reimburse the Federal Bu-
69 

reau of Investigation [FBI] for laboratory services for District of Columbia cases. This is $4,000,000 below the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level, and $5,000,000 below the budget request. In fiscal year 2008, 

the funds provided under this heading were made available until 

September 30, 2010 for the purposes of paying costs incurred by 

the FBI for evidence examination and subsequent DNA analysis for 

the District of Columbia cold case DNA backlog, expansion of resources dedicated to the processing of District of Columbia cases, 

including an increase in personnel, after October 1, 2007, and data 

entry and analysis for District of Columbia cold cases. 

The Committee believes that instead of providing further funding 

for reimbursement of the FBI which lacks extra in-house capacity 

to handle additional District of Columbia cases and would need to 

outsource the work, it is preferable to provide additional funds to 

the District of Columbia for laboratory construction. Under the 

heading ‘‘Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility’’ in 

this title, the Committee recommends an enhanced Federal contribution toward the construction of a consolidated forensics laboratory facility. When fully operational, this critical public safety enhancement will eliminate the District of Columbia’s dependency on 

the FBI to evaluate evidence and conduct forensic analysis in local 

criminal matters. 

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR OF THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,500,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $3,500,000 as a Federal payment to the 

Executive Office of the Mayor of the District of Columbia to enhance the quality of life for the District’s residents. The Committee 

intends that of this amount, $1,250,000 shall be available to the 

District of Columbia as Federal matching funds to temporarily continue benefits for low-income couples who decide to marry. Most 

low-income couples lose Federal benefits such as Medicaid, TANF, 

SCHIP, and food stamps when they marry because their incomes 

are too high to continue to qualify for benefits. The loss of benefits 

is a strong disincentive to marriage and is one reason why the nationwide marriage rate among couples in the bottom quintile of income is less than 18 percent. 

Funds provided in the bill will be available to match up to 75 

percent of every dollar that the Mayor uses to provide payments to 

newly-married couples to make up for the loss of Federal benefits. 

The Committee notes that the Mayor can use TANF funds for this 

purpose. The Committee further notes that the Department of 

Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families has designed a marriage penalty calculator that social services 

caseworkers can use to calculate a couple’s marriage penalty. 

The Committee believes that newly-married couples should not 

lose benefits for a period of 3 years. During this period, couples will 

have the opportunity to realize the economic benefits of marriage 
70 

and stabilize their financial situation before Government benefits 

cease. 

The Committee further intends that $2,250,000 of the amount 

shall be to continue Marriage Development Accounts in the District 

of Columbia. The Committee directs that these funds be distributed 

to the partnership comprised of the National Center for Fathering, 

LifeSTARTS (formerly the East Capitol Center for Change), and 

the Capital Area Asset Building Corporation for continuation of the 

Marriage Development Accounts/Pre-Marriage Development Accounts and the Together is Better Campaign Demonstration Program in the District of Columbia. 

Marriage Development Accounts [MDAs], which offer low-income 

married or engaged couples the opportunity to save for the purchase of a home, to start a business, or to pay for post-secondary 

education or job training for themselves or their children. Couples 

must meet income and asset requirements to qualify for an MDA. 

Participating couples have a high incentive to save because their 

contributions will be matched at a ratio of 3:1 by the Federal Government and partnering private institutions. 

Using Federal funds, community-based organizations provide 

participating couples with financial counseling, couples’ mentoring, 

couples’ counseling, and relationship training. These organizations 

also reach out to the community through a media campaign and by 

hosting informational events and ‘‘family fun days’’ in neighborhood 

churches, civic centers, and parks. 

The Committee directs the Mayor to submit a detailed spending 

plan, including performance measures, before these funds may be 

expended. The Committee requests that the Mayor provide this 

plan within 30 days of the enactment of this act. The Committee 

further directs the Mayor to submit a progress report on activities 

conducted no later than June 1, 2009, and a final report, including 

a detailed description of outcomes achieved, no later than February 

1, 2010. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LOCAL OPERATING BUDGET

The Committee recommends a total of $10,011,231,000 for the 

operating expenses of the District of Columbia as contained in the 

fiscal year 2009 budget submitted to the Congress by the Government of the District of Columbia on June 9, 2008. Of the total, 

$6,203,795,000 is from local funds, $2,177,337,000 is from Federal 

grant funds, $1,623,754,000 is from other funds, and $6,310,000 is 

from private funds. The Committee directs that any changes to the 

financial plan as submitted by the District must follow the reprogramming guidelines. 
(71) 

TITLE V 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. $1,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation is an independent agency established by Congress in 1992 (Public Law 102– 

281) to encourage and support research, study, and labor designed 

to produce new discoveries in all fields of endeavor for the benefit 

of mankind. Its mission is accomplished through the sponsorship of 

national competitions designed to recognize and award cutting-edge 

innovation in the fields of homeland security, life sciences, and education. During its 15-year existence, the Foundation has awarded 

approximately $7,600,000 to worthy American scientists, student 

inventors, and exemplary teachers who inspire despite especially 

challenging educational environments or personal physical disabilities. 

The Committee acknowledges that initial funding for the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation was derived from the sale 

of three denominations of specially minted coins sold by the United 

States Mint from August 1992 through June 1993. Revenues from 

the coin sales surcharges were deposited in the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Fund at the Department of the Treasury, and made 

available to the Foundation. The Committee understands the funds 

are nearly depleted. Congress provided the Christopher Columbus 

Fellowship Foundation with $600,000 in appropriated funds for fiscal year 2008. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for 

the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation. This is $400,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $1,000,000 above the 

budget request. 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $111,266,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 130,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 157,000,000 
72 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] was established as an independent agency by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1389; 7 U.S.C. 4a). 

The Commission administers the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 

U.S.C. section 1, et seq. The 1974 Act brought under Federal regulation futures trading in all goods, articles, services, rights, and interests; commodity options trading; and leverage trading in gold 

and silver bullion and coins; and otherwise strengthened the regulation of the commodity futures trading industry. It established a 

comprehensive regulatory structure to oversee the volatile futures 

trading complex. 

The CFTC is the sole Federal regulator responsible for overseeing the futures markets by encouraging competitiveness and efficiency, ensuring market integrity, and protecting market participants against manipulation, abusive trading practices, fraud, and 

other unscrupulous activities. Effective oversight by the CFTC enables the markets to better serve their designated functions of providing a price discovery mechanism and a means to offset price 

risk. 

Programs in support of the overall mission include market surveillance analysis and research; registration, audits, and contract 

markets; enforcement; reparations; proceedings; legal counsel; 

agency direction; and administrative support services. CFTC activities are carried out in Washington, DC and in regional offices located in Chicago, New York City, and Kansas City. 

The enacted 2008 farm bill (Public Law 110–234) reauthorized 

the CFTC and made several amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act to (1) clarify the CFTC’s jurisdiction over retail financial contracts based on foreign currencies; (2) make the CFTC’s 

anti-fraud authority applicable to certain off-exchange or over-thecounter derivatives contracts; (3) increase civil monetary and criminal penalties for violations; (4) permit cross-margining of accounts 

in security futures and options; and (5) establish CFTC regulation 

over certain exchange-like trading facilities that are currently exempt from most regulation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $157,000,000 to 

support 596 FTEs for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This is $27,000,000 above the budget request, and 

$45,734,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. The Committee supports the need for significantly increased resources for 

the CFTC to ensure appropriate oversight of the futures markets, 

which are expanding steadily in volume and new users, and rapidly 

evolving in their complexity and diversity. The Committee further 

acknowledges the need for CFTC to make mission-critical investments in technology. 

In the past decade, trading volume has increased more than 10- 

fold—reaching well over 3 billion trades in 2007, and actively traded contracts have quintupled—from 258 in 1997 to 1,540 in 2007. 

Approximately $5,000,000,000,000 of notional transactions flow 

through U.S. exchanges and clearing houses daily. Despite this 
73 

phenomenal surge in activity, CFTC staffing levels have not kept 

pace, and in fact, have dropped 21 percent. The globalized, electronic, and round-the-clock nature of the marketplace and the 

emergence of derivatives and hedge funds have transformed the 

regulatory environment. 

New authorities recently added through enactment of the 2008 

farm bill (Public Law 110–234), coupled with escalating public concern about record energy and agricultural commodity prices, and 

compounded by a growing influx of financial funds into the futures 

markets, make the CFTC’s staffing situation unsustainable. These 

combined factors underscore the importance of the Committee’s recommended funding increase. 

The Committee directs the CFTC to devote the additional resources provided to promptly implementing the CFTC’s new responsibilities as mandated in the 2008 farm bill and to conducting 

aggressive market surveillance and oversight in the energy arena 

and enhancing the collection, timeliness, and transparency of information, particularly with respect to index traders and swap dealers 

in the energy markets. 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $80,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 80,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 95,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Commission is an independent regulatory agency that was 

established on May 14, 1973, and is responsible for protecting the 

public against unreasonable risks of injury from consumer products; assisting consumers to evaluate the comparative safety of consumer products; developing uniform safety standards for consumer 

products and minimizing conflicting State and local regulations; 

and promoting research and investigation into the causes and prevention of product-related deaths, illnesses, and injuries. 

In carrying out its mandate, the Commission establishes mandatory product safety standards, where appropriate, to reduce the unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from consumer products; 

helps industry develop voluntary safety standards; bans unsafe 

products if it finds that a safety standard is not feasible; monitors 

recalls of defective products; informs and educates consumers about 

product hazards; conducts research and develops test methods; collects and publishes injury and hazard data, and promotes uniform 

product regulations by governmental units. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $95,000,000 for the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is $15,000,000 above the fiscal year 

2008 funding level and $15,000,000 above the budget request. 

Of the additional funding provided, $9,400,000 shall be for the 

creation of a database for consumer complaints, and $5,600,000 

shall be for staffing, including for the Office of the Inspector Gen-
74 

eral and for potential new rulemakings, as well as a Regional Product Safety Officer and a Foreign Service National to be based out 

of the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, Peoples’ Republic of China to better 

enable the CPSC to aggressively promote compliance with U.S. 

product safety standards, requirements, and expectations by Chinese and other Asian governments, manufacturers, and exporters. 

Infant Crib Safety.—The Committee is aware that current regulations concerning infant crib safety do not require that cribs be 

tested to determine durability. As a result, crib collapses have occurred that may have been prevented had the cribs been durability-tested. In addition, CPSC does not require crib manufacturers to warn consumers about using soft bedding in cribs, which can 

cause infant suffocation. The Committee directs CPSC to consider 

promulgating regulations that require cribs to be durability-tested 

and contain warning labels against the use of soft bedding. 

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $16,530,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 16,679,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 16,679,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Election Assistance Commission [EAC] was created by the 

Help America Vote Act of 2002 [HAVA] (Public Law 107–252). 

Under HAVA, the EAC’s role is to promulgate voluntary State 

guidelines for election systems, develop a national certification program for voting equipment, and provide related guidance. The EAC 

is also charged with awarding grants to improve election administration and to enhance election equipment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee provides $16,679,000 for EAC’s administrative 

expenses, which is $149,000 more than the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level and the same as the budget request. The accompanying bill 

provides $4,000,000 of these funds for transfer to the National Institute for Standards and Technology for technical assistance related to the development of voluntary State voting systems guidelines. 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $313,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 338,875,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 341,875,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] is charged with 

regulating interstate and international communications by radio, 

television, wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC is also charged with 
75 

promoting the safety of life and property through wire and radio 

communications. The mandate of the FCC under the Communications Act is to make available to all people of the United States a 

rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide wire and radio communication service. The FCC performs five major functions to fulfill 

this charge: spectrum allocation, creating rules to promote fair 

competition and protect consumers where required by market conditions, authorization of service, enhancing public safety and homeland security, and enforcement. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $341,875,000 for the 

salaries and expenses of the Federal Communications Commission 

[FCC], of which $341,875,000 is to be derived from the collection 

of fees. The recommendation is $28,875,000 above the fiscal year 

2008 enacted level and $3,000,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee provides funding to support the FCC’s continued 

efforts in facilitating the nationwide transition of broadcast television signals from analog to digital on February 17, 2009. The 

Committee is concerned that many viewers may not be adequately 

prepared for the transition. The Committee directs the FCC to continue collaborating with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, other Government agencies, and in particular broadcasters and other private sector entities involved in 

the effort to ensure a smooth transition. 

The Committee has provided $3,000,000 for a competitive grant 

program for State broadband data and development (section 503). 

The Committee believes that access to high-speed Internet service 

is a critical element of infrastructure affecting economic development, health, education, and competitiveness. Recipients shall be 

non-profit entities, contribute non-Federal matching funds of not 

less than 20 percent, and demonstrate the capability to work with 

State agencies and private sector partners. Funding shall be used 

to establish local technology planning teams, create programs to 

improve computer ownership and Internet access for unserved and 

underserved populations, and create a geographic inventory map of 

broadband service to identify gaps in such service at the census 

block level. 

Broadcast Television Standards.—The Committee continues to be 

concerned about the declining standards of broadcast television and 

the impact this decline is having on America’s children. Overall 

sexual content, foul language, and violence have greatly increased 

over the past decade. The Committee directs the FCC to continue 

to report to Congress on the issues associated with resurrecting a 

broadcast industry code of conduct for content of programming 

that, if adhered to by the broadcast industry, would protect against 

the further erosion of broadcasting standards. 

Universal Service Fund.—The Committee notes that the Congress established the Universal Service Fund [USF] in 1996 to help 

provide communities across the country with affordable telecommunications services. FCC delegated the management of the 

USF to the Universal Service Administrative Company [USAC]. 

USAC administers USF programs for high cost companies serving 
76 

rural areas, low-income consumers, rural health care providers, 

and schools and libraries. 

The Committee is concerned about the FCC’s lack of proper oversight over the USF programs. For example, according to the Government Accountability Office [GAO], the schools and libraries and 

rural health programs have experienced problems with waste, 

fraud, and abuse. The FCC’s Inspector General [IG] has reported 

that the schools and libraries program has a payment error rate of 

13 percent, the high cost program has an error rate of 16.6 percent, 

and the rural health care program has a payment error rate of 20 

percent, far exceeding the government-wide average payment error 

rate of 3 percent and the 2.5 percent threshold that the Office of 

Management and Budget sets for a program to be ‘‘at-risk.’’ The 

Committee is concerned that management oversight by FCC and 

USAC has not addressed these improper payment rates. The Committee recommendation includes $25,480,000 for the 

FCC’s IG to conduct limited audits of USF, an increase of 

$4,000,000 over the amount provided for fiscal year 2008. Audits 

should focus on all USF programs, including the high cost program, 

schools and libraries program, and the rural health care program. 

The Committee directs the FCC to follow the recommendations of 

both the IG and the GAO and to assume greater managerial control over these important programs, including improvement of the 

improper payment rates. 

Radio and Television Broadcasts on School Buses.—The Committee directs the Commission to issue a report to the Committee 

on Appropriations and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation within 180 days of enactment on commercial proposals for broadcasting radio or television programs for reception 

onboard specially-equipped school buses operated by, or under contract with, local public educational agencies. The study shall examine the nature of the material proposed to be broadcast and whether it is age appropriate for the passengers; the amount and nature 

of commercial advertising to be broadcast; and whether such broadcasts for reception by public school buses are in the public interest. 

First Responder Networks on the Northern Border.—The Committee is concerned that emergency personnel and first responders 

along the northern border have had difficulty securing licenses for 

the appropriate communications frequency from the Commission. 

The Committee directs the Commission to work with Canadian officials and applicants to devise a strategy for ensuring that licensing 

along the northern border proceeds without delay. The Committee 

directs the Commission, in coordination with the Department of 

Homeland Security, to issue a report to the Committee on Appropriations no later than 270 days after enactment that evaluates the 

Federal guidance provided to States working to establish interoperable first responder communications networks, describes the degree 

to which the guidance is coordinated with the Canadian Government, and identifies methods to avoid future coordination problems. 

The Committee has included language (sec. 501) to extend FCC’s 

exemption from the Anti-deficiency Act [ADA] until December 31, 

2009. The ADA contains accounting rules which would derail the 

operation of the FCC’s universal service electronic rate program. 
77 

Requiring the FCC to adhere to the ADA would result in the disruption of payments to schools and libraries for broadband services. 

The Committee has included language (sec. 502) that prohibits 

the FCC from enacting certain recommendations regarding universal service that were made to it by the Joint Board of FCC 

members and State Utility Commissioners. The recommendation 

would limit universal support to one line. This would be harmful 

to small businesses, especially in rural areas, which need a second 

line for a fax or for other business purposes. 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ($26,848,000) 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... (27,495,000) 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. (27,495,000) 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The FDIC Office of Inspector General conducts audits, investigations, and other reviews to assist and augment the FDIC’s contribution to the stability of, and public confidence in, the Nation’s 

financial system. A separate appropriation more effectively ensures 

the OIG’s independence consistent with the Inspector General Act 

of 1978 and other legislation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $27,495,000 for the FDIC inspector 

general, the same as the budget request and $647,000 more than 

the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. Funds are to be derived by 

transfer from the Deposit Insurance Fund and the FSLIC resolution fund. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $59,224,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 63,618,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 63,618,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Election Commission [FEC] was created through the 

1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 

(Public Law 93–443). Consistent with its duty of executing our Nation’s Federal campaign finance laws, and in pursuit of its mission 

of maintaining public faith in the integrity of the Federal campaign 

finance system, FEC conducts three major regulatory programs: (1) 

providing public disclosure of funds raised and spent to influence 

Federal elections; (2) enforcing compliance with restrictions on contributions and expenditures made to influence Federal elections; 

and (3) administering public financing of Presidential campaigns. 
78 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $63,618,000 for the Federal Election 

Commission, which is the same as the budget request and 

$4,394,000 more than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

The Committee directs the Commission to report to the Committee on Appropriations no later than 270 days following enactment an assessment of the feasibility, including estimates of cost, 

time, and personnel required, to gather and make public data regarding the media expenditures of Federal campaigns. 

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $23,641,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 22,674,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 22,674,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] is an independent 

administrative Federal agency created by title VII of the Civil 

Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–454) with a mission to 

carry out five statutory responsibilities: (1) determining the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation; (2) resolving complaints of unfair labor practices; (3) adjudicating exceptions 

to arbitrator’s awards; (4) adjudicating legal issues relating to the 

duty to bargain; and (5) resolving impasses during negotiations. 

The FLRA’s authority is divided by law and by delegation among 

a three-member authority and an Office of General Counsel, appointed by the President and subject to Senate confirmation; and 

the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which consists of seven parttime members appointed by the President. 

In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related interventions, 

training and facilitation of labor-management partnerships, and resolving disputes. FLRA promotes labor-management cooperation by 

providing training and assistance to labor organizations and agencies on resolving disputes, facilitates the creation of partnerships, 

and trains the parties on rights and responsibilities under the Federal Labor Relations Management statute. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,674,000 for 

the Federal Labor Relations Authority. This amount is the same as 

the budget request and $967,000 below the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level. 

The Committee directs the FLRA to issue a report to the Committee on Appropriations within 90 days after enactment on all activities, including cost, that the FLRA has taken in the previous 

24-month period regarding the integration and upgrade of information technology systems. 
79 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $243,864,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 256,200,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 256,200,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Trade Commission [FTC] administers a variety of 

Federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Activities in the 

antitrust area include detection and elimination of illegal collusion, 

anticompetitive mergers, unlawful single-firm conduct, and injurious vertical agreements. The FTC regulates advertising practices, 

service industry practices, marketing practices, and credit practices 

as it addresses fraud and other consumer concerns. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation provides $256,200,000. The rec- ommendation is $12,336,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level and the same as the budget request. Of the amounts provided, $168,000,000 is from Hart-Scott-Rodino pre-merger filing fees and $19,300,000 is from Do-Not-Call fees. 

The total amount of direct appropriations for this account is therefore $68,900,000. The Committee notes that this change reflects a 

net increase in offsetting fee collection receipts since last year. 

Do-Not-Call Initiative.—The recommendation includes 

$19,300,000 for the FTC Do-Not-Call initiative and implementation 

of the Telemarketing Sales Rule [TSR], of which the entire amount 

is to be derived from the collection of fees. The Do-Not-Call initiative was launched pursuant to the FTC’s amended TSR to establish 

a national database of telephone numbers of consumers who choose 

not to receive telephone solicitations from telemarketers. The DoNot-Call initiative has received broad support from, and will provide significant benefits to, consumers from all corners of the 

United States. 

Gas and Diesel Prices.—The activities of the Commission include 

review of mergers, acquisitions, and other transactions within the 

oil and natural gas industries and investigation of potential anticompetitive behaviors in those industries. The Committee is seriously concerned about the rapid rise in gas and diesel prices. The 

Committee is pleased that the Commission continues to monitor 

fuel prices on a day-to-day basis, and is encouraged that the agency 

has initiated a broader-scale investigation based on recent price 

spikes. The Committee is also pleased to see that the Commission 

has initiated a rulemaking to prohibit market manipulation in the 

petroleum industry pursuant to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–140). The Committee is encouraged by the Commission’s goal to have a rulemaking in place by 

the end of calendar year 2008. The Committee directs the Commission to keep the Committee apprised of findings made regarding 

fuel prices and other planned activities and investigations regarding the oil and gas industries. 

Subprime Lending.—The Committee is concerned about the role 

that deceptive and misleading practices in the financial services in-
80 

dustry have played in to the recent housing crisis. American consumers should expect, at a minimum, clear and reliable information from the financial services industry in order to make prudent 

financial decisions. This should especially be a concern for mortgage brokers, loan servicers, and other lending services, as twothirds of Americans make their largest investment in their homes. 

The Committee is pleased that the Commission has been actively 

participating in the rulemaking process conducted by the Federal 

Reserve Board under the Truth in Lending Act and the Home 

Ownership Equity Protection Act and directs the Commission to 

continue to focus enforcement efforts in the area of subprime lending. 

Childhood Obesity.—The Committee has included $250,000 for 

the Commission to establish a Study Commission on Food Marketed to Children (Study Commission). The Study Commission 

shall study and provide recommendations for a common approach 

to standards and categories for marketing and labeling of the nutritional quality of foods that are oriented to, or represent a significant dietary component for, children and youth. The Commission 

shall work in cooperation with the Food and Drug Administration 

and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in this effort. 

The Study Commission should be composed of nine members appointed through consultation among the three agencies, with appropriate scientific expertise and experience in child nutrition, 

child health, psychology, education, marketing, and other relevant 

fields. The Study Commission should develop nutrition standards 

for foods and beverages appropriate for labeling and marketing 

foods that represent a significant element of children’s diets. These 

standards should consider: (1) both positive and negative contributions of nutrients, ingredients, and food (including calories, portion 

size, saturated fat, trans fat, sodium, and added sugars, and the 

presence of nutrients, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains) to the 

diets of children; and (2) evidence concerning the relationship between consumption of certain nutrients, ingredients, and foods in 

preventing and promoting the development of obesity. The Study 

Commission should outline the full range of media and labeling to 

which nutrition standards for food marketing to children should 

apply. It should determine whether the current governmental authority over food marketing to children is adequate to address the 

effects of such marketing on child nutrition and obesity. The Committee directs the Study Commission to submit its findings and 

recommendations in a final report to Congress no later than January 15, 2010. 

Child Protection.—In September of 2000, the FTC released a report entitled: ‘‘Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children: A Review of Self-Regulation and Industry Practices in the Motion Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game Industries.’’ The report 

was highly critical of the entertainment industry and its persistent 

and calculated marketing of violent games, movies, and music to 

children. In response to this report, the entertainment industry has 

promised to impose tougher regulations on itself and to voluntarily 

comply with the report’s recommendation. The FTC should continue with, and expand upon, its efforts in this area. The Committee directs the Commission to continue to engage in consumer 
81 

research and workshops, underage shopper-retail compliance surveys, and marketing data collection. 

Internet.—The FTC is charged with monitoring compliance with 

the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (Public Law 105–277). 

The recommendation provides the Commission the funding resources it needs to meet the challenges of increased fraud on the 

Internet. The Committee commends the FTC for recognizing the 

unique and difficult challenge posed by the Internet, an international phenomenon that lacks borders, to protect the safety of 

our children. 

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The General Services Administration [GSA] was established by 

the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (Public Law 81–152) when Congress mandated the consolidation of the 

Federal Government’s real property and administrative services. 

GSA is organized into the Public Buildings Service, the Federal Acquisition Service, the Office of Governmentwide Policy, and the Office of Citizen Services. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Annual 5-year Plans for Federal Buildings and Border Stations.—GSA is directed to include in the annual budget submission, 

detailed 5-year plans for Federal building and land port of entry 

(border station) construction projects with yearly updates of total 

project future funding needs for construction. The 5-year plan for 

border stations shall be a coordinated effort between GSA and U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection. 

Formaldehyde Reduction in Federal High Performance Green 

Buildings.—The Committee is aware that the Federal Director of 

the General Services Administration [GSA] Office of Federal HighPerformance Green Buildings is required to develop a comprehensive ‘‘green’’ building certification system that considers indoor air 

quality (42 U.S.C. § 17092(h)(2)(E)(iii)) and a comprehensive indoor 

air quality program for Federal facilities that protects the safety of 

Federal employees and the public (42 U.S.C. § 17122(b)). The Committee is also aware that formaldehyde has been designated as a 

probable human carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and that new formaldehyde-free building material, such 

as ceiling tiles and insulation, are commercially available. It has 

been brought to the Committee’s attention that the EPA’s indoor 

air quality standards for formaldehyde in new facilities is 0.02 ppm 

above outside air concentrations. The Committee directs the Federal Director of the GSA Office of Federal High-Performance Green 

Buildings to consider adopting a formaldehyde standard consistent 

with the EPA standard in its ‘‘green’’ building certification and indoor air quality program and to specify formaldehyde-free building 

materials when it constructs new or renovates existing Federal 

buildings. 

Use of Stairs.—The Committee expects a stronger effort to promote the use of stairs in Federal buildings. The use of stairs im-
82 

proves health of Federal workers and the general population, while 

improving the efficiency of Federal buildings. 

Promoting Energy Efficiency Through Use of Revolving Doors.— The Committee supports the promotion of the use of revolving 

doors over swing doors by staff, tenants, and visitors to Federal 

buildings, when possible and appropriate, as a significant role in 

energy conservation. One of the most common ways that outside 

air penetrates a building is through the doors. Revolving doors 

maintain the existing environment within a building because they 

create a seal that prevents outside air from flowing into a building. 

On average, eight times as much air is exchanged when a swing 

door is opened versus a revolving door. In addition to keeping heat 

and cold in or out, revolving doors create a better inside environment by reducing pollution, noise, and dirt. Unfortunately, the use 

of revolving doors is not as prevalent as it could be, resulting in 

less energy efficiency within the building. The Committee directs 

GSA to take steps, such as posting signage, to promote energy efficiency and encourage employees and visitors to use revolving doors 

when possible, and to report back to the Committee no later than 

120 days after enactment of this act on intended steps and progress 

achieved to date. 

Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management.—The Committee is aware of the goals of the 

Federal Government to maximize energy efficiency and resource 

conservation, as part of Executive Order 13423 to Strengthen Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. The 

Committee is further aware of re-usable plastic crates and their environmental benefits and encourages GSA to consider deploying 

them widely in order to maximize resource conservation. 

Custom House in New Orleans.—The Committee is aware that 

Hurricane Katrina caused a roof collapse on one of the most 

architecturally and historically significant Government-owned 

structures in the southern United States, the U.S. Custom House 

in New Orleans, Louisiana. While renovations are being conducted 

by GSA and the Customs and Border Patrol, work has been proceeding slowly. The Committee is supportive of the project and is 

hopeful that GSA will use historic preservation funding and other 

resources to ensure that the Custom House can be remodeled and 

used productively in a timely manner by Federal and non-profit 

tenants as well as the community. 

GSA Per Diem in New Orleans.—The Committee is aware that 

following Hurricane Katrina, Federal agencies were authorized to 

spend above per diem allowances in the New Orleans area, an authority that has expired. On October 1, 2007, the General Services 

Administration reduced the Federal Government per diem rate for 

the New Orleans area from $148 to $131 per day during peak season and from $102 to $99 per day during off-season for lodging expenses. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the tourism industry is the largest employer in the city of New Orleans, 

producing more than 80,000 jobs with a $5,000,000,000 annual impact on the economy. During 2005, travel and tourism in New Orleans accounted for 44 percent of Louisiana’s tourism revenue and 

contributed $158,000,000 in annual State tax revenue. In light of 

the potential harmful impact of a reduction of Federal travel to 
83 

New Orleans on recovery efforts in the region, the Committee urges 

the General Services Administration to reconsider the impact of 

Federal per diem rates upon the larger recovery efforts of New Orleans and to take steps to maintain or increase the per diem rate 

for fiscal year 2009. 

FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND—LIMITATIONS ON AVAILABILITY OF

REVENUE

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Limitation on availability of revenue: 

Limitation on availability, 2008 .................................................... $7,830,414,000 

Limitation on availability, 2009 .................................................... 8,377,573,000 

Committee recommendation .......................................................... 8,524,445,000 

The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the following activities financed from rent charges: 

Construction and Acquisition of Facilities.—Space is acquired 

through the construction or purchase of facilities and prospectuslevel extensions to existing buildings. All costs directly attributable 

to site acquisition, construction, and the full range of design and 

construction services, and management and inspection of construction projects are funded under this activity. 

Repairs and Alterations.—Repairs and alterations of public buildings as well as associated design and construction services are 

funded under this activity. Protection of the Government’s investment, health and safety of building occupants, transfer of agencies 

from leased space, and cost effectiveness are the principal criteria 

used in establishing priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides 

for conversion of existing facilities and non-prospectus extensions. 

Installment Acquisition Payments.—Payments are made for liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover principal, interest, and other requirements on the debt incurred for construction 

of Federal buildings. 

Rental of Space.—Space is acquired through the leasing of buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in U.S. Postal 

Service facilities, 174 million rentable square feet in fiscal year 

2007, and 184 million rentable square feet in fiscal year 2008. 

Building Operations.—Services are provided for Governmentowned and leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities and fuel, 

maintenance, miscellaneous services (such as moving, evaluation of 

new materials and equipment, and field supervision), and general 

management and administration of all real property related programs including salaries and benefits paid from the Federal Buildings Fund. 

Other Programs.—When requested by Federal agencies, the Public Buildings Service provides building services, such as tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and protection services 

which are in excess of those services provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation purposes, the balances of the 

Unconditional Gifts of Real, Personal, or Other Property trust fund 

have been combined with the Federal Buildings Fund. 
84 

CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION

Limitation on availability, 2008 1 ......................................................... $531,448,000 

Limitation on availability, 2009 ........................................................... 620,119,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 766,991,000 

1Of this amount, $250,000,000 was designated as emergency funding. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The construction and acquisition fund shall be available for site, 

design, construction, management, and inspection costs for the construction of new Federal facilities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $766,991,000 for construction and acquisition, including non-prospectus projects. 

CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION 

State Description Amount 

AL Tuscaloosa, Federal Building .............................................................................................................. $25,000,000 

CA San Ysidro, Land Port of Entry ........................................................................................................... 58,910,000 

CA San Diego, U.S. Courthouse Annex ..................................................................................................... 110,362,000 

CO Lakewood, Denver Federal Center Remediation ................................................................................. 10,472,000 

DC DHS Consolidation and Development of St. Elizabeths Campus ....................................................... 331,390,000

DC St. Elizabeths West Campus Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 8,249,000 

DC St. Elizabeths West Campus Site Acquisition .................................................................................... 7,000,000 

MD Montgomery County, FDA Consolidation ............................................................................................. 200,404,000 

ND Portal, Land Port of Entry ................................................................................................................... 15,204,000 

REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2008 ........................................................... $722,161,000 

Limitation on availability, 2009 ........................................................... 692,374,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 692,374,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Under this activity, the General Services Administration [GSA] 

executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations [R&A] of both 

Government-owned and leased facilities under the control of GSA. 

The primary goal of this activity is to provide commercially equivalent space to tenant agencies. Safety, quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are given primary consideration in carrying out 

this responsibility. 

R&A workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and building 

managers. The work identified through these inspections is programmed in order of priority into the Inventory Reporting Information System [IRIS] and incorporated into a 5-year plan for accomplishment, based upon funding availability, urgency, and the volume of R&A work that GSA has the capability to execute annually. 

Since fiscal year 1995, design and construction services activities 

associated with repair and alteration projects have been funded in 

this account. 
85 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends new obligational authority of 

$692,374,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2009. This 

amount is the same as the President’s request. 

REPAIRS AND ALTERATIONS 

State Description Amount 

DC Eisenhower Executive Office Building-CBR ........................................................................................ $14,700,000 

DC West Wing Infrastructure Systems Replacement ............................................................................... 76,487,000 

DC Eisenhower Executive Office Building Phase III ................................................................................. 51,075,000 

IL Chicago, Dirksen Courthouse .............................................................................................................. 152,825,000 

NC New Bern, U.S. Post Office and Courthouse ...................................................................................... 10,640,000 

INSTALLMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENTS

Limitation on availability, 2008 ........................................................... $155,781,000 

Limitation on availability, 2009 ........................................................... 149,570,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 149,570,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enable GSA to enter 

into contractual arrangements for the construction of a backlog of 

approved but unfunded projects. This activity provides for the payment of interest to the Federal Financing Bank related to facilities 

acquired pursuant to the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 (40 

U.S.C. 592). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $149,570,000 for installment acquisition payments, the same as the budget request 

and $6,211,000 below the fiscal year 2008 funding level. 

RENTAL OF SPACE

Limitation on availability, 2008 ........................................................... $4,315,534,000 

Limitation on availability, 2009 ........................................................... 4,692,156,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,692,156,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except in cases where GSA has 

delegated its leasing authority. GSA’s policy is to lease privately 

owned buildings and land only when: (1) Federal space needs cannot be otherwise accommodated satisfactorily in existing Government-owned or leased space; (2) leasing proves to be more efficient 

than the construction or alteration of a Federal building; (3) construction or alteration is not warranted because requirements in 

the community are insufficient or are indefinite in scope or duration; or (4) completion of a new Federal building within a reasonable time cannot be assured. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $4,692,156,000 for 

rental of space. The Committee recommendation is the same as the 
86 

President’s budget request and $376,622,000 above the fiscal year 

2008 enacted level. 

BUILDING OPERATIONS

Limitation on availability, 2008 ........................................................... $2,105,490,000 

Limitation on availability, 2009 ........................................................... 2,223,354,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,223,354,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This activity provides for the operation of all Government-owned 

facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building services in 

GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do not require the 

lessor to furnish such services. Services included in building operations are cleaning, protection, maintenance, payments for utilities 

and fuel, grounds maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related supporting services include various real property management and staff support activities such as space acquisition and assignment; the moving of Federal agencies as a result of space alterations in order to provide better space utilization in existing buildings; onsite inspection of building services and operations accomplished by private contractors; and various highly specialized contract administration support functions. 

The space, operations, and services referred to above are furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment of rent. 

Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA also provides 

varying levels of above-standard services in agency headquarters 

facilities, including those occupied by the Executive Office of the 

President, such as the east and west wings of the White House. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $2,223,354,000 for 

building operations. This amount is the same as the President’s 

budget request and $117,864,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

GOVERNMENT-WIDE POLICY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $52,891,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 56,578,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 54,578,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Government-wide Policy provides for Governmentwide policy development, support, and evaluation functions associated with real and personal property, supplies, vehicles, aircraft, 

information technology, acquisition, transportation, and travel 

management. This office also provides for the Federal Procurement 

Data Center, Workplace Initiatives, Regulatory Information Service 

Center, the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, and the Committee Management Secretariat. The Office of Government-wide 

Policy, working cooperatively with other agencies, provides the 

leadership needed to develop and evaluate the implementation of 

policies designed to achieve the most cost-effective solutions for the 
87 

delivery of administrative services and sound workplace practices, 

while reducing regulations and empowering employees. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,578,000 for Government-wide Policy. This amount is $2,000,000 below the 

budget request and $1,687,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $85,870,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 71,811,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 69,349,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Operating Expenses provides for the salaries and expenses of: 

Government-wide activities associated with utilization and donation of surplus personal property and disposal of real property; 

agency-wide policy direction, management, and communications; 

the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; and services as authorized 

by 5 U.S.C. 3109. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $69,349,000 for 

the Operating Expenses. This amount is $2,462,000 below the 

budget request and $16,521,000 below the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $48,382,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 54,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 54,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and investigative 

functions to identify and correct management and administrative 

deficiencies within the General Services Administration [GSA], including conditions for existing or potential instances of fraud, 

waste, and mismanagement. This audit function provides internal 

audit and contract audit services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA contracting officials on accounting and financial matters relative to the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits review and 

evaluate all facets of GSA operations and programs, test internal 

control systems, and develop information to improve operating efficiencies and enhance customer services. The investigative function 

provides for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal 

activities involving GSA programs, personnel, and operations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,000,000 for 

the Office of Inspector General. This amount is the same as the 
88 

budget request and $5,618,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level. 

ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT [E-GOV] FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This program supports interagency ‘‘electronic government’’ or ‘‘egov’’ initiatives, i.e., projects that use the Internet or other electronic methods to provide individuals, businesses, and other government agencies with simpler and more timely access to Federal 

information, benefits, services, and business opportunities. 

Proposals for funding must meet capital planning guidelines and 

include adequate documentation to demonstrate a sound business 

case, attention to security and privacy, and a way to measure performance against planned results. In addition, a small portion of 

the funds could be used for awards to those project management 

teams that delivered the best product to meet customer needs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for 

the Electronic Government Fund. This amount is $2,000,000 below 

the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $4,000,000 below the budget 

request. 

ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,478,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 2,934,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,934,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation provides for an annual pension and compensation for office staffs and other related operating expenses for 

each former President pursuant to Public Law 85–745. The cost of 

franking privileges for the widows of former President Reagan and 

former President Ford are also funded in this appropriation. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $2,934,000 for allowances and office 

staff for former Presidents, $456,000 above the fiscal year 2008 

funding level and the same as the budget request. An additional 

$366,000 is provided as the budget requests for the commencement 

of benefits for President George W. Bush as a former President. 

Below is listed a detailed analysis of the Committee’s recommendation for fiscal year 2009 funding: 
89 

FISCAL YEAR 2009 BUDGET ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Carter G.H. Bush Clinton G.W. Bush Widows Total 

Personnel Compensation .................................... 96 96 96 30 ................ 318 

Personnel Benefits .............................................. 2 64 65 20 ................ 151 

Benefits for Former Presidents .......................... 194 194 204 146 ................ 738 

Travel .................................................................. 2 56 50 11 ................ 119 

Rental Payments to GSA .................................... 102 175 544 95 ................ 916 

Communications, Utilities, and Miscellaneous 

Charges: 

Telephone ................................................... 10 17 79 15 ................ 121 

Postage ...................................................... 15 13 15 3 14 60 

Printing ............................................................... 5 14 14 3 ................ 36 

Other Services .................................................... 80 111 84 25 ................ 300 

Supplies & Materials .......................................... 5 15 26 5 ................ 51 

Equipment .......................................................... 7 69 35 13 ................ 124 

Total Obligations ................................... 518 824 1,212 366 14 2,934 

PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... $8,520,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 8,520,000 

The appropriation provides for an orderly transfer of executive 

leadership, in accordance with the Presidential Transition Act of 

1963. Funds are also authorized to finance the costs of briefings 

and training for personnel associated with the incoming administration. Funds are only requested during a presidential election 

year and are not available for obligation by the incumbent administration. The Committee recommends $8,520,000 for presidential 

transition expenses, an amount equal to the budget estimate, of 

which $1,000,000 is for briefing personnel associated with the incoming administration. 

FEDERAL CITIZEN SERVICES FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $17,328,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 36,558,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 36,558,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Federal Citizen Services Fund [FCSF] (formerly the Federal 

Citizen Information Center) appropriation provides for the salaries 

and expenses of the Office of Citizen Services [OCS]. The FCSF 

consolidates all of GSA’s citizen-oriented programs into a single 

funding source by unifying OCS programs formerly funded by the 

Federal Citizen Information Center Fund and the Operating Expenses appropriations. The Office of Citizen Services provides citizens, businesses, other governments, and the media with access 

points to easily obtain Government information and services via 

the Internet, e-mail, print, and telephone. 

The Office of Citizen Services [OCS] provides information and 

services to the public primarily through USA.gov and 

GobiernoUSA.gov, the official web portal of the U.S. Government. 

OCS also operates pueblo.gsa.gov, consumeraction.gov and 

consumidor.gov, webcontent.gov, and kids.gov websites. OCS pro-
90 

vides direct telephone (1–800–FED–INFO), e-mail and on-line assistance to citizens through the National Contact Center, and offers 

simple and cost-effective contact center solutions to customer Federal agencies through the USA Services program. OCS also coordinates the publication and distribution of information through the 

Government Printing Office’s Public Documents Distribution Center in Pueblo, Colorado. 

OCS supports effective Government by training web and contact 

center managers across the Federal Government through Web 

Manager University, and provides administrative support to various interagency steering committees. OCS provides management 

of the USA.gov hosting infrastructure, including support for all 

Federal agency applications on USA.gov, and provides development 

and facilitation services to Federal agencies and initiatives to enhance their delivery of citizen services. OCS brings Federal, State, 

territorial, local and Indian tribal governments together to improve 

services to citizens through sharing of best practices, and serves as 

a point of contact to other nations to share experiences in delivering citizen services and to bring new solutions to the U.S. Government. 

The Federal Citizen Services Fund is financed from annual appropriations to pay for the salaries and expenses of OCS staff. Reimbursements from Federal agencies pay for the direct costs of information services OCS provides on their behalf. The FCSF also receives funding from user fees for publications ordered by the public, 

payments from private entities for services rendered, and gifts from 

the public. All income is available without regard to fiscal year limitations, but is subject to an annual aggregate expenditure limit as 

set forth in appropriation acts. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $36,558,000 for the Federal Services 

Center, an increase of $19,230,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and consistent with the budget request. The funding 

level reflects a transfer from the ‘‘Operating Expenses’’ account to 

consolidate GSA’s citizen-based services. 

The appropriation will be augmented by reimbursements from 

Federal agencies for distribution of consumer publications, user 

fees from the public, and other income. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Section 510 authorizes GSA to use funds for the hire of passenger motor vehicles. 

Section 511 authorizes GSA to transfer funds within the Federal 

buildings fund for meeting program requirements. 

Section 512 limits funding for courthouse construction which 

does not meet certain standards of a capital improvement plan. 

Section 513 provides that no funds may be used to increase the 

amount of occupiable square feet, provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any other service usually provided, to any 

agency which does not pay the requested rate. 

Section 514 continues the provision that permits GSA to pay 

small claims (up to $250,000) made against the Government. 
91 

Section 515 changes the Federal Citizen Information Fund to the 

Federal Citizen Services Fund. 

Section 516 authorizes GSA to allow volunteer and other nongovernmental organizations supporting the National Response 

Framework, under Emergency Support Function [ESF] #6—Mass 

Care, Housing, and Human Services, access to GSA Sources of Supply. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $37,507,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 38,811,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 38,811,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB] was established by 

the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. MSPB is an independent 

quasi-judicial agency manifested to protect Federal merit systems 

against partisan political and other prohibited personnel practices 

and to ensure adequate protection for employees against abuses by 

agency management. 

MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based civil 

service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case basis 

through hearing and deciding employee appeals and on a systemic 

basis by reviewing significant actions and regulations of the Office 

of Personnel Management [OPM] and conducting studies of the 

civil service and other merit systems. The intended results of 

MSPB’s efforts are to assure that personnel actions taken against 

employees are processed within the law and that actions taken by 

OPM and other agencies support and enhance Federal merit principles. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,811,000 for 

the Merit Systems Protection Board. This is an increase of 

$1,304,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same 

as the budget request. The Committee makes available no more 

than $2,579,000 for adjudicating retirement appeals through an appropriation from the trust fund consistent with past practice. 

MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOUNDATION

FEDERAL PAYMENT TO MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND

EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY FOUNDATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,750,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 100,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,750,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall Fund is invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to the needs 
92 

of the Fund. Interest earnings from the investments are used to 

carry out the activities of the Morris K. Udall Foundation. The 

Foundation awards scholarships, fellowships, and grants, and 

funds activities of the Udall Center. 

The Morris K. Udall Foundation also supports training programs 

for professionals in health care policy and public policy, such as the 

Native Nations Institute [NNI]. NNI, based at the University of Arizona, provides Native Americans with leadership and management 

training, and analyzes policies relevant to tribes. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,750,000 for 

the Morris K. Udall Foundation. This amount is $3,650,000 above 

the budget request and is equal to the enacted 2008 level. The 

Committee includes language to allow up to 60 percent of the appropriation to be used for the expenses of the Native Nations Institute. 

ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 850,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is a 

Federal program established by Public Law 105–156 to assist parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and public lands 

conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris K. Udall Foundation 

and serves as an impartial, non-partisan institution providing professional expertise, services, and resources to all parties involved in 

such disputes. The Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative problem solving is appropriate for specific environmental 

conflicts, how and when to bring all the parties together for discussion, and whether a third-party facilitator or mediator might be 

helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts to reach consensus 

or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and mediators with substantial experience in environmental conflict resolution and can help parties in 

selecting an appropriate neutral professional. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000 for 

the Morris K. Udall Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund. This 

amount is equal to the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$1,150,000 above the budget request. 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

The National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is 

the national recordkeeper managing the Government’s archives 

and records, and operating the presidential libraries. NARA is an 

independent agency created by statute in 1934 to safeguard the 

records of all three branches of the Federal Government. NARA administers the Information Security Oversight Office [ISOO], is the 
93 

publisher of the Federal Register, and makes grants for historical 

documentation through the National Historical Publications and 

Records Commission [NHPRC]. In addition, NARA has recently 

been charged with additional responsibilities including mediating 

Freedom of Information Act disputes and coordinating controlled 

unclassified information. 

OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $315,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 327,783,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 330,883,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for basic operations dealing with management of the Federal Government’s archives and records, operation 

of Presidential Libraries, review for declassification of classified security information, and other duties. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $330,883,000 for operating expenses 

of the National Archives and Records Administration for fiscal year 

2009. This amount is $15,883,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $3,100,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee’s recommendation includes requested funds to 

prepare for the new George W. Bush Presidential Library, process 

and declassify presidential records, and supplement criminal investigative staff. 

In addition, the Committee provides $1,200,000 above the request for continuance of public research hours, which is a base operating cost and should be part of the budget request. The Committee also recommends $1,000,000 to fulfill the responsibility designated to NARA under the OPEN Government Act (Public Law 

110–175) to manage the new Office of Government Information 

Services [OGIS], thereby disagreeing with the administration 

which placed this responsibility and funding with the Justice Department, which posed a conflict of interest given that department’s responsibility to defend its government-agency clients in litigation brought by requesters. Finally, the Committee is aware that 

on May 9, 2008, the President signed a memorandum designating 

NARA as the executive agent for overseeing and managing the implementation of the designation and sharing of controlled unclassified information. The Committee is further aware that OMB has 

determined that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence 

shall provide funding to NARA to cover start-up costs of $2,000,000 

over fiscal year 2009. The Committee expects that NARA’s budget 

submission for fiscal year 2010 will request funds for this purpose. 

ELECTRONIC RECORDS ARCHIVES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $58,028,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 67,008,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 67,008,000 
94 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

National Archives and Records Administration [NARA] is developing an Electronic Records Archives [ERA] that will ensure the 

preservation of and access to Government electronic records. With 

the rapid changes in technology today, the formats in which 

records are stored become obsolete within a few years, making 

records inaccessible even if they are preserved intact with the most 

modern technology. ERA will preserve electronic records generated 

in a manner that enables requesters to access them on computer 

systems now and in the future. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $67,008,000 for the Electronic 

Records Archives project. This amount is an increase of $8,980,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same as the budget request. A provision is included in the bill requiring NARA to 

submit a spending plan for these funds. 

The Committee strongly supports the Electronic Records Archives [ERA] program at the National Archives Records Administration. The Committee continues to emphasize the importance 

that amounts requested in the President’s budget be adequate to 

meet current program requirements for the development of systems 

to interface with agencies, receive all documents, and conduct all 

necessary training programs. The Committee remains committed to 

working to ensure that this program is adequately funded on an 

expedited basis so ERA can preserve the Nation’s important 

records at the earliest feasible date. 

The Committee is gravely concerned about the lack of progress 

in developing ERA capabilities to ingest electronic records from the 

current presidential administration at the time of the January 

2009 transition. Delays in negotiating the scope and timing of the 

system development with the contractor have left little time to develop, test, and deploy the proposed system. This delay puts 

NARA’s ability take custody of the current administration’s electronic records and make them available to authorized recipients 

during the next administration at significant risk. Because of the 

significant impact that delays in accessing presidential records 

could have on the succeeding administration, Congress, and the 

courts, NARA should develop a formal plan for ensuring the availability of electronic presidential records in the event that ERA is 

not capable of providing such access. 

REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $28,605,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 9,211,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 33,211,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This account provides for the repair, alteration, and improvement 

of Archives facilities and Presidential libraries nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It will better enable NARA to 

maintain its facilities in proper condition for public visitors, re-
95 

searchers, and NARA employees, and also maintain the structural 

integrity of the buildings. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $33,211,000 for the repairs and res- toration account. This amount is $4,606,000 above the fiscal year 

2008 enacted level and $24,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee provides $9,211,000 for ongoing repairs and restoration and recommends specific funding to be distributed as follows: 

Committee recommendation 

JFK Presidential Library .................................................................................................................................... 22,000,000 

LBJ Presidential Library ................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

The Committee has prioritized funding under this account with 

input from NARA’s capital improvement plan and projects already 

underway. Therefore, the Committee has included $2,000,000 to 

complete renovations for the Lyndon Baines Johnson [LBJ] Presidential Library and $22,000,000 to complete construction of the 

JFK Presidential Library. 

The Committee recognizes that it has more than adequately provided funding for NARA’s portion of the LBJ Presidential Library 

plaza project, therefore, the Library is on notice not to return to 

the Committee for any further funding for this project, a directive 

which is reflected in the bill. 

The Committee is aware of the great need of repairs of presidential libraries, particularly the FDR Presidential Library, which 

suffers from flooding, whose infrastructure is dangerously deteriorated and outdated, and whose systems violate NARA’s standards 

for preservation, but is unfortunately constrained to provide funding for this worthwhile project. 

The Committee also is aware of the need for roof repair at the 

Truman Presidential Library and encourages NARA to review its 

repair needs, considering the NARA on-going repair account as a 

source of funding. 

The Committee makes permanent the directive requiring NARA 

to update its comprehensive capital needs assessment for its entire 

infrastructure of presidential libraries and records facilities, as part 

of its fiscal year 2010 budget submission and urges that an appropriate level of funding for repair of valuable historic presidential libraries be included in the fiscal year 2010 budget request. 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PUBLICATIONS AND RECORDS COMMISSION

GRANTS PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $9,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 10,500,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Historical Publications and Records Commission 

[NHPRC] provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish 

records that document American history. Administered within the 
96 

National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC helps 

State, local, and private institutions preserve non-Federal records, 

helps publish the papers of major figures in American history, and 

helps archivists and records managers improve their techniques, 

training, and ability to serve a range of information users. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $10,500,000 for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission [NHPRC]. This amount 

is $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$10,500,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee strongly supports the NHPRC program and has 

provided funding to continue this important program. This program 

has played a central role in the preservation and dissemination of 

the Nation’s documentary heritage. Further, the program has been 

successful in leveraging private sector contributions. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

The Committee includes an administrative provision directing 

NARA to include in its annual budget submission each year a comprehensive capital needs assessment for its entire infrastructure of 

presidential libraries and records facilities. Funding should be included in each year’s budget to address the highest priorities, including projects already underway. 

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

CENTRAL LIQUIDITY FACILITY

Direct loan limitation Administrative 

expenses 

Appropriations, 2008 .................................................................................................. ($1,500,000,000) ($329,000) 

Budget estimate, 2009 ............................................................................................... (1,500,000,000) (334,000) 

Committee recommendation ....................................................................................... (1,500,000,000) (334,000) 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit Union 

Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95–630). The CLF is a 

mixed-ownership Government corporation managed by the National Credit Union Administration Board and owned by its member credit unions. 

The purpose of the CLF is to improve the general financial stability of credit unions by meeting their seasonal and emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage savings, support consumer 

and mortgage lending, and provide basic financial resources to all 

segments of the economy. To become eligible for CLF services, credit unions invest in the capital stock of the CLF, and the facility 

uses the proceeds of such investments and the proceeds of borrowed funds to meet the liquidity needs of credit unions. The primary sources of funds for the CLF are stock subscriptions from 

credit unions and borrowings. 
97 

The CLF may borrow funds from any source, with the amount 

of borrowing limited to 12 times the amount of subscribed capital 

stock and surplus. 

Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for funds 

attributable to emergency outflows from managerial difficulties or 

local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical changes in such areas as 

agriculture, education, and retail business. Loans can also be made 

to offset protracted credit problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends the budget request of limiting administrative expenses for the Central Liquidity Fund [CLF] to 

$334,000,000 in fiscal year 2009. The Committee recommends a 

limitation of $1,500,000,000 for the principal amount of new direct 

loans to member credit unions. These amounts are the same as the 

budget request. 

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $975,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program 

[CDRLF] was established in 1979 to assist officially designated 

‘‘low-income’’ credit unions in providing basic financial services to 

low-income communities. Low-interest loans and deposits are made 

available to assist these credit unions. Loans or deposits are normally repaid in 5 years, although shorter repayment periods may 

be considered. Technical assistance grants [TAGs] are also available to low-income credit unions for improving operations as well 

as addressing safety and soundness issues. Credit unions use TAG 

funds for specific initiatives, including taxpayer assistance, financial education, home ownership initiatives, and training assistance. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for technical assistance 

grants to community development credit unions. This funding level 

is equal to the budget request and is $25,000 more than the fiscal 

year 2008 enacted level. The Committee expects the CDRLF to continue making loans from their available funds derived from repaid 

loans and interest earned on previous loans to designated credit 

unions. 

The Committee supports NCUA’s outreach efforts to underserved 

rural and urban communities across America through technical assistance grants provided within CDRLF. The Committee encourages NCUA to continue its efforts to provide financial education, 

particularly regarding consumer credit and home mortgages, and to 

provide alternatives to predatory lending services through targeted 

technical assistance grants and support. 
98 

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $11,750,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 13,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 13,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Government Ethics [OGE], a separate agency within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (Public Law 95–521). OGE is charged by law to 

provide overall direction of executive branch policies designed to 

prevent conflicts of interest and ensure high ethical standards. 

OGE carries out these responsibilities by developing regulations 

pertaining to conflicts of interest, postemployment restrictions, 

standards of conduct, and public and confidential financial disclosure in the executive branch; by monitoring compliance with financial disclosure requirements by recommending appropriate corrective action when necessary; by evaluating the effectiveness of applicable laws; and by preparing advisory opinions and policy memoranda interpreting requirements regarding conflicts of interest, 

post employment restrictions, standards of conduct, and financial 

disclosure. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,000,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Ethics in fiscal 

year 2009. This amount is the same as the budget request and 

$1,250,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. The Committee 

encourages OGE to keep the Committee regularly informed of any 

emerging needs resulting from enactment of any new legislation affecting ethics obligations of executive branch officials and employees, as well as initiatives undertaken to fulfill OGE’s critical role 

in Presidential transition issues, including education on post-employment restrictions for outgoing officials and processing the expected surge of public financial disclosure reports filed by the incoming President’s nominees for high level positions requiring Senate confirmation. The funding level will also allow OGE to provide 

the necessary training and guidance for new and experienced ethics 

officials to enable them to handle ethics issues that arise during 

the transition period. 

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $101,765,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 92,829,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 92,829,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Personnel Management [OPM] was established by 

Public Law 95–454, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, enacted 

on October 13, 1978. OPM is responsible for management of Federal human resources policy and oversight of the merit civil service 
99 

system. Although individual agencies are increasingly responsible 

for personnel operations, OPM provides a Governmentwide policy 

framework for personnel matters, advises and assists agencies 

(often on a reimbursable basis), and ensures that agency operations 

are consistent with requirements of law on issues such as veterans 

preference. OPM oversees examining of applicants for employment, 

issues regulations and policies on hiring, classification and pay, 

training, investigations, other aspects of personnel management, 

and operates a reimbursable training program for the Federal Government’s managers and executives. OPM is also responsible for 

administering the retirement, health benefits, and life insurance 

programs affecting most Federal employees, retired Federal employees, and their survivors. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a general fund appropriation of 

$92,829,000 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Personnel 

Management, which is $8,936,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 

level and the same as the budget request. 

The recommendation includes $5,851,000 for the Enterprise 

Human Resources Integration project and $1,315,000 for the 

Human Resources Line of Business project. 

Retirement Systems Modernization.—The Committee is extremely 

concerned about whether OPM is effectively managing its retirement systems modernization program, particularly in light of findings reported by the Government Accountability Office [GAO] in 

January 2008 and OPM’s February 2008 implementation of the 

RetireEZ system with capability that was significantly less than 

originally planned. On May 16, 2008, the Committee directed GAO 

to conduct a follow-up study to determine the status of OPM’s efforts to fully develop and implement RetireEZ and to evaluate the 

agency’s efforts to ensure the accuracy of the new system. In light 

of OPM’s May 28, 2008 decision to stop work on a major contract 

that is critical to the retirement systems modernization program’s 

success, the Committee further directs GAO to assess the impact 

of the stop work order on OPM’s plans for developing and implementing RetireEZ. 

Child Care.—Last year, the Committee directed OPM to work 

with and through the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, 

through several specific directives, to communicate with Federal 

agencies about dependent care programs. The Committee is aware 

of steps OPM is to be taking to improve communication about dependent care programs, and has seen some positive results, especially in the use of the Dependent Care Flexible Spending Account 

[DCFSA]. The Committee is supportive of OPM’s future plans, 

many of which should be on-going activities. No later than 45 days 

after enactment, OPM shall report to the Committee timelines, including start and/or completion dates, for the following activities to 

ensure progress and provide for accountability: 

—when OPM will expand its Open Season marketing campaign 

to include new touch points (e.g., floor graphics inside Metro 

stations) and redesign materials with a focus on dependent 

care; 
100 

—when OPM will follow through with targeting one or two agencies with very low enrollment and develop creative ways to encourage agencies to educate employees about the use of 

FSAFEDS, including the feasibility of whether this should be 

an annual activity; 

—when OPM will conduct outreach to affinity groups such as Executive Women in Government and Blacks in Government to 

push the FSAFEDS Program, including the feasibility of 

whether this should be an annual activity; 

—when GSA will begin working with the military to advertise 

tuition assistance, when these new advertising materials will 

be initially disbursed, and how often the materials will be provided (e.g. annually); 

—when OPM will add a link on child care subsidies to the front 

page of the OPM website. 

Disability Policy and Leadership.—OPM, as the personnel agency 

for the Federal Government, should be committed to helping the 

Federal Government become the model employer Congress and the 

law mandate that it be, with regard to individuals with disabilities. 

OPM’s track record, of late, has not been stellar. Erroneous information and web links on OPM’s disability website were not corrected over a lengthy period of time despite notification; a key OPM 

staff position dealing with disability issues has remained vacant for 

long periods of time; insufficient outreach has been conducted to 

the disability community, a population of more than 30 million 

working-age Americans available for public service. This is particularly disappointing given that 60 percent of the Federal workforce 

will be eligible for retirement within 10 years. In addition, inefficiencies exist within the USAJOBS electronic employment portal, 

making it more difficult for applicants who wish to be considered 

under Schedule A authority to bypass competitive requirements as 

authorized. Finally, OPM has neglected to provide clear guidance 

to Federal agencies, applicants, and Federal employees on the appropriate use of the Schedule A appointing authority. Until the involvement of this Committee, these problems languished. 

The Committee acknowledges that OPM has begun steps to improve matters. The Committee remains dedicated to ensuring that 

these problems are corrected, urges OPM to redouble their efforts 

to solve these issues, and directs OPM to advise the Committee as 

improvements are achieved. 

Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program and Nursing 

Shortage.—The Committee is concerned with the ongoing shortage 

of nurses, which is due in large part to the national shortage of 

nurse faculty, and encourages OPM to assist in alleviating the 

shortage through the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility 

Program. The Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program 

provides for the temporary assignment of personnel between the 

Federal Government and State and local governments, colleges and 

universities, and other eligible entities. Federally-employed nurses 

could be given the opportunity to serve a temporary assignment in 

an accredited school of nursing. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that more than 1 million new and replacement Registered Nurses [RNs] will be needed by 2016. However, schools of 

nursing are forced to turn away thousands of qualified applicants 
101 

each year due to faculty shortages. The Federal Government currently employs more than 53,000 nurses domestically, and many 

have the educational background and expertise to teach the next 

generation of nurses, in the process gaining valuable experience 

and informing students about careers in government service. 

The Committee directs OPM to carry out the Intergovernmental 

Personnel Act Mobility Program with special attention provided to 

Federal agencies employing more than 2,000 nurses. OPM may develop guidelines that provide Federal agencies direction or guidance in using their authority under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program— 

—to provide financial assistance to Federal employees holding a 

degree in nursing to accept an assignment to teach in an accredited school of nursing in exchange for a commitment from 

the individual to serve for an additional term in Federal service or a commitment from the school of nursing to take additional steps to increase its number of nursing students that 

will commit to Federal service upon graduation; 

—to provide financial assistance to Federal employees who have 

served as a nurse in the Federal Government and are eligible 

for retirement to allow such individuals to attend an accredited 

school of nursing to obtain the training to become a nurse faculty member in exchange for a commitment to encourage current and prospective students to pursue a career in nursing in 

the Federal Government and a commitment from the school of 

nursing to take additional steps to increase its number of nursing students that will commit to Federal service upon graduation; and 

—to provide financial or other assistance to Federal employees 

who have served as a nurse in the Federal Government, are eligible for retirement, and are qualified to teach to expedite the 

transition of such individuals into nurse faculty positions. 

The Committee directs OPM to report to the Committee no later 

than 120 days after enactment of this act on how the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program is being used to alleviate 

the nursing shortage and on the demonstrable steps OPM has 

taken to encourage government-employed nurses to teach at accredited colleges of nursing. 

Employment for the Blind.—The Committee applauds the administration’s commitment to programs which support disabled Americans to become fully employed and integrated into their communities. To further advance this goal, the Committee requests the 

OPM to review the status of Federal employment policies and to 

consider any changes that may be necessary to help meet the goal 

of employing blind Americans. The Committee notes, for example, 

that the Internal Revenue Service has successfully operated a program with the Lions World Services for the Blind [LWSB] in Little 

Rock, Arkansas for the past 40 years. This program employs blind 

individuals trained by LWSB to work in IRS call centers, which 

could be a model for other Federal agencies. The Committee would 

be pleased to receive a report on this matter including the views 

of the Federal employee labor organizations by July 15, 2009. 
102 

LIMITATION

(TRANSFER OF TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2008 ..................................................................................... $123,901,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 118,082,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 118,082,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust funds 

of the Office of Personnel Management to cover administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance programs, including the 

cost of automating the retirement recordkeeping systems. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation of $118,082,000, which 

is $5,819,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 level and the same as 

the budget request. The amount includes $15,200,000 for retirement systems modernization, the same as the request. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,519,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,538,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,136,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of Inspector General is charged with establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the Office of Personnel Management’s activities which prevent and detect fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency’s programs. Contract audits provide 

professional advice to agency contracting officials on accounting 

and financial matters regarding the negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal agency audits review and evaluate all facets of agency operations, including 

financial statements. Evaluation and inspection services provide 

detailed technical evaluations of agency operations. Insurance audits review the operations of health and life insurance carriers, 

health care providers, and insurance subscribers. The investigative 

function provides for the detection and investigation of improper 

and illegal activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 

Administrative sanctions debar from participation in the health insurance program those health care providers whose conduct may 

pose a threat to the financial integrity of the program itself or to 

the well-being of insurance program enrollees. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,136,000 for 

salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in fiscal 

year 2009. This amount is $617,000 more than the fiscal year 2008 

enacted level and $598,000 more than the budget request. 
103 

(LIMITATION ON TRANSFER FROM TRUST FUNDS)

Limitation, 2008 ..................................................................................... $17,081,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 16,462,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 20,428,000 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the 

trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General activities 

totaling $20,428,000 for fiscal year 2009. This amount is $3,347,000 

more than the fiscal year 2008 enacted level, and $3,966,000 above 

the budget request. The increased funds will help restore the OIG’s 

budget to previous levels and permit additional audits and investigations. 

GOVERNMENT PAYMENT FOR ANNUITANTS, EMPLOYEES HEALTH

BENEFITS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $8,884,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 9,533,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,533,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This appropriation covers the Government’s share of the cost of 

health insurance for annuitants covered by the Federal Employees 

Health Benefits Program and the Retired Federal Employees 

Health Benefits Act of 1960, as well as administrative expenses incurred by OPM for these programs. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 

$9,553,000,000 for Government payments for annuitants, employees health benefits. 

GOVERNMENT PAYMENT FOR ANNUITANTS, EMPLOYEE LIFE

INSURANCE

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $41,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 46,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 46,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Public Law 96–427, the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance 

Act of 1980 requires that all employees under the age of 65 who 

separate from the Federal Government for purposes of retirement 

on or after January 1, 1990, continue to make contributions toward 

their basic life insurance coverage after retirement until they reach 

the age of 65. These retirees will contribute two-thirds of the cost 

of the basic life insurance premium, identical to the amount contributed by active Federal employees for basic life insurance coverage. As with the active Federal employees, the Government is required to contribute one-third of the cost of the premium for retirees’ basic coverage. OPM, acting as the payroll office on behalf of 

Federal retirees, has requested, and the Committee has provided, 

the funding necessary to make the required Government contribu-
104 

tion associated with annuitants’ post-retirement life insurance coverage. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 

$46,000,000 for the Government payment for annuitants, employee 

life insurance. 

PAYMENT TO CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $11,941,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 10,550,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 10,550,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The civil service retirement and disability fund was established 

in 1920 to administer the financing and payment of annuities to retired Federal employees and their survivors. The fund covers the 

operation of the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal 

Employees’ Retirement System. 

This appropriation provides for the Government’s share of retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military service, and survivor 

annuities to eligible former spouses of some annuitants who did not 

elect survivor coverage. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a mandatory appropriation of 

$10,550,000,000 for payment to the civil service retirement and disability fund. 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $17,468,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 17,468,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 17,468,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel [OSC] was first established on 

January 1, 1979. From 1979 until 1989, it operated as an autonomous investigative and prosecutorial arm of the Merit Systems 

Protection Board (the Board). In 1989, Congress enacted the Whistleblower Protection Act (Public Law 101–12), which made OSC an 

independent agency within the executive branch. In 1994, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (Public Law 103–353) became law. It defined employment-related rights 

of persons in connection with military service, prohibited discrimination against them because of that service, and gave OSC new authority to pursue remedies for violations by Federal agencies. 

OSC investigates Federal employee allegations of prohibited personnel practices with an emphasis on protecting Federal Government whistleblowers, and, when appropriate, prosecutes cases before the Merit Systems Protection Board and enforces the Hatch 
105 

Act. OSC also provides a channel for whistleblowing by Federal 

employees, and may transmit allegations of reprisal to whistleblowing to the agency head concerned and require an agency investigation and a report to Congress and the President when appropriate. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,468,000 for 

the Office of Special Counsel. This amount is the same as the budget request and is the same as the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. 

The Committee strongly urges the OSC to work with whistleblower advocacy organizations to promote the highest level of confidence in the Whistleblower Protection Act and the OSC. The 

Committee acknowledges that OSC continues to experience growth 

in its caseload, as a result of heightened awareness of the Hatch 

Act stemming from media focus on several high-profile cases, a 

more vigorous focus on complaints under the Uniformed Services 

Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, and actions under the 

Whistleblower Protection Act. 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. 1 ($14,985,000)

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 14,043,000

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 14,043,000

1The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Public Law 109–435, sec. 603(a)) authorizes appropriations for the Commission out of the off-budget Postal Service Fund beginning in 

fiscal year 2009. Prior to fiscal year 2009, the United States Postal Service Board of Governors 

determined the budget of the Commission. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Postal Regulatory Commission is an independent agency 

that has exercised regulatory oversight over the United States 

Postal Service [USPS] since its creation by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. For over three decades, that oversight consisted 

primarily of conducting public, on-the-record hearings concerning 

proposed rates, mail classification, and major service changes, and 

recommended decisions for action to the Postal Service Board of 

Governors. 

The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act [PAEA] (Public 

Law 109–435) assigned significant new responsibilities to the Commission. These enhanced authorities include providing regulatory 

oversight of the pricing of USPS products and services, ensuring 

USPS transparency and accountability, consulting on delivery service standards and performance measures, consulting on international postal policies, preventing cross-subsidization or other 

anticompetitive postal practices, and serving as a forum to act on 

complaints with postal products and services. The Commission provides leadership and recommends policies that foster a robust and 

viable postal system. 
106 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the Postal 

Fund, of $14,043,000 for the Postal Regulatory Commission. This 

amount is the same as the budget request, and $942,000 below the 

fiscal year 2008 funding level. The funds will support 74 FTEs and 

enable the Commission to conduct a comprehensive review of the 

universal service obligation and the postal monopoly, a financial review of the Postal Service report on costs, revenues, rates, and 

services, and a financial review of the Postal Service compliance 

with section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. 

PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Recommended by the July 22, 2004 report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/11 

Commission), the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 

[PCLOB] was originally established through the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108–458). 

The PCLOB was made a component of the White House Office 

within the Executive Office of the President. 

Under the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–53), the PCLOB was reconstituted as an independent agency within the Executive Branch. The 

mission of the PCLOB is to (1) analyze and review actions the Executive Branch takes to protect the Nation from terrorism, ensuring that the need for such actions is balanced with the need to protect privacy and civil liberties; and (2) ensure that liberty concerns 

are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of laws, regulations, and policies related to efforts to protect 

the Nation against terrorism. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000 for 

the PCLOB. The Committee strongly supports the mission of the 

PCLOB. The Committee notes that the former Board ceased to 

functionally exist after January 30, 2008. The Committee is concerned that the new PCLOB has not yet been reconstituted and 

staffed as required by Public Law 110–53. The Committee urges 

the PCLOB, once it is reconstituted, to promptly provide a detailed 

budget justification to the Committee. 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $906,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 913,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 938,000,000 
107 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] is an independent agency responsible for administering many of the Nation’s 

laws regulating the areas of securities and finance. 

The mission of the SEC is to administer and enforce Federal securities laws in order to protect investors, maintain fair, honest, 

and efficient markets, and promote capital formation. This includes 

ensuring full disclosure of financial information, regulating the Nation’s securities markets, and preventing and policing fraud and 

malpractice in the securities and financial markets. The strength 

of the American economy and our Nation’s financial markets is dependent upon investors’ confidence in the financial disclosures and 

statements released by publicly traded companies. 

The Committee is concerned that American investors may be unwittingly investing in companies with ties to countries that sponsor 

terrorism or are linked to human rights violations. The Committee 

believes that a company’s association with sponsors of terrorism 

and human rights abuses, no matter how large or small, can have 

a materially adverse result on a public company’s operations, financial condition, earnings, and stock prices, all of which can negatively affect the value of an investment. In order to protect American investors’ savings and to disclose these business relationships 

to investors, an Office of Global Security Risk was established 

within the Division of Corporation Finance. The Committee expects 

the work of the Office to remain a high priority during fiscal year 

2009 and directs the SEC to continue to submit quarterly reports 

on its activities. 

The Committee expects the SEC to implement key controls to effectively safeguard the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of 

its financial and sensitive information and systems. 

The Committee encourages the SEC to continue its efforts to improve the timeliness of disbursement of funds to investors victimized by securities fraud. The Committee applauds the SEC’s efforts 

to establish a specialized office devoted to ensuring that funds are 

promptly disbursed and install a new computer system to simplify 

the tracking, collection, and distribution of assessed penalties. 

The Committee is pleased that the SEC has made strides to simplify complex information and improve electronic public access to 

investment information through interactive data systems. 

With the markets experiencing a steady increase in the number 

of complex securities products and market participants and in light 

of problems plaguing the credit markets as a result of subprime 

lending, it is imperative that our Nation’s top securities regulator 

has the resources to effectively meet its mandate. The Committee 

is disappointed that the President’s budget falls short as it provides 

for 378 fewer employees than in 2005 when the SEC received additional funding due to Enron and other corporate scandals and almost 100 less full-time employees than provided for in fiscal year 

2008. As the SEC intensifies its oversight of credit rating agencies 

in response to issues involving structured finance instruments, the 

SEC must have sufficient staff to evaluate the performance of new 

regulations and the quality of information that is available to investors. Staffing shortfalls impact the SEC’s ability to ensure ade-
108 

quate supervision of market participants and promote and sustain 

public confidence in the integrity of our capital markets. 

The Committee is aware that a petition was filed with the Commission on September 18, 2007, calling for the issuance of an interpretative release clarifying the application of existing law to the 

disclosure of risks associated with climate change. The Commission 

is encouraged to give prompt consideration to this petition and to 

provide guidance on the appropriate disclosure of climate risk. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends a total budget (obligational) author- ity of $938,000,000 for the salaries and expenses of the SEC, including $890,000,000 from new fee collections and $48,000,000 

from prior year balances. This total funding level is $32,000,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and $25,000,000 above the 

budget request, to allow the SEC to begin to address staffing shortfalls. 

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $22,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 22,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 22,000,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Selective Service System [SSS] is an independent Federal 

agency, operating with permanent authorization under the Military 

Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.). The agency is 

not part of the Department of Defense [DOD], but its basic mission 

is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces adequate to ensure the security of the United States during a time of 

national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have relied on 

volunteers to fill military manpower requirements. However, the 

Selective Service System remains the primary vehicle by which 

personnel will be brought into the military if Congress and the 

President should authorize a return to the draft. 

In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law (Public 

Law 100–180, sec. 715) to develop plans for a post-mobilization 

health care personnel delivery system capable of providing the necessary critically skilled healthcare personnel to the Armed Forces 

in time of emergency. An automated system capable of handling 

mass registration and inductions is now complete, together with 

necessary draft legislation, a draft Presidential proclamation, prototype forms and letters, and other products. These products will 

be available should the need arise. The development of supplemental standby products, such as a compliance system for health 

care personnel, continues using very limited existing resources. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,000,000 for 

the Selective Service System. This amount is the same as the budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. The 

Committee encourages the System to continue the development of 
109 

its Central Registrant Processing Portal Initiative, and to improve 

the cost effectiveness of the registration process by continuing to 

increase the percentage of electronic and automatic registrations. 

The Committee is concerned that the Service recently experienced compliance problems under 31 U.S.C. 1341, but is encouraged that the Service has taken steps to correct the situation. The 

Committee urges the Service to exercise heightened diligence in its 

budgetary management controls to avoid any recurring issues in 

this area. 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $568,988,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 658,508,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 765,798,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $765,798,000 for the 

Small Business Administration [SBA]. The recommendation is 

$196,810,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and 

$107,290,000 over the budget request. Funding is distributed 

among the SBA appropriation accounts as described below. 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $413,574,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 328,159,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 447,250,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $447,250,000. The recommendation is $33,676,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

level and $119,091,000 above the budget request. 

Within the amounts made available under this heading, the 

Committee recommends grants for the following organizations and 

programs: 

Account Description Amount 

SBA ............. Adelante Development Center for its ACCENT School-to-Work Transition Program, Albuquerque, NM.$250,000 

SBA ............. Alaska Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Inc., for a rural Alaska e-commerce training project, Anchorage, AK.1,100,000 

SBA ............. Albuquerque Hispano Chamber of Commerce workforce training, Albuquerque, NM ......... 245,000 

SBA ............. Alcorn State University for a Systems Research Institute, Alcorn State, MS ..................... 600,000 

SBA ............. Appalachian State University to study the effects of economic growth resulting from 

viticulture and agritourism in western North Carolina, Boone, NC.

750,000 

SBA ............. Association of Vermont Credit Unions, Student financial literacy, Burlington, VT ............ 145,000 

SBA ............. Business and infrastructure development, Mingo County Redevelopment Authority, 

Williamson, WV.

3,500,000 

SBA ............. Business incubator, Arkansas Biosciences Institute, Arkansas State University ............... 520,000 

SBA ............. Cedarbridge small business incubator, Lakewood, NJ ........................................................ 245,000 

SBA ............. Center for Economic Growth, Watervliet Innovation Center, Albany, NY ............................ 300,000 

SBA ............. City of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Small business investment initiative for technical assistance to business enterprises.225,000 

SBA ............. City of San Diego, CA, One-stop small business resource center ...................................... 100,000 

SBA ............. Colorado Enterprise Fund for operating expenses and technical assistance to borrowers, 

Denver, CO.

245,000 

SBA ............. Colorado State University Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Fort Collins, CO ..... 250,000 

SBA ............. Community Links Hawaii for planning and development of Oahu Technology and Innovation Park, Oahu, HI.250,000 

SBA ............. E4 Entrepreneurship for immigrants, minorities, women, and people with disabilities in 

southwest King County, WA.

100,000 

SBA ............. Eastern Washington University, Accelerating economic development in rural, underserved communities of NE Washington.200,000 

SBA ............. Economic development assistance for Wells, NV ................................................................ 640,000 
110 

Account Description Amount 

SBA ............. Economic Development for Central Oregon, Bend Venture Catalyst, Bend, OR ................. 245,000 

SBA ............. Economic Development Training Program, Camden, NJ ...................................................... 100,000 

SBA ............. Entrepreneurial Development Center business accelerator, Cedar Rapids, IA ................... 350,000 

SBA ............. First responder education initiative, Benedictine University, Lisle, IL ................................ 500,000 

SBA ............. Florida Institute of Technology , Florida Advanced Combustion Center ............................. 245,000 

SBA ............. Grambling State University, Expanding Minority Entrepreneurship Regionally Across the 

Louisiana Delta [EMERALD] program.

250,000 

SBA ............. Grays Harbor sustainable industries research and development facility and incubator, 

Port of Grays Harbor, Aberdeen, WA.

450,000 

SBA ............. Grow Inglewood, small business development, Inglewood, CA ........................................... 450,000 

SBA ............. Indiana University, Indiana innovation incubator, Bloomington, IN ................................... 245,000 

SBA ............. International Trade Compliance in Agra-Business, Wichita, KS ......................................... 225,500 

SBA ............. Jackie Joyner-Kersee Center for job training and placement services, East St. Louis, 

IL.

310,000 

SBA ............. Jackson State University for Lynch Street Corridor Redevelopment, Jackson, MS .............. 600,000 

SBA ............. Kansas Bioscience Authority for the Kansas Small Business Biobased Polymer Initiative, 

Olathe, KS.

550,000 

SBA ............. Kansas Farm Bureau for the Kansas Hometown Prosperity Alliance, Manhattan, KS ....... 300,000 

SBA ............. Macomb County business accelerator, Macomb County, MI ............................................... 400,000 

SBA ............. Massachusetts Technology Collaborative Renewable Energy Economic Development Center, Boston, MA.260,000 

SBA ............. Mississippi Biotechnology Association for a Feasibility Study and Capacity Building, 

Jackson, MS.

500,000 

SBA ............. Mississippi State University for Convergence of Scientists and Entrepreneurs to Expedite Commercialization [SCEEC], Starkville, MS.600,000 

SBA ............. Mississippi Technology Alliance for the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurial Services, Jackson, MS.600,000 

SBA ............. Missouri Western State University for the Biotechnology Mobile Workforce Development 

Center, St. Joseph, MO.

1,000,000 

SBA ............. Montana Department of Commerce, for technical assistance and operating expenses of 

the Native American and WIRED program.

520,000 

SBA ............. Montgomery County Action Council for the development of economic growth and the recruitment of small businesses, Independence, KS.500,000 

SBA ............. Myrtle Beach International Trade & Convention Center, Myrtle Beach, SC ........................ 1,000,000 

SBA ............. National Center for Aviation Training for a Technical Education and Training, Wichita, 

KS.

500,000 

SBA ............. Native Hawaiian Organizations Association, Entrepreneurial Development & Government 

Procurement Center, Honolulu, HI.

300,000 

SBA ............. Nebraska Community Foundation, HomeTown Competitiveness, Lincoln, NE ..................... 300,000 

SBA ............. New Castle County Chamber of Commerce, Emerging Enterprise Center, business incubator, DE.520,000 

SBA ............. North Dakota State College of Science, Nanotechnology Applied Science Laboratory ....... 375,000 

SBA ............. Northern Community Development Corporation, Northeast Kingdom [NEK] wireless LINC, 

VT.

300,000 

SBA ............. Northern Kentucky University’s College of Informatics, Highland Heights, KY ................... 2,000,000 

SBA ............. Ohio University, Economic Development through Entrepreneurship in Appalachia [EDEA] 245,000 

SBA ............. Pellissippi Research Centre on the Oak Ridge Corridor, Alcoa, TN .................................... 700,000 

SBA ............. Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse, Tech Belt Biosciences Initiative, Pittsburgh, PA .... 245,000 

SBA ............. ReCycle North, Green-collar enterprise program, Burlington, VT ........................................ 100,000 

SBA ............. Rhode Island Rural Development Council and Farm Fresh Rhode Island, for Rhode Island small business development.350,000 

SBA ............. Rural Economic Area Partnership [REAP] Zones, Rugby, ND .............................................. 250,000 

SBA ............. Rural Enterprise Institute’s Native American Rural Business and Resource Center at 

Eastern Oklahoma State College, Wilburton, OK.

500,000 

SBA ............. Safer Foundation for transitional employment placement, Chicago, IL ............................. 500,000 

SBA ............. Small Business and Economic Opportunity Office, Essex County, NJ ................................ 375,000 

SBA ............. Small business green development, City of East Providence, RI ....................................... 245,000 

SBA ............. Small business trade assistance office, Prince George’s County, MD ............................... 100,000 

SBA ............. South Dakota State University, technology-based economic development ......................... 475,000 

SBA ............. Southern Illinois University for the Southern Illinois Research Park, Carbondale, IL ........ 500,000 

SBA ............. Southwestern Pennsylvania Advanced Robotics Business Accelerator, Pittsburgh, PA ...... 700,000 

SBA ............. St. Leo Residence for Veterans for job training, Catholic Charities, Chicago, IL .............. 500,000 

SBA ............. TechTown Small Business Clinic, Wayne State Law School ............................................... 175,000 

SBA ............. University of Connecticut Avery Point, business incubator, Groton, CT ............................. 120,000 

SBA ............. University of Connecticut Health Center business incubator, Farmington, CT .................. 325,000 
111 

Account Description Amount 

SBA ............. University of Kansas for Equipment for Pharmaceutical Small Business Development, 

Kansas City, KS.

450,000 

SBA ............. University of Kansas Hospital for Medical Faculty Small Business Development, Kansas 

City, KS.

700,000 

SBA ............. University of Maryland—Baltimore BioPark ........................................................................ 450,000 

SBA ............. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Advanced Technical and Manufacturing Center 

business incubator, Fall River, MA.

260,000 

SBA ............. University of Southern Mississippi for Early Stage Entrepreneur Development, Hattiesburg, MS.600,000 

SBA ............. University of Wisconsin—Milwaukee, University-industry partnership to foster rapid development of businesses in water industries.300,000 

SBA ............. University Technology Park, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL ........................... 500,000 

SBA ............. Virginia’s Center for Innovative Technology, Mine safety technology and communication 

improvements, Herndon, VA.

250,000 

SBA ............. Washington Hancock Community Agency for a Microbusiness Assistance Program, 

Milbridge, ME.

250,000 

SBA ............. World Trade Center Utah Partnership Initiative, Salt Lake City, UT ................................... 400,000 

Within the amounts made available under this heading, the 

Committee recommendation provides $160,257,000 for the SBA 

non-credit business assistance programs. The recommendation is 

$49,240,000 above the budget request and $19,311,000 above the 

2008 enacted level. 

The Committee recommendations for non-credit business assistance, by program, are displayed in the following table: 

NON-CREDIT BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Committee 

recommendation 

Small Business Development Centers ............................................................................................................. 110,000 

Drug-free Workplace Grants ............................................................................................................................. 1,020 

SCORE .............................................................................................................................................................. 5,120 

Women’s Business Centers .............................................................................................................................. 13,450 

Women’s Business Council .............................................................................................................................. 775 

Microloan Technical Assistance ....................................................................................................................... 20,000 

Veterans Programs ........................................................................................................................................... 1,200 

PRIME ............................................................................................................................................................... 3,105 

Native American Outreach ............................................................................................................................... 1,033 

7(j) Technical Assistance ................................................................................................................................. 2,380 

HUBZone ........................................................................................................................................................... 2,174 

Total, Non-credit Business Assistance Programs .............................................................................. 160,257 

The Committee continues to support the Small Business Development Center [SBDC] Program. Of the amounts provided for the 

SBDC program, $1,000,000 is for the Veterans Assistance and 

Services Program as authorized by Public Law 110–186 and 

$1,000,000 is for the Small Business Energy Efficiency Program as 

authorized by Public Law 110–140. The Committee directs SBA to 

keep the Committee apprised of funding provided under these two 

programs for fiscal years 2008 and 2009. 

The Committee provides $1,200,000 for veterans programs, an 

increase of $457,000 above both the budget request and the fiscal 

year 2008 enacted level to support additional grants to veterans 

business outreach centers. When determining the allocation of the 

additional funding, the Committee encourages SBA to consider cen-
112 

ters with significant experience in conducting outreach to veterans, 

including those previously receiving Federal funding. 

The Committee provides funds above the request to hire two additional staff in support of the agency-wide effort to modernize 

SBA’s loan management and accounting systems. The Committee 

is encouraged by SBA’s efforts towards modernizing the agency’s 

core systems. Current systems are outdated and limit capabilities, 

and new systems are needed to enhance the management of SBA’s 

$85,000,000,000 loan portfolio. However, the Committee is concerned with the risk inherent in such a relatively large acquisition 

and the extent of reliance on contractor assistance. Additional 

funding is provided to hire one new staff within the Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer who shall be dedicated exclusively to quality assurance and contractor oversight for the loan management 

and accounting system and to hire one new executive-level staff 

who shall be dedicated exclusively to agency-wide management, coordination, and implementation of the new system. The Committee 

directs the agency to continue consultations with other Federal 

agencies regarding best practices involving design, acquisition, and 

implementation of new systems and regarding contractor oversight. 

SBA shall submit a quarterly written report to the Committee on 

Appropriations summarizing the agency’s progress regarding the 

modernization effort, including milestones planned and achieved 

and progress on cost and schedule. 

The Committee is concerned with deficiencies in SBA’s oversight 

of supervised lenders, as detailed in a report from the SBA Inspector General [IG]. Lending is a core function of the SBA, and proper 

oversight is key to adequately protecting taxpayer dollars. The 

Committee urges SBA to implement the IG recommendations, particularly regarding the establishment of risk mitigation goals and 

the development of standard procedures and guidance to ensure 

that enforcement is sufficiently aggressive and consistent. 

SBA shall submit a report to the Committee on Appropriations 

within 270 days of enactment on the Microloan program. The report shall include information regarding the program’s outcome 

measures, the number and dollar amount of lending, borrower profiles, performance of loans, income growth and improved sustainability of businesses benefiting from the program, job creation resulting from the program, and potential unmet need in the program. The report shall also address performance of program participants, such as intermediaries and non-lending technical assistance providers, and steps SBA has taken to implement recommendations of the 2003 report from the SBA Inspector General, 

particularly regarding the enforcement of reporting requirements 

in the Microloan program. 

The Committee encourages SBA to consider options for donating, 

or offering at discounted prices, used equipment, including computers, for appropriate use by small businesses located in the 

United States. The Committee directs SBA to report to the Committee on Appropriations within 270 days after enactment on potential plans for such donations. 

The Committee directs the SBA Office of Advocacy to conduct a 

study on broadband penetration levels and payment of broadband 

services among small businesses in the United States. The Com-
113 

mittee directs the SBA to provide a preliminary report to the Committee on Appropriations within 180 days of enactment and a final 

report within 1 year of enactment. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $15,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 15,500,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 15,500,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $15,500,000 for the Of- fice of Inspector General. The recommendation is $500,000 above 

the fiscal year 2008 enacted level and the same as the budget request. 

The Committee directs the Inspector General to continue routine 

analysis and reporting on SBA’s modernization of its loan management and accounting systems, including acquisition, contractor 

oversight, implementation, and progress regarding budget and 

schedule. 

SURETY BOND GUARANTEES REVOLVING FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,000,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $2,000,000. The rec- ommendation is $1,000,000 below the fiscal year 2008 enacted level 

and the same as the budget request. 

BUSINESS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $137,414,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 138,480,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 140,980,000 

The Committee recommendation provides $140,980,000. The rec- ommendation is $3,566,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level 

and $2,500,000 above the budget request. The recommendation provides $138,480,000 for administrative 

expenses, which may be transferred to and merged with SBA salaries and expenses to cover the common overhead expenses associated with the business loans programs. The recommendation provides $2,500,000 for the Microloan direct 

loan program. The Committee is concerned with the administration’s request to increase the fees paid by small businesses seeking 

assistance under the Microloan program in order to eliminate Federal spending on the Microloan program. 

DISASTER LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... $174,369,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 160,068,000 

The Committee provides $160,068,000 for necessary administrative expenses of the Disaster Loans program. Any direct loan subsidies required in fiscal year 2009 will be derived from available 

unobligated balances. As always, SBA is urged to seek out emergency funding in the event of a disaster requiring loan assistance. 
114 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

Section 520 continues a provision concerning transfer authority 

and availability of funds. 

Section 521 provides that all disaster loans issued in Alaska or 

North Dakota shall not be sold. 

Section 522 prohibits the Small Business Administration from 

implementing a proposed rule that would limit the use of solesource contracts for women-owned small businesses to only four industries. 

Section 523 provides for a transfer of previously appropriated 

funds into the account for salaries and expenses. 

HARRY S. TRUMAN SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. $500,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation is an independent 

agency established by Congress in 1975 (Public Law 93–642) to encourage exceptional college students to pursue careers in public 

service through the Truman Scholarship program. The Truman 

Scholarship is a merit-based award available to college juniors who 

plan to pursue careers in Government or elsewhere in public service. Truman Scholars receive up to $30,000 for graduate or professional school, participate in leadership development activities, and 

have special opportunities for internships and employment with 

the Federal Government. 

The Foundation Trust Fund was established with a one-time 

$30,000,000 appropriation in 1976. The authorizing legislation directed that this endowment be invested solely in U.S. Treasury Securities, the interest from which has funded the Foundation’s operating budget. With the decline in interest rates, the Foundation 

has experienced a significant decline in Federal financial support. 

From fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2009, despite having cut expenditures by 27 percent, annual trust fund revenue has declined 

25 percent. The Foundation anticipates a budget deficit of $243,220 

for fiscal year 2009 if appropriations are not provided. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $500,000 for the 

Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation. No funding was provided in fiscal year 2008 or in the budget request. The appropriation is provided to offset the decline in trust fund revenues, to increase direct financial support to scholars, to ensure compliance 

with government audit reporting requirements, and to invest in 

technology and financial development activities. The Committee includes a provision clarifying findings necessary to invest the Truman Scholarship Trust Fund in par value special Treasury securities. 
115 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

PAYMENT TO THE POSTAL SERVICE FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $117,864,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 82,831,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 111,831,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Post Office dates back to 1775. It became the Postal Service 

in 1971 as an independent establishment of the executive branch 

of the United States Government. The Postal Service’s basic function and obligation is to provide postal services to bind the Nation 

together through the personal, educational, literary, and business 

correspondence of the people. Its mission is to provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and render postal 

services to all communities. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends appropriations totaling $111,831,000 for payment to the Postal Service Fund, an increase 

of $29,000,000 above the budget request and $6,033,000 below the 

fiscal year 2008 enacted level. This amount includes $29,000,000 for revenue forgone on free 

and reduced-rate mail pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 2401(d). The recommendation also includes $82,831,000 as an advance appropriation for fiscal year 2010, which includes $67,526,000 for 2009 costs 

and $15,305,000 for 2006 reconciliation adjustments. 

Revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail enables postage 

rates to be set at levels below the unsubsidized rates for certain 

categories of mail as authorized by subsections (c) and (d) of section 

2401 of title 39, United States Code. Free mail for the blind and 

overseas voters will continue to be provided at the funding level 

recommended by the Committee. 

The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would assure 

that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind shall continue 

to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural delivery of mail shall continue without reduction; and that none of the funds provided be 

used to consolidate or close small rural and other small post offices 

in fiscal year 2009. These are services that must be maintained in 

fiscal year 2009 and beyond. 

The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery is one of the 

most important services provided by the Federal Government to its 

citizens. Especially in rural and small town America, this critical 

postal service is the linchpin that serves to bind the Nation together. 

Mail Delivery in Chicago.—The Committee is encouraged by survey reports released in June 2008 indicating improvements in firstclass mail delivery in Chicago, Illinois, and acknowledges the comprehensive review and changes instituted by the Postmaster General to upgrade postal operations and improve customer service. 

The Committee will continue to closely follow the Postal Service’s 

management reform initiatives in order to secure and sustain the 

highest level of mail delivery service for postal consumers in Chicago. 
116 

Postal Facility Restoration in Louisiana.—The Committee strongly encourages the Postal Service to expedite its efforts to assess 

service needs, reestablish postal facilities, improve mail delivery, 

and enhance product and service offerings to customers in New Orleans and other Louisiana communities affected by Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita which struck the Gulf Coast in 2005. The Committee commends the Postal Service’s announced plans to restore 

retail facilities in Lakeview, Gentilly, and Chef Manteur districts 

by the end of 2008, and urges the Postal Service to keep pace with 

the needs of its residential and business customers as the communities rebuild. 

Mail-Related Recycling Initiatives.—In 2006, the Postal Service 

discarded approximately 317,000 tons of undeliverable-as-addressed advertising mail. Such mail can be disposed of using incinerators, landfills, and other methods. As the Government Accountability Office recently reported, recycling undeliverable advertising 

mail and mail discarded by customers in postal facility lobbies provides the Postal Services with a means to generate substantial revenues, significantly reduce its waste disposal costs, and improve its 

financial position. The Committee understands that the Postal 

Service and the mailing industry have undertaken a variety of initiatives to increase the recycling of mail-related material and the 

amount of mail with environmentally preferable attributes, such as 

recycled paper. For example, the Postal Service has established annual goals to increase its revenue from mail-related recycling from 

$7,500,000 in fiscal year 2007 to $40,000,000 in fiscal year 2010 

and has conducted a pilot recycling program in New York City. The 

Committee strongly urges the Postal Service to seek additional savings resulting from lower waste disposal costs which accompany increased recycling. The Committee encourages the Postal Service to 

routinely examine the cost, feasibility, and mission compatibility of 

other opportunities to fulfill its commitment to minimize the agency’s impact on every aspect of the environment and demonstrate its 

commitment to environmental stewardship. 

Consolidation of Mail Processing Facilities.—The Committee remains concerned about the findings of a Government Accountability Office [GAO] report released in June 2007, as well as GAO 

testimony before Congress in July 2007, that raise serious questions about the United States Postal Service’s mail realignment efforts, including unclear criteria for selecting facilities and for making decision about area mail processing [AMP] consolidations, and 

a lack of appropriate stakeholder and public input when considering potential consolidations. The Committee awaits a GAO report 

on its evaluation of Postal Service reports providing updated AMP 

guidance on communications with the public and on a Facilities 

Plan. The Committee is aware that the Postal Service has decided 

not to proceed with AMPs in Aberdeen, South Dakota and Yakima, 

Washington. The Committee directs the Postal Service not to proceed with the Sioux City, Iowa AMP until after the GAO has reported to Congress and the Committee has had an opportunity to 

review GAO’s findings. 

Emergency Preparedness.—Congress appropriated funds in fiscal 

year 2005 for the Postal Service’s use for a mail treatment facility 

in Washington, DC, in the aftermath of the anthrax attacks using 
117 

the U.S. mail. In fiscal year 2008, the Committee directed the 

Comptroller General to assess the status of the treatment process, 

including the cost of the treatment; the volume of treated mail and 

how it has changed over time; and the extent of delays in mail delivery as a result of the treatment step and how they have changed 

over time. That GAO study is underway. The Committee has 

learned that none of the funds designated for the facility construction have been spent. The Committee understands that the Postal 

Service expects to issue a solicitation for a new irradiation services 

contract later this year, and does not expect to make a final decision on the use of the funding until the solicitation process is concluded in early 2009. Once the solicitation process is concluded, the 

Committee directs the Postal Service to keep the Committee 

promptly and regularly informed on its treatment processes and to 

consult with the Committee on its future plans for securing mail 

irradiation services, including costs. 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. 1 ($233,440,000) 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 239,356,000

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 239,356,000

1The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (Public Law 109–435, sec. 603(b)(3)) authorizes appropriations for the Postal Service Inspector General out of the off-budget Postal Service 

Fund beginning in fiscal year 2009. Prior to fiscal year 2009, the United States Postal Service 

Board of Governors determined the budget of the Postal Service Office of Inspector General. 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The United States Postal Service [USPS] Office of Inspector General [OIG] is an independent organization established in 1996 and 

charged with reporting to Congress on the overall efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of USPS programs and operations. The OIG 

plays a key role in maintaining the integrity and accountability of 

America’s postal service, its revenue and assets, and its employees. 

The OIG meets this responsibility by conducting and supervising 

objective and independent audits, investigations, and other reviews. In fiscal year 2007, the OIG identified potential financial impact on Postal Service operations of nearly $1,970,000,000, recovered over $24,000,000 to the Postal Service, and identified over 

$150,000,000 in workers’ compensation program cost avoidance. 

These results were identified by conducting over 300 audits and 

over 7,000 investigations. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation, out of the Postal 

Fund, of $239,356,000 for the United States Postal Service Office 

of Inspector General. This amount is the same as the budget request, and $5,916,000 above the fiscal year 2008 funding level. The 

funds will support 1,194 FTEs and enable the Office of Inspector 

General to concentrate on its fiscal year 2009 priorities of completing over 350 audits and 7,800 investigative cases and 100 percent of mandated audits, and referring over 5,500 fraud, waste, or 
118 

abuse investigative cases for criminal prosecution, civil litigation, 

or administrative action, as well as focus on Postal Service high 

risk areas. 

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $45,326,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 48,463,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 48,463,000 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the legislative branch established in 1969 under Article I of the Constitution of the United States. The Court was created to provide a national forum for the resolution of disputes between taxpayers and 

the Internal Revenue Service, resolve cases expeditiously while giving careful consideration to the merits of each matter, and ensure 

the uniform interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code. The matters over which the Court has jurisdiction are set forth in various 

sections of title 26 of the United States Code. 

The court is composed of 19 judges, one of whom the judges elect 

as chief judge. In their judicial duties the judges are assisted by 

senior judges, who participate in the adjudication of regular cases, 

and by special trial judges, who hear small tax cases and certain 

regular cases assigned to them by the chief judge. 

The court conducts trial sessions throughout the United States, 

including Hawaii and Alaska. Decisions by the court are reviewable 

by the U.S. Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is granted, by the 

Supreme Court. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $48,463,000 for 

the U.S. Tax Court. This amount is the same as the budget request 

and $3,137,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. The Committee notes that the increased funding is expected to help the Tax 

Court comply with the Court Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110– 

177) which authorizes the United States Marshals Service to provide protective services to the Tax Court at the same level as such 

services are provided to other Federal Courts on a reimbursable 

basis. This level of protection includes the presence of United 

States Marshals Service security personnel in courtrooms where 

the Tax Court presides. In addition, the funds will enable the Tax 

Court to fill necessary staff vacancies to fulfill its statutory mission. 

STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The Financial Services and General Government appropriation 

bill includes general provisions which govern both the activities of 

the agencies covered by the bill, and, in some cases, activities of 

agencies, programs, and general government activities that are not 

covered by the bill. 
119 

The bill contains a number of general provisions that have been 

carried in this bill for years and which are routine in nature and 

scope. General provisions in the bill are explained under this section of the report. Those general provisions that deal with a single 

agency only are shown immediately following that particular agency’s or department’s appropriation accounts in the bill. Those provisions that address activities or directives affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill are contained in title VI. General provisions 

that are governmentwide in scope are contained in title VII of this 

bill. General provisions applicable to the District of Columbia are 

contained in title VIII of this bill. 
(120) 

TITLE VI 

GENERAL PROVISIONS THIS ACT 

Section 601 continues the provision prohibiting pay and other expenses of non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this act. 

Section 602 continues the provision prohibiting obligations beyond the current fiscal year and prohibits transfers of funds unless 

expressly provided. 

Section 603 continues the provision limiting expenditures for consulting service through procurement contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public record and available for public inspection. 

Section 604 continues the provision prohibiting funds in this act 

to be transferred without express authority. 

Section 605 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to engage in activities that would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act (46 Stat. 590). 

Section 606 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

unless the recipient agrees to comply with the Buy American Act. 

Section 607 continues the provision prohibiting funding for any 

person or entity convicted of violating the Buy American Act. 

Section 608 continues and modifies the provision authorizing the 

reprogramming of funds and specifies the reprogramming procedures for agencies funded by this act. 

Section 609 continues the provision ensuring that 50 percent of 

unobligated balances may remain available for certain purposes. 

Section 610 continues the provision restricting the use of funds 

for the Executive Office of the President to request official background reports from the Federal Bureau of Investigation without 

the written consent of the individual who is the subject of the report. 

Section 611 continues the provision ensuring that the cost accounting standards shall not apply with respect to a contract under 

the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. 

Section 612 continues the provision referencing non-foreign area 

cost of living allowances. 

Section 613 continues the provision waiving restrictions on the 

purchase of non-domestic articles, materials, and supplies in the 

case of acquisition by the Federal Government of information technology. 

Section 614 continues a provision on the acceptance by agencies 

or commissions funded by this act, or by their officers or employees, 

of payment or reimbursement for travel, subsistence, or related expenses from any person or entity (or their representative) that engages in activities regulated by such agencies or commissions. 
121 

Section 615 makes technical corrections to changes made in Public Law 110–161 regarding the dollar coin. 

Section 616 enables the United States Tax Court to implement 

a provision included in the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (Public 

Law 109–280) which authorized the payment of certain group life 

insurance premiums on behalf of its eligible judges. 

Section 617 allows the Public Company Accounting Oversight 

Board to obligate amounts collected from monetary penalties for 

the purpose of funding scholarships for accounting students, as authorized by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–204). 

Section 618 prohibits the use of funds to enforce a provision of 

the Cuban Assets Control Regulations that impedes sales to Cuba. 

Section 619 is a provision relating to travel to Cuba for commercial sales of agricultural and medical goods. 

Section 620 is a provision relating to travel to visit family in 

Cuba. 

Section 621 continues for 4 fiscal years the provision prohibiting 

the use of funds for a proposed rule related to the determination 

that real estate brokerage activities are financial activities. 

Section 622 provides authorization for appropriations to the 

Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation. 

Section 623 directs the Federal Trade Commission to conduct a 

rulemaking under the Administrative Procedures Act with respect 

to subprime mortgage loans and nontraditional mortgage loans. 
(122) 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNMENT-WIDE, 

DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND CORPORATIONS 

Section 701 continues the provision requiring agencies to administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its workplaces are free 

from the illegal use of controlled substances. 

Section 702 continues the provision setting specific limits on the 

cost of passenger vehicles purchased by the Federal Government 

with exceptions for police, heavy duty, electric hybrid, and clean 

fuels vehicles. 

Section 703 continues the provision allowing funds made available to agencies for travel to also be used for quarters allowances 

and cost-of-living allowances. 

Section 704 continues and modifies the provision prohibiting the 

government, with certain specified exceptions, from employing nonU.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be in the continental 

United States. 

Section 705 continues the provision ensuring that agencies will 

have authority to pay the General Services Administration bills for 

space renovation and other services. 

Section 706 continues the provision allowing agencies to finance 

the costs of recycling and waste prevention programs with proceeds 

from the sale of materials recovered through such programs. 

Section 707 continues the provision providing that funds may be 

used to pay rent and other service costs in the District of Columbia. 

Section 708 continues the provision precluding interagency financing of groups absent prior statutory approval. 

Section 709 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in accordance 

with the applicable law of the United States. 

Section 710 continues the provision limiting the pay increases of 

certain prevailing rate employees. 

Section 711 continues the provision limiting the amount that can 

be used for redecoration of offices under certain circumstances. 

Section 712 continues the provision that permits interagency 

funding of national security and emergency preparedness telecommunications initiatives, which benefit multiple Federal departments, agencies, and entities. 

Section 713 continues the provision requiring agencies to certify 

that a schedule C appointment was not created solely or primarily 

to detail the employee to the White House and modifies the list of 

agencies to which the provision does not apply. 

Section 714 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to prevent Federal employees from communicating with Congress 

or to take disciplinary or personnel actions against employees for 

such communication. 
123 

Section 715 continues the provision prohibiting Federal training 

not directly related to the performance of official duties. 

Section 716 continues the provision prohibiting the expenditure 

of funds for the implementation of agreements in certain nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are included in the policies. 

Section 717 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda designed to support or 

defeat legislation pending before Congress. 

Section 718 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds by an agency to provide home addresses of Federal 

employees to labor organizations, absent employee authorization or 

court order. 

Section 719 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds to provide non-public information such as mailing or 

telephone lists to any person or organization outside of the Government without approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Section 720 continues the provision prohibiting the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes within the 

United States not authorized by Congress. 

Section 721 continues the provision directing agencies’ employees 

to use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties. 

Section 722 continues the provision authorizing the use of current fiscal year funds to finance an appropriate share of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board administrative costs. 

Section 723 continues the provision authorizing agencies to 

transfer funds to or reimburse the Government-wide Policy account 

of the General Services Administration to finance an appropriate 

share of various government-wide boards and councils. 

Section 724 continues the provision authorizing breastfeeding at 

any location in a Federal building or on Federal property. 

Section 725 continues the provision permitting interagency funding of the National Science and Technology Council, and requiring 

an OMB report on the budget and resources of the Council. 

Section 726 continues the provision requiring identification of the 

Federal agencies providing Federal funds and the amount provided 

for all proposals, solicitations, grant applications, forms, notifications, press releases, or other publications related to the distribution of funding to a State. 

Section 727 continues the provision prohibiting the use of funds 

to monitor personal information relating to the use of Federal 

Internet sites. 

Section 728 continues the provision regarding contraceptive coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan. 

Section 729 continues the provision recognizing the U.S. AntiDoping Agency as the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan 

American, and Paralympic sports in the United States. 

Section 730 continues the provision allowing departments and 

agencies to use official travel funds to participate in the fractional 

aircraft ownership pilot programs. 

Section 731 continues the provision prohibiting funds for implementation of OPM regulations limiting detailees to the legislative 

branch and placing certain limitations on the Coast Guard Congressional Fellowship program. 
124 

Section 732 continues the provision prohibiting the expenditure 

of funds for the acquisition of certain additional Federal law enforcement training facilities. 

Section 733 continues the provision concerning the use of funds 

for the ‘‘e-Gov’’ initiative that were not appropriated specifically for 

that purpose. 

Section 734 continues the provision providing funding for the 

Midway Atoll Airfield. 

Section 735 is a new provision that amends section 739(b) of the 

Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 

2008, relating to insourcing of new and contracted out functions. 

Section 736 is a new provision that amends section 739(a)(1) of 

the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2008, relating to requirements for public-private competitions. 

Section 737 is a new provision that prohibits the use of funds to 

begin or announce a study or public-private competition regarding 

the conversion to contractor performance of any function performed 

by civilian Federal employees pursuant to Office of Management 

and Budget Circular A–76 or any other administrative regulation, 

directive, or policy. The provision is a 1-year moratorium on new 

A–76 studies so that the new Administration may have an opportunity to review and develop Federal workforce policies. 

Section 738 continues a provision, with modifications, providing 

that the adjustment in rates of basic pay for employees under statutory pay systems taking effect in fiscal year 2009 shall be an increase of 3.9 percent. 

Section 739 continues a provision that prohibits executive branch 

agencies from creating or funding prepackaged news stories that 

are broadcast or distributed in the United States unless specific notification conditions are met. 

Section 740 continues the provision prohibiting funds used in 

contravention of the Privacy Act, section 552a of title 5, United 

States Code or section 522.224 of title 48 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

Section 741 continues the provision requiring each department 

and agency to evaluate the creditworthiness of an individual before 

issuing the individual a Government purchase charge card or travel card. 

Section 742 continues a provision requiring the Office of Management and Budget to submit a crosscut budget report on Great 

Lakes restoration activities not later than 30 days after the submission of the budget of the President to Congress. 

Section 743 includes a provision prohibiting funds from being 

used for any Federal Government contract with any foreign incorporated entity which is treated as an inverted domestic corporation. 

Section 744 includes a provision requiring improvements to enhance public access to information on agency Inspector General 

websites. 

Section 745 prohibits the expenditure of funds on public-private 

competitions under Office of Management and Budget [OMB] Circular A–76, or direct conversions, related to the Human Resources 

Lines of Business initiative until 60 days after OMB submits a report to the Committees on Appropriations addressing several speci-
125 

fied issues of concern. The section also would require that OMB 

submit a copy of its report to the Government Accountability Office 

[GAO] when it is submitted to the Committees. GAO is required to 

brief the Committees on its views of the OMB report within 45 

days of receiving it. OMB shall provide GAO with full and timely 

access to the documents, analyses, and personnel the GAO determines it needs to conduct a thorough review of the OMB report and 

provide the Committees with its views. 

Section 746 requires the Office of Management and Budget to 

provide a report no later than 120 days after enactment on the status of a pilot program to develop and implement an inventory to 

track the cost and size of service contracts in at least three cabinetlevel departments, as required by section 748 of division D of Public Law 110–161. 

Section 747 permits executive branch employees to participate in 

private sector programs that offer inducements such as the repayment or forgiveness of student loans, notwithstanding the prohibition of supplementation of salary under 18 U.S.C. 209. 

Section 748 makes permanent a modification to existing law that 

prohibits funds to pay the salary of an individual for a position in 

an acting capacity for which that individual’s nomination has been 

submitted to the Senate but returned to the President under Rule 

XXXI of the Standing Rules of the Senate without confirmation. 

Section 749 prohibits the Office of Personnel Management or any 

other agency from using funds to implement regulations changing 

the competitive areas under reductions-in-force for Federal employees. 

Section 750 is a new provision allowing Federal employees who 

are members of the National Guard and Reserve to maintain their 

normal Federal salary when called to active duty by requiring their 

employing agencies to make up the difference between their military pay and what they would have earned at their Federal job. 

Section 751 directs agencies to include information in budget justifications submitted to Congress regarding redirection of congressionally directed funding. 

Section 752 declares the inapplicability of these general provisions to title IV and title VIII. 

Section 753 is a new provision requiring reports on Executive 

Branch workforce composition. 
(126) 

TITLE VIII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Section 801 continues the provision that specifies that an appropriation for a particular purpose or object shall be considered as 

the maximum amount that may be expended for said purpose or 

object. 

Section 802 continues the provision that permits funds for travel 

and payment of dues. 

Section 803 continues the provision that appropriates funds for 

refunding overpayments of taxes collected and for paying settlements and judgments against the District of Columbia government. 

Section 804 continues the provision that prohibits the use of the 

appropriation for publicity or propaganda purposes, and permits 

the use of local funds for carry out lobbying activity. 

Section 805 continues the provision that establishes reprogramming and transfer requirements with respect to notification requirements for the reprogramming of local funds. 

Section 806 continues the provision that restricts the use of 

funds only to the objects for which the appropriations were made. 

Section 807 continues the provision that directs the Mayor of the 

District of Columbia to submit new fiscal year 2009 revenue estimates as of the end of the first quarter of the fiscal year. 

Section 808 continues the provision that prohibits the use of Federal funds for salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the 

offices of U.S. Senator or Representative under section 4(d) of the 

D.C. Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979. 

Section 809 continues the provision restricting use of Federal 

funds for the implementation or enforcement of the Health Care 

Benefits Expansion Act of 1992. 

Section 810 continues and makes permanent the provision that 

allows the mayor to accept, obligate, and expend Federal, private, 

and other grants received by the District government that are not 

reflected in the amounts appropriated in this act. 

Section 811 continues the provision that restricts the use of official vehicles to official duties and not between a residence and 

workplace, except under certain circumstances. 

Section 812 continues the provision that prohibits the use of appropriated funds by the District of Columbia Attorney General or 

any other officer or entity of the District government to provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action which seeks to require 

Congress to provide for voting representation in Congress for the 

District of Columbia. 

Section 813 continues the provision that prohibits the use of any 

Federal funds in this act to carry out any program of distributing 
127 

sterile needles or syringes for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug. 

Section 814 continues the provision that requires the Chief Financial Officers of the District of Columbia to certify that they understand the duties and restrictions applicable to their agency as 

a result of this act. 

Section 815 continues the provision that includes a ‘‘conscience 

clause’’ on legislation that pertains to contraceptive coverage by 

health insurance plans. 

Section 816 modifies the provision that requires the Mayor of the 

District of Columbia to submit reports on various indicators pertaining to the District of Columbia. 

Section 817 modifies the provision relating to the use of any 

funds in the act to pay the fees of an attorney who represents a 

party in an action or any attorney who defends any action, including an administrative proceeding, brought against D.C. Public 

Schools under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

[IDEA]. 

Section 818 continues and makes permanent the provision that 

allows for appropriations in this act to be increased by no more 

than $100,000,000 from unexpended general funds, and used only 

for one-time expenditures, to avoid deficit spending, for debt reduction, for program needs, or to avoid revenue shortfalls. 

Section 819 continues and makes permanent the provision that 

allows the District to spend ‘‘other-type funds’’ under certain conditions. 

Section 820 continues and makes permanent the provision that 

allows for short-term borrowing from the emergency and contingency reserve funds established under section 450A of the District 

of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public Law 98–198; D.C. Official 

Code, sec. 1–204.50a) under certain circumstances. 

Section 821 continues the provision prohibiting use of funds to 

change the legality of marijuana use. 

Section 822 continues the provision relating to abortion. 

Section 823 continues a provision to mitigate the necessity for 

dual budgeting of local funds when such funds are transferred but 

not expended. 

Section 824 provides for a waiver of the Congressional review period in order to permit the Income Tax Secured Bond Authorization 

Act of 2008, as introduced on May 6, 2008 (D.C. Bill 17–741), to 

take effect on the date of its enactment by the District of Columbia. 

Section 825 is a new provision authorizing an increase in the 

hourly rate paid to attorneys appointed to represent indigent persons in matters before the District of Columbia local courts. 

Section 826 continues the provision which limits references to 

‘‘this Act’’ as referring to only this title. 
(128) 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment to 

the House bill ‘‘which proposes an item of appropriation which is 

not made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty 

stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate 

during that session.’’ 

Items providing funding for fiscal year 2009 which lack authorization are as follows: 

Department of the Treasury 

Departmental Offices 

Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments 

Office of the Inspector General 

Inspector General for Tax Administration 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 

Financial Management Service 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 

Bureau of the Public Debt 

Community Development and Financial Institutions Fund 

Internal Revenue Service: 

Taxpayer Services 

Enforcement 

Operations Support 

Business Systems Modernization 

Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration 

Executive Office of the President 

Office of Management and Budget 

ONDCP: Training for drug court professionals 

District of Columbia 

Federal Payment for the DC Water and Sewer Authority 

Federal Payment for School Improvement 

Federal Payment to Jumpstart Public School Reform 

Federal Payment for Central Library and Branch Locations 

Federal Payment for Consolidated Laboratory Facility 

Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the District of 

Columbia 

Federal Payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor 

Independent Agencies 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

Election Assistance Commission 

Federal Communications Commission 

Federal Election Commission 
129 

Federal Trade Commission 

General Services Administration: 

Federal Building Fund 

GSA E-government Fund 

Office of Government Ethics 

Office of Special Counsel 

Merit Systems Protection Board 

National Credit Union Administration: Community Development 

Revolving Loan Fund 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(c), RULE XXVI, OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 10, 2008, the 

Committee ordered reported an original bill (S. 3260) making appropriations for financial services and general government for the 

fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and authorized the chairman of the Committee or the chairman of the subcommittee to offer 

the text of the Senate bill as a Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute to the House companion measure, with the bill 

subject to amendment and subject to the budget allocations, by a 

recorded vote of 29–0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows: 

Yeas Nays 

Chairman Byrd 

Mr. Inouye 

Mr. Leahy 

Mr. Harkin 

Ms. Mikulski 

Mr. Kohl 

Mrs. Murray 

Mr. Dorgan 

Mrs. Feinstein 

Mr. Durbin 

Mr. Johnson 

Ms. Landrieu 

Mr. Reed 

Mr. Lautenberg 

Mr. Nelson 

Mr. Cochran 

Mr. Stevens 

Mr. Specter 

Mr. Domenici 

Mr. Bond 

Mr. McConnell 

Mr. Shelby 

Mr. Gregg 

Mr. Bennett 

Mr. Craig 

Mrs. Hutchison 

Mr. Brownback 

Mr. Allard 

Mr. Alexander 
130 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on 

a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part 

of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof 

which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of 

that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and 

of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by 

stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 

would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form 

recommended by the Committee.’’ 

In compliance with this rule, the following changes in existing 

law proposed to be made by this bill are shown as follows: existing 

law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is 

printed in italic; and existing law in which no change is proposed 

is shown in roman. 

TITLE 5—GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND 

EMPLOYEES 

PART III—EMPLOYEES 

Subpart D—Pay and Allowances 

CHAPTER 55—PAY ADMINISTRATION 

SUBCHAPTER IV—DUAL PAY AND DUAL EMPLOYMENT 

5537. Fees for jury and witness service. 

5538. Nonreduction in pay while serving in the uniformed services or National 

Guard. 

* * * * * * * 

§ 5537. Fees for jury and witness service 

(a) An employee as defined by section 2105 of this title (except 

an individual whose pay is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate or the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives) or an individual employed by the government of the District 

of Columbia may not receive fees for service— 

(1) as a juror in a court of the United States or the District 

of Columbia; or 

(2) as a witness on behalf of the United States or the District of Columbia. 

(b) An official of a court of the United States or the District 

of Columbia may not receive witness fees for attendance before a 

court, commissioner, or magistrate judge where he is officiating. 

(c) For the purpose of this section, ‘‘court of the United States’’ 

has the meaning given it by section 451 of title 28 and includes the 

District Court of Guam and the District Court of the Virgin Islands. 
131 

§ 5538. Nonreduction in pay while serving in the uniformed 

services or National Guard 

(a) An employee who is absent from a position of employment 

with the Federal Government in order to perform active duty in the 

uniformed services pursuant to a call or order to active duty under 

a provision of law referred to in section 101(a)(13)(B) of title 10 

shall be entitled, while serving on active duty, to receive, for each 

pay period described in subsection (b), an amount equal to the 

amount by which— 

(1) the amount of basic pay which would otherwise have 

been payable to such employee for such pay period if such employee’s civilian employment with the Government had not been 

interrupted by that service, exceeds (if at all) 

(2) the amount of pay and allowances which (as determined 

under subsection (d))— 

(A) is payable to such employee for that service; and 

(B) is allocable to such pay period. 

(b)(1) Amounts under this section shall be payable with respect 

to each pay period (which would otherwise apply if the employee’s 

civilian employment had not been interrupted)— 

(A) during which such employee is entitled to reemployment 

rights under chapter 43 of title 38 with respect to the position 

from which such employee is absent (as referred to in subsection 

(a)); and 

(B) for which such employee does not otherwise receive 

basic pay (including by taking any annual, military, or other 

paid leave) to which such employee is entitled by virtue of such 

employee’s civilian employment with the Government. 

(2) For purposes of this section, the period during which an employee is entitled to reemployment rights under chapter 43 of title 

38— 

(A) shall be determined disregarding the provisions of section 4312(d) of title 38; and 

(B) shall include any period of time specified in section 

4312(e) of title 38 within which an employee may report or 

apply for employment or reemployment following completion of 

service on active duty to which called or ordered as described 

in subsection (a). 

(c) Any amount payable under this section to an employee shall 

be paid— 

(1) by such employee’s employing agency; 

(2) from the appropriation or fund which would be used to 

pay the employee if such employee were in a pay status; and 

(3) to the extent practicable, at the same time and in the 

same manner as would basic pay if such employee’s civilian employment had not been interrupted. 

(d) The Office of Personnel Management shall, in consultation 

with Secretary of Defense, prescribe any regulations necessary to 

carry out the preceding provisions of this section. 

(e)(1) The head of each agency referred to in section 

2302(a)(2)(C)(ii) shall, in consultation with the Office, prescribe procedures to ensure that the rights under this section apply to the employees of such agency. 
132 

(2) The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration 

shall, in consultation with the Office, prescribe procedures to ensure 

that the rights under this section apply to the employees of that 

agency. 

(f) For purposes of this section— 

(1) the terms ‘‘employee’’, ‘‘Federal Government’’, and ‘‘uniformed services’’ have the same respective meanings as given 

those terms in section 4303 of title 38; 

(2) the term ‘‘employing agency’’, as used with respect to an 

employee entitled to any payments under this section, means the 

agency or other entity of the Government (including an agency 

referred to in section 2302(a)(2)(C)(ii)) with respect to which 

such employee has reemployment rights under chapter 43 of 

title 38; and 

(3) the term ‘‘basic pay’’ includes any amount payable 

under section 5304. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 15—COMMERCE AND TRADE 

CHAPTER 41—CONSUMER CREDIT PROTECTION 

SUBCHAPTER I—CONSUMER CREDIT COST DISCLOSURE

Part B—Credit Transactions 

§ 1639. Requirements for certain mortgages 

(a) Disclosures 

* * * * * * * 

(l) Discretionary regulatory authority of Board 

(1) Exemptions 

The Board may, by regulation or order, exempt specific 

mortgage products or categories of mortgages from any or all 

of the prohibitions specified in subsections (c) through (i) of 

this section, if the Board finds that the exemption— 

(A) is in the interest of the borrowing public; and 

(B) will apply only to products that maintain and 

strengthen home ownership and equity protection. 

(2) Prohibitions 

The Board, by regulation or order, shall prohibit acts or 

practices in connection with— 

(A) mortgage loans that the Board finds to be unfair, 

deceptive, or designed to evade the provisions of this section; and3(B) refinancing of mortgage loans that the Board 

finds to be associated with abusive lending practices, or 

that are otherwise not in the interest of the borrower. 

(m) CIVIL PENALTIES IN FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION EN- FORCEMENT ACTIONS.—For purposes of enforcement by the Federal 

Trade Commission, any violation of a regulation issued by the Federal Reserve Board pursuant to subsection (l)(2) of this section shall 

be treated as a violation of a rule promulgated under section 18 of 
133 

the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a) regarding unfair 

or deceptive acts or practices. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 

PART II—CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 

CHAPTER 232—MISCELLANEOUS SENTENCING 

PROVISIONS 

§ 3672. Duties of Director of Administrative Office of the 

United States Courts 

The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States 

Courts, or his authorized agent, shall investigate the work of the 

probation officers and make recommendations concerning the same 

to the respective judges and shall have access to the records of all 

probation officers. 

He shall collect for publication statistical and other information concerning the work of the probation officers. 

He shall prescribe record forms and statistics to be kept by the 

probation officers and shall formulate general rules for the proper 

conduct of the probation work. 

He shall endeavor by all suitable means to promote the efficient administration of the probation system and the enforcement 

of the probation laws in all United States courts. 

He shall, under the supervision and direction of the Judicial 

Conference of the United States, fix the salaries of probation officers and shall provide for their necessary expenses including clerical service and travel expenses. 

He shall incorporate in his annual report a statement concerning the operation of the probation system in such courts. 

He shall have the authority to contract with any appropriate 

public or private agency or person for the detection of and care in 

the community of an offender who is an alcohol-dependent person, 

an addict or a drug-dependent person, or a person suffering from 

a psychiatric disorder within the meaning of section 2 of the Public 

Health Service Act. This authority shall include the authority to 

provide equipment and supplies; testing; medical, educational, social, psychological and vocational services; corrective and preventative guidance and training; and other rehabilitative services designed to protect the public and benefit the alcohol-dependent person, addict or drug-dependent person, or a person suffering from a 

psychiatric disorder by eliminating his dependence on alcohol or 

addicting drugs, by controlling his dependence and his susceptibility to addiction, or by treating his psychiatric disorder. He may 

negotiate and award such contracts without regard to section 3709 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. He also shall have the 

authority to expend funds or to contract with any appropriate public or private agency or person to monitor and provide services to 

any offender in the community authorized by øthis Act¿ this paragraph, including treatment, equipment and emergency housing, 

corrective and preventative guidance and training, and other reha-
134 

bilitative services designed to protect the public and promote the 

successful reentry of the offender into the community. 

He shall pay for presentence studies and reports by qualified 

consultants and presentence examinations and reports by psychiatric or psychological examiners ordered by the court under subsection (b) or (c) of section 3552, except for studies conducted by the 

Bureau of Prisons. 

Whenever the court finds that funds are available for payment 

by or on behalf of a person furnished such services, training, or 

guidance, the court may direct that such funds be paid to the Director. Any moneys collected under this paragraph shall be used to 

reimburse the appropriations obligated and disbursed in payment 

for such services, training, or guidance. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 22—FOREIGN RELATIONS AND INTERCOURSE 

CHAPTER 79—TRADE SANCTIONS REFORM AND EXPORT 

ENHANCEMENT 

§ 7209. Requirements relating to certain travel-related transactions with Cuba 

ø(a) Authorization of travel relating to commercial sale of 

agricultural commodities 

øThe Secretary of the Treasury shall promulgate regulations 

under which the travel-related transactions listed in subsection (c) 

of section 515.560 of title 31, Code of Federal Regulations, may be 

authorized on a case-by-case basis by a specific license for travel 

to, from, or within Cuba for the commercial export sale of agricultural commodities pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.¿ 

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF TRAVEL RELATING TO COMMERCIAL

SALES OF AGRICULTURAL AND MEDICAL GOODS.—The Secretary of 

the Treasury shall promulgate regulations under which the travelrelated transactions listed in paragraph (c) of section 515.560 of 

title 31, Code of Federal Regulations, are authorized by general license for travel to, from, or within Cuba for the marketing and sale 

of agricultural and medical goods pursuant to the provisions of this 

title. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 26—INTERNAL REVENUE CODE 

Subtitle F—Procedure and Administration 

CHAPTER 76—JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

SUBCHAPTER C—THE TAX COURT

PART III—MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

§ 7472. Expenditures 

The Tax Court is authorized to make such expenditures (including expenditures for personal services and rent at the seat of 
135 

Government and elsewhere, and for law books, books of reference, 

and periodicals), as may be necessary efficiently to execute the 

functions vested in the Tax Court. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Tax Court is authorized to pay on behalf of its 

judges, age 65 or over, any increase in the cost of Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance imposed after April 24, 1999, that is incurred after the date of the enactment of the Pension Protection 

Act of 2006, including any expenses generated by such payments, 

as authorized by the chief judge in a manner consistent with such 

payments authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United 

States pursuant to section 604(a)(5) of title 28, United States Code. 

Except as provided in section 7475, all expenditures of the Tax 

Court shall be allowed and paid, out of any moneys appropriated 

for purposes of the Tax Court, upon presentation of itemized vouchers therefor signed by the certifying officer designated by the chief 

judge. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE 

PART III—COURT OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES 

CHAPTER 41—ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF UNITED 

STATES COURTS 

§ 604. Duties of Director generally 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(5) Fix the compensation of clerks of court, deputies, librarians, criers, messengers, law clerks, secretaries, stenographers, clerical assistants, and other employees of the courts 

whose compensation is not otherwise fixed by law, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, pay on behalf of Justices and judges of the United States appointed to hold office 

during good behavior ømagistrate judges appointed under section 631 of this title,¿, United States magistrate judges, bankruptcy judges appointed under chapter 6 of this title, judges of 

the District Court of Guam, judges of the District Court for the 

Northern Mariana Islands, judges of the District Court of the 

Virgin Islands, bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges retired under section 377 of this title, and judges retired under 

section 373 of this title, who are, aged 65 or over, any increases 

in the cost of Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance imposed after April 24, 1999, including any expenses generated 

by such payments, as authorized by the Judicial Conference of 

the United States; 

* * * * * * * 
136 

TITLE 40—PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS 

Subtitle I—Federal Property and Administrative Services 

CHAPTER 3—ORGANIZATION OF GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

SUBCHAPTER III—FUNDS

§ 323. Consumer Information Center Fund 

(a) EXISTENCE.—There is in the Treasury a øConsumer Information Center¿ Federal Citizen Services Fund, General Services 

Administration, for the purpose of disseminating Federal Government øconsumer¿ information to the public and for other related 

purposes. 

(b) DEPOSITS.—Money shall be deposited into the Fund from— 

(1) appropriations from the Treasury for øConsumer Information Center¿ Federal Citizen Services activities; 

* * * * * * * 

CHAPTER 33—ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND 

ALTERATION 

§ 3313. Delegation 

(a) * * * 

(1) shall, except for the authority contained in section 3305(b) 

of this title, be delegated on request to the appropriate øexecutive¿ 

federal agency when the estimated cost of the project does not exceed $100,000; and 

(2) may be delegated to the appropriate øexecutive¿ federal 

agency when the Administrator determines that delegation will 

promote efficiency and economy. 

* * * * * * * 

CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FELLOWSHIP ACT 

TITLE IV—CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS QUINCENTENARY 

COINS AND FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATION 

SUBTITLE B—CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATION

SEC. 421. SHORT TITLE. 

This subtitle may be cited as the ‘‘Christopher Columbus Fellowship Act’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 426. CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FELLOWSHIP FUND. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established in the Treasury a fund 

to be known as the Christopher Columbus Scholarship Fund (hereafter in this subtitle referred to as the ‘‘fund’’), which shall consist 

of— 

(1) amounts deposited under subsection (d); 

(2) obligations obtained under subsection (c); 

(3) amounts contributed to the Foundation; øand¿ 
137 

(4) amounts appropriated to the Foundation, as authorized 

under section 430; and 

ø(4)¿ (5) all surcharges received by the Secretary of the 

Treasury from the sale of coins minted under the Christopher 

Columbus Quincentenary Coin Act. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 429. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS. 

(a) The Foundation may— 

* * * * * * * 

(b) ANNUAL REPORT.—The Foundation shall submit to the 

President and to the Congress an annual report of its operations 

under this subtitle. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 430. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Foundation, 

such sums as may be necessary to carry out this subtitle. 

* * * * * * * 

DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, 

THE JUICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCICES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998, PUBLIC LAW 105–119 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

SEC. 122. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(g)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and subject to 

paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to establish, for a period of ø10 years¿ 11 years from date of enactment of 

this provision, a personnel management demonstration project providing for the compensation and performance management of not 

more than a combined total of 950 employees who fill critical scientific, technical, engineering, intelligence analyst, language translator, and medical positions in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and 

Firearms. 

* * * * * * * 

UNIVERSAL SERVICE ANTIDEFICIENCY TEMPORARY 

SUSPENSION ACT, PUBLIC LAW 108–494 

TITLE III—UNIVERSAL SERVICE 

SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Universal Service Antideficiency 

Temporary Suspension Act’’. 
138 

SEC. 302. APPLICATION OF CERTAIN TITLE 31 PROVISIONS TO UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—During the period beginning on the date of 

enactment of this Act and ending on øDecember 31, 2008¿ December 31, 2009, section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 

31, United States Code, do not apply— 

(1) to any amount collected or received as Federal universal service contributions required by section 254 of the 

Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254), including any interest earned on such contributions; nor 

(2) to the expenditure or obligation of amounts attributable 

to such contributions for universal service support programs 

established pursuant to that section. 

(b) POST-2005 FULFILLMENT OF PROTECTED OBLIGATIONS.—Section 1341 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31, United States 

Code, do not apply after øDecember 31, 2008¿ December 31, 2009, 

to an expenditure or obligation described in subsection (a)(2) made 

or authorized during the period described in subsection (a). 

* * * * * * * 

TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006, PUBLIC LAW 109–115 

DIVISION A—TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006 

TITLE IV 

THE JUDICIARY 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS—THE JUDICIARY

SEC. 407. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

ø(c) The authorities granted in this section shall expire on September 30, 2010.¿ 

* * * * * * * 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008, PUBLIC 

LAW 110–161 

DIVISION D—FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL 

GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 

TITLE VI 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS ACT 

SEC. 622. Section 5112 of title 31, United States Code, is 

amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: 
139 

‘‘ø(r)¿ (s) REDESIGN AND ISSUANCE OF CIRCULATING QUARTER

DOLLAR HONORING THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND EACH OF THE

TERRITORIES.— ‘‘(1) REDESIGN IN 2009.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding the fourth sentence of subsection (d)(1) and subsection (d)(2) and subject 

to paragraph (6)(B), quarter dollar coins issued during 

2009, shall have designs on the reverse side selected in accordance with this subsection which are emblematic of the 

District of Columbia and the territories. 

‘‘(B) FLEXIBILITY WITH REGARD TO PLACEMENT OF IN- SCRIPTIONS.—Notwithstanding subsection (d)(1), the Secretary may select a design for quarter dollars issued during 2009 in which— 

‘‘(i) the inscription described in the second sentence of subsection (d)(1) appears on the reverse side 

of any such quarter dollars; and 

‘‘(ii) any inscription described in the third sentence of subsection (d)(1) or the designation of the 

value of the coin appears on the obverse side of any 

such quarter dollars. 

‘‘(2) SINGLE DISTRICT OR TERRITORY DESIGN.—The design on the reverse side of each quarter dollar issued during 2009 shall be emblematic of one of the following: The 

District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 

Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, 

and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

‘‘(3) SELECTION OF DESIGN.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Each of the 6 designs required 

under this subsection for quarter dollars shall be— 

‘‘(i) selected by the Secretary after consultation with— 

‘‘(I) the chief executive of the District of 

Columbia or the territory being honored, or 

such other officials or group as the chief executive officer of the District of Columbia or the 

territory may designate for such purpose; and 

‘‘(II) the Commission of Fine Arts; and 

‘‘(ii) reviewed by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee. 

‘‘(B) SELECTION AND APPROVAL PROCESS.—Designs 

for quarter dollars may be submitted in accordance 

with the design selection and approval process developed by the Secretary in the sole discretion of the Secretary. 

‘‘(C) PARTICIPATION.—The Secretary may include 

participation by District or territorial officials, artists 

from the District of Columbia or the territory, engravers of the United States Mint, and members of the 

general public. 

‘‘(D) STANDARDS.—Because it is important that the 

Nation’s coinage and currency bear dignified designs 

of which the citizens of the United States can be 

proud, the Secretary shall not select any frivolous or 
140 

inappropriate design for any quarter dollar minted 

under this subsection. 

‘‘(E) PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN REPRESENTATIONS.— No head and shoulders portrait or bust of any person, 

living or dead, and no portrait of a living person may 

be included in the design of any quarter dollar under 

this subsection. 

‘‘(4) TREATMENT AS NUMISMATIC ITEMS.—For purposes of 

sections 5134 and 5136, all coins minted under this subsection 

shall be considered to be numismatic items. 

‘‘(5) ISSUANCE.— ‘‘(A) QUALITY OF COINS.—The Secretary may mint and 

issue such number of quarter dollars of each design selected under øparagraph (4)¿ paragraph (3) in uncirculated and proof qualities as the Secretary determines to 

be appropriate. 

‘‘(B) SILVER COINS.—Notwithstanding subsection (b), 

the Secretary may mint and issue such number of quarter 

dollars of each design selected under øparagraph (4)¿ 

paragraph (3) as the Secretary determines to be appropriate, with a content of 90 percent silver and 10 percent 

copper. 

‘‘(C) TIMING AND ORDER OF ISSUANCE.—Coins minted 

under this subsection honoring the District of Columbia 

and each of the territories shall be issued in equal sequential intervals during 2009 in the following order: the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 

Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, 

and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

‘‘(6) OTHER PROVISIONS.— ‘‘(A) APPLICATION IN EVENT OF ADMISSION AS A

STATE.—If the District of Columbia or any territory becomes a State before the end of the 10-year period referred 

to in subsection (l)(1), subsection (l)(7) shall apply, and this 

subsection shall not apply, with respect to such State. 

‘‘(B) APPLICATION IN EVENT OF INDEPENDENCE.—If any 

territory becomes independent or otherwise ceases to be a 

territory or possession of the United States before quarter 

dollars bearing designs which are emblematic of such territory are minted pursuant to this subsection, this subsection shall cease to apply with respect to such territory. 

‘‘(7) TERRITORY DEFINED.—For purposes of this subsection, 

the term ‘territory’ means the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 

Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and 

the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.’’. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—GOVERNMENT-WIDE 

DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND CORPORATIONS

* * * * * * * 
141 

SEC. 739. (a) REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETI- TION.— (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the 

funds appropriated by this or any other Act shall be available 

to convert to contractor performance an activity or function of 

an executive agency that, on or after the date of enactment of 

this Act, is performed by ømore than 10¿ Federal employees 

unless— 

* * * * * * * 

ø(b) USE OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITION.—Nothing in Office 

of Management and Budget Circular A–76 shall prevent the head 

of an executive agency from conducting a public-private competition 

to evaluate the benefits of converting work from contract performance to performance by Federal employees in appropriate instances. The Circular shall provide procedures and policies for 

these competitions that are similar to those applied to competitions 

that may result in the conversion of work from performance by 

Federal employees to performance by a contractor.¿ 

(b) GUIDELINES ON INSOURCING NEW AND CONTRACTED OUT

FUNCTIONS.— (1) GUIDELINES REQUIRED.— (A) The heads of executive agencies subject to the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act (Public Law 105–270), 

shall devise and implement guidelines and procedures to 

ensure that consideration is given to using, on a regular 

basis, Federal employees to perform new functions and 

functions that are performed by contractors and could be 

performed by Federal employees. 

(B) The guidelines and procedures required under subparagraph (A) may not include any specific limitation or 

restriction on the number of functions or activities that may 

be converted to performance by Federal employees. 

(2) SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR CERTAIN FUNCTIONS.—The 

guidelines and procedures required under paragraph (1) shall 

provide for special consideration to be given to using Federal 

employees to perform any function that 

(A) is performed by a contractor and— 

(i) has been performed by Federal employees at any 

time during the previous 10 years; 

(ii) is a function closely associated with the performance of an inherently governmental function; 

(iii) has been performed pursuant to a contract 

awarded on a non-competitive basis; or 

(iv) has been performed poorly, as determined by a 

contracting officer during the 5-year period preceding 

the date of such determination, because of excessive 

costs or inferior quality; or 

(B) is a new requirement, with particular emphasis 

given to a new requirement that is similar to a function 

previously performed by Federal employees or is a function 

closely associated with the performance of an inherently 

governmental function. 

(3) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS FROM COMPETI- TIONS.—The head of an executive agency may not conduct a 
142 

public-private competition under Office of Management and 

Budget Circular A–76 or any other provision of law or regulation before— 

(A) in the case of a new agency function, assigning the 

performance of the function to Federal employees; 

(B) in the case of any agency function described in subsection (2), converting the function to performance by Federal employees; or 

(C) in the case of an agency function performed by Federal employees, expanding the scope of the function. 

(4) DEADLINE.— 

(A) The head of each executive agency shall implement 

the guidelines and procedures required under this section 

by not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment 

of this Act. 

(B) Not later than 210 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Government Accountability Office 

shall submit a report on the implementation of this subsection to the Committees on Appropriations of the House 

of Representatives and the Senate, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate. 

(5) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(A) The term ‘‘inherently governmental functions’’ has 

the meaning given such term in subpart 7.5 of part 7 of the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation. 

(B) The term ‘‘functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions’’ means the functions described in section 7.503(d) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation. 

(6) APPLICABILITY.—This subsection shall not apply to the 

Department of Defense. 

* * * * * * * 

ECONOMIC STIMULUS ACT OF 2008, PUBLIC LAW 110–185 

TITLE I—RECOVERY REBATES AND INCENTIVES FOR BUSINESS INVESTMENT 

SEC. 101. 2008 RECOVERY REBATES FOR INDIVIDUALS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(e) APPROPRIATIONS TO CARRY OUT REBATES.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Immediately upon the enactment of this 

Act, the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in 

the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 

ending September 30, 2008: 

(A) DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY.— 
143 

(i) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(B) SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.—For an additional amount for ‘‘Social Security Administration—Limitation on Administrative Expenses’’, $31,000,000, to remain 

available until September 30, 2008. 

(C) TRANSFER AUTHORITY.—The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to transfer funds provided by paragraph 

(1)(A) among the accounts specified in paragraph (1)(A) to 

carry out the rebates upon the advance notification of the 

Committees on Appropriations: Provided, That any proposed transfer of funds greater than $5,000,000 shall be 

subject to the advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations. 

* * * * * * * 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOME RULE ACT 

ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT AMOUNTS NOT INCLUDED IN ANNUAL BUDGET

SEC. 446B. (a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(f) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall apply with respect to 

øfiscal years 2006 through 2008¿ fiscal year 2006 and each succeeding fiscal year. 

* * * * * * * 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICIAL CODE 

TITLE 11—ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION OF THE 

COURTS 

CHAPTER 26—REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS IN 

CRIMINAL CASES 

§ 11–2604. Payment for representation 

(a) Any attorney appointed pursuant to this chapter shall, at 

the conclusion of the representation or any segment thereof, be 

compensated at a fixed rate of ø$65 per hour¿ $90 per hour. Such 

attorney shall be reimbursed for expenses reasonably incurred. 

ø(b) For representation of a defendant before the Superior 

Court or before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, as the 

case may be, the compensation to be paid to an attorney shall not 

exceed the following maximum amounts: 

ø(1) $1900 for misdemeanor cases; 

ø(2) $3600 for felony cases; and 

ø(3) $1900 for post-trial matters if the underlying case was 

a misdemeanor or $3600 for post-trial matters if the underlying case was a felony.¿ 

(b) The compensation to be paid to an attorney appointed pursuant to this chapter shall not exceed the following maximum 

amounts: 
144 

(1) For representation of a defendant before the Superior 

Court of the District of Columbia for misdemeanors or felonies, 

the maximum amount set forth in section 3006A(d)(2) of title 

18, United States Code, for representation of a defendant before 

the United States magistrate judge or the district court for misdemeanors or felonies (as the case may be). 

(2) For representation of a defendant before the District of 

Columbia Court of Appeals, the maximum amount set forth in 

section 3006A(d)(2) of title 18, United States Code, for representation of a defendant in an appellate court. 

(3) For representation of a defendant in post-trial matters 

for misdemeanors or felonies, the amount applicable under 

paragraph (1) for misdemeanors or felonies (as the case may 

be). 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 16—PARTICULAR ACTIONS, PROCEEDINGS AND 

MATTERS 

CHAPTER 23—FAMILY DIVISION PROCEEDINGS 

SUBCHAPTER I—PROCEEDINGS REGARDING 

DELINQUENCY, NEGLECT, OR NEED OF SUPERVISION 

§ 16–2326.01. Compensation of attorneys in neglect and termination of parental rights proceedings 

(a) * * * 

(b) Compensation payable pursuant to this section shall be 

subject to the following limitations: 

(1) for all proceedings from initial hearing through disposition, the maximum compensation shall be ø$1,600¿ $1,980; 

(2) for all subsequent proceedings other than termination 

of parental rights, the maximum compensation shall be 

ø$1,600¿ $1,980 per year; 

(3) for proceedings to terminate parental rights, the maximum compensation shall be ø$2,200¿ $2,700; and 

(4) for appeal of trial court orders, the maximum compensation shall be ø$1,100¿ $1,350 per case. 

* * * * * * * 
145 

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL 

PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 

308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget authority Outlays 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

of bill 

Committee 

allocation 

Amount 

of bill 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution 

for 2009: Subcommittee on Financial Services and General 

Government: 

Mandatory ............................................................................ 20,661 20,661 20,663 1 20,663 

Discretionary ........................................................................ 22,380 22,870 22,809 1 23,019 

Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2009 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 2 38,594 

2010 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 3,266 

2011 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 618 

2012 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 345 

2013 and future years ........................................................ .................... .................... .................... 320 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 

2009 ......................................................................................... NA 708 NA 503 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

NA: Not applicable. 

NOTE. Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for tax enforcement and in accordance with section 312(c)(2)(B) of Senate Concurrent Resolution 70 (110th Congress), the Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will file a revised section 302(a) allocation for 

the Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $490,000,000 in budget authority and associated outlays. 

DISCLOSURE OF CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING 

ITEMS 

The Constitution vests in the Congress the power of the purse. 

The Committee believes strongly that Congress should make the 

decisions on how to allocate the people’s money. 

As defined in Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the 

term ‘‘congressionally directed spending item’’ means a provision or 

report language included primarily at the request of a Senator, providing, authorizing, or recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, 

or other expenditure with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific 

State, locality or congressional district, other than through a statutory or administrative, formula-driven, or competitive award process. 

For each item, a Member is required to provide a certification 

that neither the Member nor the Senator’s immediate family has 

a pecuniary interest in such congressionally directed spending 

item. Such certifications are available to the public on the website 

of the Senate Committee on Appropriations 

(www.appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm). 

Following is a list of congressionally directed spending items included in the Senate recommendation discussed in this report, 

along with the name of each Senator who submitted a request to 

the Committee of jurisdiction for each item so identified. Neither 

the Committee recommendation nor this report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV. 
146 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS 

Account Project Funding Member 

DC ..................................................................................... Children’s National Medical Center, pediatric surgical center renovations, Washington, DC ....... $3,000,000 Senator Cochran DC ..................................................................................... LifeSTARTS Youth & Family Services, the Capital Area Asset Building Corporation, and the National Center for Fatherhood to administer Marriage Development Accounts in the District of 

Columbia.

2,250,000 Senator Brownback 

GSA ................................................................................... Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Federal Building .......................................................................................... 25,000,000 Senator Shelby GSA ................................................................................... California, San Diego United States Courthouse Annex ................................................................. 110,362,000 The President, Senators Feinstein 

and Boxer 

GSA ................................................................................... California, San Ysidro, Port of Entry ............................................................................................... 58,910,000 The President, Senator Feinstein GSA ................................................................................... Colorado, Lakewood, Denver Federal Center Remediation .............................................................. 10,472,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... Illinois, Chicago, Dirksen Courthouse ............................................................................................. 152,825,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... Maryland, Montgomery County, MD, FDA ........................................................................................ 204,404,000 The President, Senators Mikulski

and Cardin 

GSA ................................................................................... North Carolina, New Bern, US PO and Courthouse ........................................................................ 10,640,000 The President, Senator Dole GSA ................................................................................... North Dakota, Portal, Port of Entry ................................................................................................. 15,204,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... District of Columbia, DHS Consolidation and development of St. Elizabeths campus ................. 331,390,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... District of Columbia, St. Elizabeths West Campus Infrastructure ................................................. 8,249,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... District of Columbia, St. Elizabeths West Campus Site Acquisition .............................................. 7,000,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... District of Columbia, Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg CBR ........................................................ 14,700,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... District of Columbia, Eisenhower Executive Office Bldg, Phase III ................................................ 51,075,000 The President GSA ................................................................................... District of Columbia, West Wing Infrastructure Systems Replacement ......................................... 76,487,000 The President NARA ................................................................................. JFK Presidential Library ................................................................................................................... 22,000,000 Senator Kerry NARA ................................................................................. LBJ Presidential Library ................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senator Hutchison ONDCP .............................................................................. National Alliance of Model State Drug Laws .................................................................................. 1,250,000 Senator Durbin ONDCP .............................................................................. National Drug Court Institute .......................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... Adelante Development Center for its ACCENT School-to-Work Transition Program, Albuquerque, 

NM.

250,000 Senators Domenici and Bingaman 

SBA ................................................................................... Alaska Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Inc., for a rural Alaska e-commerce training 

project, Anchorage, AK.

1,100,000 Senator Stevens 

SBA ................................................................................... Albuquerque Hispano Chamber of Commerce workforce training, Albuquerque, NM .................... 245,000 Senator Bingaman SBA ................................................................................... Alcorn State University for a Systems Research Institute, Alcorn State, MS ................................ 600,000 Senator Cochran SBA ................................................................................... Appalachian State University to study the effects of economic growth resulting from viticulture 

and agritourism in western North Carolina, Boone, NC.

750,000 Senator Dole 

SBA ................................................................................... Association of Vermont Credit Unions, Student financial literacy, Burlington, VT ........................ 145,000 Senator Sanders SBA ................................................................................... Business and infrastructure development, Mingo County Redevelopment Authority, Williamson, 

WV.

3,500,000 Senator Byrd 

SBA ................................................................................... Business incubator, Arkansas Biosciences Institute, Arkansas State University .......................... 520,000 Senators Lincoln and Pryor 
147 

SBA ................................................................................... Cedarbridge small business incubator, Lakewood, NJ ................................................................... 245,000 Senators Lautenberg and Menendez SBA ................................................................................... Center for Economic Growth, Watervliet Innovation Center, Albany, NY ........................................ 300,000 Senator Schumer SBA ................................................................................... City of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Small business investment initiative for technical assistance 

to business enterprises.

225,000 Senator Landrieu 

SBA ................................................................................... City of San Diego, CA, One-stop small business resource center ................................................. 100,000 Senator Boxer SBA ................................................................................... Colorado Enterprise Fund for operating expenses and technical assistance to borrowers, Denver, CO. 245,000 Senator Salazar SBA ................................................................................... Colorado State University Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Fort Collins, CO ................ 250,000 Senators Allard and Salazar SBA ................................................................................... Community Links Hawaii for planning and development of Oahu Technology and Innovation 

Park, Oahu, HI.

250,000 Senators Inouye and Akaka 

SBA ................................................................................... E4 Entrepreneurship for immigrants, minorities, women, and people with disabilities in southwest King County, WA. 100,000 Senator Cantwell SBA ................................................................................... Eastern Washington University, Accelerating economic development in rural, underserved communities of NE Washington. 200,000 Senator Murray SBA ................................................................................... Economic development assistance for Wells, NV ........................................................................... 640,000 Senator Reid SBA ................................................................................... Economic Development for Central Oregon, Bend Venture Catalyst, Bend, OR ............................. 245,000 Senator Wyden SBA ................................................................................... Economic Development Training Program, Camden, NJ ................................................................. 100,000 Senators Lautenberg and Menendez SBA ................................................................................... Entrepreneurial Development Center business accelerator, Cedar Rapids, IA ............................... 350,000 Senator Harkin SBA ................................................................................... First responder education initiative, Benedictine University, Lisle, IL ........................................... 500,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... Florida Institute of Technology , Florida Advanced Combustion Center ........................................ 245,000 Senator Bill Nelson SBA ................................................................................... Grambling State University, Expanding Minority Entrepreneurship Regionally Across the Louisiana Delta [EMERALD] program. 250,000 Senator Landrieu SBA ................................................................................... Grays Harbor sustainable industries research and development facility and incubator, Port of 

Grays Harbor, Aberdeen, WA.

450,000 Senators Cantwell and Murray 

SBA ................................................................................... Grow Inglewood, small business development, Inglewood, CA ...................................................... 450,000 Senators Boxer and Feinstein SBA ................................................................................... Indiana University, Indiana innovation incubator, Bloomington, IN ............................................... 245,000 Senator Bayh SBA ................................................................................... International Trade Compliance in Agra-Business, Wichita, KS .................................................... 225,500 Senator Brownback SBA ................................................................................... Jackie Joyner-Kersee Center for job training and placement services, East St. Louis, IL ............. 310,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... Jackson State University for Lynch Street Corridor Redevelopment, Jackson, MS ......................... 600,000 Senators Cochran and Wicker SBA ................................................................................... Kansas Bioscience Authority for the Kansas Small Business Biobased Polymer Initiative, 

Olathe, KS.

550,000 Senator Brownback 

SBA ................................................................................... Kansas Farm Bureau for the Kansas Hometown Prosperity Alliance, Manhattan, KS ................... 300,000 Senator Brownback SBA ................................................................................... Macomb County business accelerator, Macomb County, MI .......................................................... 400,000 Senators Levin and Stabenow SBA ................................................................................... Massachusetts Technology Collaborative Renewable Energy Economic Development Center, 

Boston, MA.

260,000 Senators Kennedy and Kerry 

SBA ................................................................................... Mississippi Biotechnology Association for a Feasibility Study and Capacity Building, Jackson, 

MS.

500,000 Senator Cochran 

SBA ................................................................................... Mississippi State University for Convergence of Scientists and Entrepreneurs to Expedite Commercialization (SCEEC), Starkville, MS. 600,000 Senators Cochran and Wicker 
148 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

SBA ................................................................................... Mississippi Technology Alliance for the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurial Services, 

Jackson, MS.

600,000 Senators Cochran and Wicker 

SBA ................................................................................... Missouri Western State University for the Biotechnology Mobile Workforce Development Center, 

St. Joseph, MO.

1,000,000 Senator Bond 

SBA ................................................................................... Montana Department of Commerce, for technical assistance and operating expenses of the 

Native American and WIRED program.

520,000 Senators Baucus and Tester 

SBA ................................................................................... Montgomery County Action Council for the development of economic growth and the recruitment of small businesses, Independence, KS. 500,000 Senator Roberts SBA ................................................................................... Myrtle Beach International Trade & Convention Center, Myrtle Beach, SC ................................... 1,000,000 Senator Graham SBA ................................................................................... National Center for Aviation Training for a Technical Education and Training, Wichita, KS ....... 500,000 Senator Brownback SBA ................................................................................... Native Hawaiian Organizations Association, Entrepreneurial Development & Government Procurement Center, Honolulu, HI. 300,000 Senators Inouye and Akaka SBA ................................................................................... Nebraska Community Foundation, HomeTown Competitiveness, Lincoln, NE ................................ 300,000 Senator Ben Nelson SBA ................................................................................... New Castle County Chamber of Commerce, Emerging Enterprise Center, business incubator, 

DE.

520,000 Senators Biden and Carper 

SBA ................................................................................... North Dakota State College of Science, Nanotechnology Applied Science Laboratory ................... 375,000 Senators Conrad and Dorgan SBA ................................................................................... Northern Community Development Corporation, Northeast Kingdom (NEK) wireless LINC, VT ...... 300,000 Senator Leahy SBA ................................................................................... Northern Kentucky University’s College of Informatics, Highland Heights, KY .............................. 2,000,000 Senator McConnell SBA ................................................................................... Ohio University, Economic Development through Entrepreneurship in Appalachia [EDEA] ........... 245,000 Senator Brown SBA ................................................................................... Pellissippi Research Centre on the Oak Ridge Corridor, Alcoa, TN ............................................... 700,000 Senators Alexander and Corker SBA ................................................................................... Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse, Tech Belt Biosciences Initiative, Pittsburgh, PA ............... 245,000 Senator Casey SBA ................................................................................... ReCycle North, Green-collar enterprise program, Burlington, VT ................................................... 100,000 Senator Sanders SBA ................................................................................... Rhode Island Rural Development Council and Farm Fresh Rhode Island, for Rhode Island 

small business development.

350,000 Senators Reed and Whitehouse 

SBA ................................................................................... Rural Economic Area Partnership [REAP] Zones, Rugby, ND ......................................................... 250,000 Senators Conrad and Dorgan SBA ................................................................................... Rural Enterprise Institute’s Native American Rural Business and Resource Center at Eastern 

Oklahoma State College, Wilburton, OK.

500,000 Senator Inhofe 

SBA ................................................................................... Safer Foundation for transitional employment placement, Chicago, IL ......................................... 500,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... Small Business and Economic Opportunity Office, Essex County, NJ ............................................ 375,000 Senators Lautenberg and Menendez SBA ................................................................................... Small business green development, City of East Providence, RI ................................................... 245,000 Senators Reed and Whitehouse SBA ................................................................................... Small business trade assistance office, Prince George’s County, MD ........................................... 100,000 Senator Cardin SBA ................................................................................... South Dakota State University, technology-based economic development .................................... 475,000 Senator Johnson SBA ................................................................................... Southern Illinois University for the Southern Illinois Research Park, Carbondale, IL .................... 500,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... Southwestern Pennsylvania Advanced Robotics Business Accelerator, Pittsburgh, PA ................. 700,000 Senators Specter and Casey SBA ................................................................................... St. Leo Residence for Veterans for job training, Catholic Charities, Chicago, IL ......................... 500,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... TechTown Small Business Clinic, Wayne State Law School ........................................................... 175,000 Senators Levin and Stabenow 
149 

SBA ................................................................................... University of Connecticut Avery Point, business incubator, Groton, CT ......................................... 120,000 Senators Dodd and Lieberman SBA ................................................................................... University of Connecticut Health Center business incubator, Farmington, CT .............................. 325,000 Senators Dodd and Lieberman SBA ................................................................................... University of Kansas for Equipment for Pharmaceutical Small Business Development, Kansas 

City, KS.

450,000 Senator Brownback 

SBA ................................................................................... University of Kansas Hospital for Medical Faculty Small Business Development, Kansas City, 

KS.

700,000 Senator Brownback 

SBA ................................................................................... University of Maryland-Baltimore BioPark ...................................................................................... 450,000 Senators Mikulski and Cardin SBA ................................................................................... University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Advanced Technical and Manufacturing Center business incubator, Fall River, MA. 260,000 Senators Kennedy and Kerry SBA ................................................................................... University of Southern Mississippi for Early Stage Entrepreneur Development, Hattiesburg, MS 600,000 Senators Cochran and Wicker SBA ................................................................................... University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, University-industry partnership to foster rapid development 

of businesses in water industries.

300,000 Senator Kohl 

SBA ................................................................................... University Technology Park, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL ...................................... 500,000 Senator Durbin SBA ................................................................................... Virginia’s Center for Innovative Technology, Mine safety technology and communication improvements, Herndon, VA. 250,000 Senators Webb and Warner SBA ................................................................................... Washington Hancock Community Agency for a Microbusiness Assistance Program, Milbridge, 

ME.

250,000 Senators Collins and Snowe 

SBA ................................................................................... World Trade Center Utah Partnership Initiative, Salt Lake City, UT .............................................. 400,000 Senator Bennett 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Departmental Offices 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 248,360 273,895 273,895 ∂25,535 ..........................

Executive direction ...................................................................................................................................................... (10,840 ) (21,592 ) (11,097 ) (∂257 ) (¥10,495 ) General Counsel .......................................................................................................................................................... (9,909 ) .......................... (10,495 ) (∂586 ) (∂10,495 ) Economic policies and programs ................................................................................................................................ (44,242 ) (45,853 ) (45,853 ) (∂1,611 ) ..........................Financial policies and programs ................................................................................................................................ (29,464 ) (34,735 ) (34,735 ) (∂5,271 ) ..........................Terrorism and Financial Intelligence .......................................................................................................................... (56,775 ) (61,712 ) (61,712 ) (∂4,937 ) ..........................Treasury-wide management ........................................................................................................................................ (18,505 ) (19,009 ) (19,009 ) (∂504 ) ..........................
150 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Administration ............................................................................................................................................................. (78,625 ) (90,994 ) (90,994 ) (∂12,369 ) ..........................

Department-wide systems and capital investments programs ........................................................................................... 18,710 26,975 26,975 ∂8,265 ..........................Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 18,450 19,356 19,356 ∂906 ..........................Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration ............................................................................................................. 140,533 145,736 145,736 ∂5,203 ..........................Air transportation stabilization program account ............................................................................................................... ¥3,600 .......................... .......................... ∂3,600 ..........................Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ............................................................................................................................... 85,844 91,335 91,335 ∂5,491 ..........................

Subtotal, Departmental Offices .............................................................................................................................. 508,297 557,297 557,297 ∂49,000 ..........................

Financial Management Service ............................................................................................................................................ 234,423 239,344 239,344 ∂4,921 ..........................

Emergency appropriations (Public Law 110–185) ...................................................................................................... 64,175 .......................... .......................... ¥64,175 ..........................

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 93,515 96,900 98,900 ∂5,385 ∂2,000 

Bureau of the Public Debt ................................................................................................................................................... 172,871 177,054 177,054 ∂4,183 ..........................Community development financial institutions fund program account .............................................................................. 94,000 28,620 100,000 ∂6,000 ∂71,380 Payment of government losses in shipment ....................................................................................................................... 1,000 2,000 2,000 ∂1,000 ..........................

Total, Department of the Treasury, non-IRS .......................................................................................................... 1,168,281 1,101,215 1,174,595 ∂6,314 ∂73,380 

Internal Revenue Service 

Taxpayer services ................................................................................................................................................................. 2,150,000 2,150,000 2,213,350 ∂63,350 ∂63,350 

Emergency appropriations (Public Law 110–185) ...................................................................................................... 50,720 .......................... .......................... ¥50,720 ..........................

Enforcement .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4,780,000 5,117,267 5,117,267 ∂337,267 ..........................Operations support ............................................................................................................................................................... 3,680,059 3,856,172 3,896,650 ∂216,591 ∂40,478 

Emergency appropriations (Public Law 110–185) ...................................................................................................... 151,415 .......................... .......................... ¥151,415 ..........................

Business systems modernization ......................................................................................................................................... 267,090 222,664 282,175 ∂15,085 ∂59,511 Health Insurance Tax Credit Administration ........................................................................................................................ 15,235 15,406 15,406 ∂171 ..........................

Total, Internal Revenue Service .............................................................................................................................. 11,094,519 11,361,509 11,524,848 ∂430,329 ∂163,339 
151 

Total, title I, Department of the Treasury .............................................................................................................. 12,262,800 12,462,724 12,699,443 ∂436,643 ∂236,719 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (11,996,490 ) (12,462,724 ) (12,699,443 ) (∂702,953 ) (∂236,719 ) 

(Mandatory) ........................................................................................................................................... (1,000 ) (2,000 ) (2,000 ) (∂1,000 ) ..........................(Discretionary) ....................................................................................................................................... (11,995,490 ) (12,460,724 ) (12,697,443 ) (∂701,953 ) (∂236,719 ) 

Emergency appropriations ............................................................................................................................. 266,310 .......................... .......................... ¥266,310 ..........................

TITLE II—EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT 

The White House 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 190,078 .......................... .......................... ¥190,078 

Compensation of the President ................................................................................................................................... .......................... 450 .......................... .......................... ¥450 

Total, Salaries and expenses .................................................................................................................................. .......................... 190,528 .......................... .......................... ¥190,528 

Compensation of the President and the White House Office: 

Compensation of the President ................................................................................................................................... 450 .......................... 450 .......................... ∂450 Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 51,656 .......................... 52,499 ∂843 ∂52,499 

Executive Residence at the White House: 

Operating expenses ..................................................................................................................................................... 12,814 .......................... 13,363 ∂549 ∂13,363 White House repair and restoration ............................................................................................................................ 1,600 .......................... 1,600 .......................... ∂1,600 

Council of Economic Advisers .............................................................................................................................................. 4,118 .......................... 4,118 .......................... ∂4,118 Office of Policy Development ............................................................................................................................................... 3,482 .......................... 5,250 ∂1,768 ∂5,250 National Security Council ..................................................................................................................................................... 8,640 .......................... 9,029 ∂389 ∂9,029 Office of Administration ....................................................................................................................................................... 91,745 .......................... 95,633 ∂3,888 ∂95,633 

Total, The White House ........................................................................................................................................... 174,505 190,528 181,942 ∂7,437 ¥8,586 

Office of Management and Budget ..................................................................................................................................... 78,000 72,800 80,172 ∂2,172 ∂7,372 

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 26,402 23,697 27,900 ∂1,498 ∂4,203 Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center ....................................................................................................................... 1,000 5,000 5,000 ∂4,000 ..........................High intensity drug trafficking areas program ................................................................................................................... 230,000 200,000 235,000 ∂5,000 ∂35,000 Other Federal drug control programs .................................................................................................................................. 164,300 189,685 204,250 ∂39,950 ∂14,565 

Total, Office of National Drug Control Policy ......................................................................................................... 421,702 418,382 472,150 ∂50,448 ∂53,768 

Unanticipated needs ............................................................................................................................................................ 1,000 1,000 1,000 .......................... ..........................Presidential transition administrative support .................................................................................................................... .......................... 8,000 8,000 ∂8,000 ..........................
152 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Special Assistance to the President and Official Residence of the Vice President: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 4,432 4,496 4,496 ∂64 ..........................Operating expenses ..................................................................................................................................................... 320 323 323 ∂3 ..........................

Total, title II, Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to the President ................................. 679,959 695,529 748,083 ∂68,124 ∂52,554 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (679,959 ) (695,529 ) (748,083 ) (∂68,124 ) (∂52,554 ) 

(Mandatory) ........................................................................................................................................... (450 ) (450 ) (450 ) .......................... ..........................(Discretionary) ....................................................................................................................................... (679,509 ) (695,079 ) (747,633 ) (∂68,124 ) (∂52,554 ) 

TITLE III—THE JUDICIARY 

Supreme Court of the United States 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of justices ..................................................................................................................................................... 2,149 2,119 2,119 ¥30 ..........................Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 64,377 67,658 67,657 ∂3,280 ¥1 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 66,526 69,777 69,776 ∂3,250 ¥1 

Care of the building and grounds ....................................................................................................................................... 12,201 18,447 18,447 ∂6,246 ..........................

Total, Supreme Court of the United States ............................................................................................................ 78,727 88,224 88,223 ∂9,496 ¥1 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges ....................................................................................................................................................... 2,431 2,356 2,356 ¥75 ..........................Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 24,641 30,001 29,126 ∂4,485 ¥875 

Total, US Court of Appeals for the Fed Circuit ...................................................................................................... 27,072 32,357 31,482 ∂4,410 ¥875 
153 

United States Court of International Trade 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,765 1,696 1,694 ¥71 ¥2 Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 14,867 17,926 17,911 ∂3,044 ¥15 

Total, US Court of International Trade ................................................................................................................... 16,632 19,622 19,605 ∂2,973 ¥17 

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services 

Salaries and expenses: 

Salaries of judges and bankruptcy judges ................................................................................................................. 332,434 323,911 321,157 ¥11,277 ¥2,754 Judges COLA ................................................................................................................................................................ 5,000 6,000 6,000 ∂1,000 ..........................Other salaries and expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 4,267,328 4,633,180 4,505,603 ∂238,275 ¥127,577 

Other salaries and expenses (emergency) ......................................................................................................... 14,500 .......................... .......................... ¥14,500 ..........................

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................... 4,619,262 4,963,091 4,832,760 ∂213,498 ¥130,331 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund ............................................................................................................................ 4,099 4,253 4,253 ∂154 ..........................Defender services ................................................................................................................................................................. 835,601 911,408 854,204 ∂18,603 ¥57,204 

Defender services (emergency) ................................................................................................................................... 10,500 .......................... .......................... ¥10,500 ..........................

Fees of jurors and commissioners ....................................................................................................................................... 63,081 62,206 62,206 ¥875 ..........................Court security ....................................................................................................................................................................... 410,000 439,915 428,004 ∂18,004 ¥11,911 

Total, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services ................................................................. 5,942,543 6,380,873 6,181,427 ∂238,884 ¥199,446 

Administrative Office of the United States Courts 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 76,036 81,959 79,049 ∂3,013 ¥2,910 

Federal Judicial Center 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 24,187 25,759 25,468 ∂1,281 ¥291 

Judicial Retirement Funds 

Payment to judiciary trust funds ......................................................................................................................................... 65,400 76,140 76,140 ∂10,740 ..........................

United States Sentencing Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 15,477 16,257 16,225 ∂748 ¥32 

Total, title III, the Judiciary .................................................................................................................................... 6,246,074 6,721,191 6,517,619 ∂271,545 ¥203,572 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (6,221,074 ) (6,721,191 ) (6,517,619 ) (∂296,545 ) (¥203,572 ) 

(Mandatory) ........................................................................................................................................... (404,179 ) (406,222 ) (403,466 ) (¥713 ) (¥2,756 ) (Discretionary) ....................................................................................................................................... (5,816,895 ) (6,314,969 ) (6,114,153 ) (∂297,258 ) (¥200,816 ) 
154 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Emergency appropriations ............................................................................................................................. (25,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥25,000 ) ..........................

TITLE IV—DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

FEDERAL FUNDS 

Federal payment for Resident Tuition Support .................................................................................................................... 33,000 35,100 35,100 ∂2,100 ..........................Federal payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the District of Columbia .............................................. 3,352 15,000 15,400 ∂12,048 ∂400 Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts .......................................................................................................... 223,920 223,920 251,625 ∂27,705 ∂27,705 Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts ............................................................................................................... 47,975 47,975 52,475 ∂4,500 ∂4,500 Federal payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia .......................... 190,343 202,490 203,490 ∂13,147 ∂1,000 Federal payment to the District of Columbia Public Defender Service .............................................................................. 32,710 35,659 35,659 ∂2,949 ..........................Federal payment to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority .......................................................................... 8,000 14,000 16,000 ∂8,000 ∂2,000 Federal payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council .......................................................................................... 1,300 1,774 1,774 ∂474 ..........................Federal payment to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia ............................................... 5,453 .......................... 5,000 ¥453 ∂5,000 Federal payment for School Improvement ........................................................................................................................... 40,800 54,000 54,000 ∂13,200 ..........................Federal payment for consolidated laboratory facility .......................................................................................................... 5,000 5,000 21,000 ∂16,000 ∂16,000 Federal payment to jumpstart public school reform ........................................................................................................... .......................... 20,000 20,000 ∂20,000 ..........................Federal payment for Central Library/branch locations ........................................................................................................ 9,000 7,000 7,000 ¥2,000 ..........................Federal payment to reimburse the FBI ................................................................................................................................ 4,000 5,000 .......................... ¥4,000 ¥5,000 Federal payment to the Executive Office of the Mayor ....................................................................................................... 5,000 .......................... 3,500 ¥1,500 ∂3,500 

Total, Title IV, District of Columbia ....................................................................................................................... 609,853 666,918 722,023 ∂112,170 ∂55,105 

TITLE V—OTHER INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation ..................................................................................................................... 600 .......................... 1,000 ∂400 ∂1,000 Commodity Futures Trading Commission ............................................................................................................................ 111,266 130,000 157,000 ∂45,734 ∂27,000 Consumer Product Safety Commission ................................................................................................................................ 80,000 80,000 95,000 ∂15,000 ∂15,000 
155 

Election Assistance Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 16,530 16,679 16,679 ∂149 ..........................Election reform programs ..................................................................................................................................................... 115,000 .......................... .......................... ¥115,000 ..........................Election data collection grants ............................................................................................................................................ 10,000 .......................... .......................... ¥10,000 ..........................

Total, Election Assistance Commission .................................................................................................................. 141,530 16,679 16,679 ¥124,851 ..........................

Federal Communications Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 313,000 338,875 341,875 ∂28,875 ∂3,000 Transfer from USF for OIG audits (by transfer) .................................................................................................................. (21,480 ) (25,480 ) (25,480 ) (∂4,000 ) ..........................Offsetting fee collections—current year ............................................................................................................................. ¥312,000 ¥337,875 ¥341,875 ¥29,875 ¥4,000 

Direct appropriation ................................................................................................................................................ 1,000 1,000 .......................... ¥1,000 ¥1,000 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector General (by transfer) ............................................................. (26,848 ) (27,495 ) (27,495 ) (∂647 ) ..........................Federal Election Commission ............................................................................................................................................... 59,224 63,618 63,618 ∂4,394 ..........................Federal Labor Relations Authority ........................................................................................................................................ 23,641 22,674 22,674 ¥967 ..........................

Federal Trade Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 243,864 256,200 256,200 ∂12,336 ..........................Offsetting fee collections—current year ............................................................................................................................. ¥139,000 ¥168,000 ¥168,000 ¥29,000 ..........................Offsetting fee collections, telephone database ................................................................................................................... ¥23,000 ¥19,300 ¥19,300 ∂3,700 ..........................

Direct appropriation ................................................................................................................................................ 81,864 68,900 68,900 ¥12,964 ..........................

General Services Administration 

Federal Buildings Fund 

Appropriations ...................................................................................................................................................................... (83,964 ) (525,000 ) (671,872 ) (∂587,908 ) (∂146,872 ) Limitations on availability of revenue: 

Construction and acquisition of facilities .................................................................................................................. 306,448 620,119 766,991 ∂460,543 ∂146,872 

Construction (emergency) ................................................................................................................................... 225,000 .......................... .......................... ¥225,000 ..........................

Repairs and alterations .............................................................................................................................................. 722,161 692,374 692,374 ¥29,787 ..........................Installment acquisition payments ............................................................................................................................... 155,781 149,570 149,570 ¥6,211 ..........................Rental of space ........................................................................................................................................................... 4,315,534 4,692,156 4,692,156 ∂376,622 ..........................Building operations ..................................................................................................................................................... 2,105,490 2,223,354 2,223,354 ∂117,864 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 7,830,414 8,377,573 8,524,445 ∂694,031 ∂146,872 

Repayment of debt ............................................................................................................................................................... 50,804 56,865 56,865 ∂6,061 ..........................
156 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Rental income to fund ......................................................................................................................................................... ¥7,916,272 ¥8,134,239 ¥8,134,239 ¥217,967 ..........................

Total, Federal Buildings Fund ................................................................................................................................ ¥35,054 300,199 447,071 ∂482,125 ∂146,872 

Government-wide policy ....................................................................................................................................................... 52,891 56,578 54,578 ∂1,687 ¥2,000 Operating expenses .............................................................................................................................................................. 85,870 71,811 69,349 ¥16,521 ¥2,462 Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 48,382 54,000 54,000 ∂5,618 ..........................Electronic Government Fund ................................................................................................................................................ 3,000 5,000 1,000 ¥2,000 ¥4,000 Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents ............................................................................................................ 2,478 2,934 2,934 ∂456 ..........................Expenses, Presidential transition ......................................................................................................................................... .......................... 8,520 8,520 ∂8,520 ..........................Federal Citizen Services Fund .............................................................................................................................................. 17,328 36,558 36,558 ∂19,230 ..........................

Total, General Services Administration .................................................................................................................. 174,895 535,600 674,010 ∂499,115 ∂138,410 

Merit Systems Protection Board 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 37,507 38,811 38,811 ∂1,304 ..........................Limitation on administrative expenses ................................................................................................................................ 2,579 2,579 2,579 .......................... ..........................

Total, Merit Systems Protection Board ................................................................................................................... 40,086 41,390 41,390 ∂1,304 ..........................

Morris K. Udall Foundation 

Morris K. Udall Trust Fund ................................................................................................................................................... 3,750 100 3,750 .......................... ∂3,650 Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund .............................................................................................................................. 2,000 850 2,000 .......................... ∂1,150 

Total, Morris K. Udall Foundation ........................................................................................................................... 5,750 950 5,750 .......................... ∂4,800 

National Archives and Records Administration 

Operating expenses .............................................................................................................................................................. 315,000 327,783 330,883 ∂15,883 ∂3,100 

Reduction of debt ........................................................................................................................................................ ¥10,896 ¥11,842 ¥11,842 ¥946 ..........................

Electronic records archive .................................................................................................................................................... 58,028 67,008 67,008 ∂8,980 ..........................
157 

Repairs and restoration ....................................................................................................................................................... 28,605 9,211 33,211 ∂4,606 ∂24,000 National Historical Publications and Records Commission: Grants program ..................................................................... 9,500 .......................... 10,500 ∂1,000 ∂10,500 

Total, National Archives and Records Admin ......................................................................................................... 400,237 392,160 429,760 ∂29,523 ∂37,600 

National Credit Union Administration 

Central liquidity facility: 

(Limitation on direct loans) ........................................................................................................................................ (1,500,000 ) (1,500,000 ) (1,500,000 ) .......................... ..........................(Limitation on admin expenses, corporate funds) ...................................................................................................... (329 ) (334 ) (334 ) (∂5 ) ..........................

Community development credit union revolving loan fund ................................................................................................. 975 1,000 1,000 ∂25 ..........................Office of Government Ethics ................................................................................................................................................ 11,750 13,000 13,000 ∂1,250 ..........................

Office of Personnel Management 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 101,765 92,829 92,829 ¥8,936 ..........................

Limitation on administrative expenses ....................................................................................................................... 123,901 118,082 118,082 ¥5,819 ..........................

Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 1,519 1,538 2,136 ∂617 ∂598 

Limitation on administrative expenses ....................................................................................................................... 17,081 16,462 20,428 ∂3,347 ∂3,966 

Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits .................................................................................................. 8,884,000 9,533,000 9,533,000 ∂649,000 ..........................Govt Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance ..................................................................................................... 41,000 46,000 46,000 ∂5,000 ..........................Payment to Civil Svc Retirement and Disability Fund ........................................................................................................ 11,941,000 10,550,000 10,550,000 ¥1,391,000 ..........................

Total, Office of Personnel Management ................................................................................................................. 21,110,266 20,357,911 20,362,475 ¥747,791 ∂4,564 

Office of Special Counsel ..................................................................................................................................................... 17,468 17,468 17,468 .......................... ..........................Postal Regulatory Commission ............................................................................................................................................. .......................... 14,043 14,043 ∂14,043 ..........................Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board ........................................................................................................................ 2,000 2,000 2,000 .......................... ..........................

Securities and Exchange Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 906,000 913,000 938,000 ∂32,000 ∂25,000 Prior year unobligated balances .......................................................................................................................................... ¥63,262 ¥42,000 ¥48,000 ∂15,262 ¥6,000 

Direct appropriation ................................................................................................................................................ 842,738 871,000 890,000 ∂47,262 ∂19,000 

Selective Service System ...................................................................................................................................................... 22,000 22,000 22,000 .......................... ..........................

Small Business Administration 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 344,123 328,159 377,799 ∂33,676 ∂49,640 Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. 15,000 15,500 15,500 ∂500 ..........................Surety bond guarantees revolving fund ............................................................................................................................... 3,000 2,000 2,000 ¥1,000 ..........................Business Loans Program Account: 

Direct loans subsidy .................................................................................................................................................... 2,000 .......................... 2,500 ∂500 ∂2,500 
158 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Administrative expenses .............................................................................................................................................. 135,414 138,480 138,480 ∂3,066 ..........................

Total, Business loans program account ................................................................................................................. 137,414 138,480 140,980 ∂3,566 ∂2,500 

Disaster Loans Program Account: 

Direct loans subsidy .................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 14,301 .......................... .......................... ¥14,301 Administrative expenses .............................................................................................................................................. .......................... 160,068 160,068 ∂160,068 ..........................

Total, Disaster loans program account .................................................................................................................. .......................... 174,369 160,068 ∂160,068 ¥14,301 

Salaries and expenses, other ............................................................................................................................................... 69,451 .......................... 69,451 .......................... ∂69,451 

Total, Small Business Administration .................................................................................................................... 568,988 658,508 765,798 ∂196,810 ∂107,290 

Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation ............................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... 500 ∂500 ∂500 

United States Postal Service 

Payment to the Postal Service Fund .................................................................................................................................... 29,000 .......................... 29,000 .......................... ∂29,000 

Advance appropriations ............................................................................................................................................... 88,864 82,831 82,831 ¥6,033 ..........................

Total, Payment to the Postal Service Fund ............................................................................................................ 117,864 82,831 111,831 ¥6,033 ∂29,000 

Office of Inspector General .................................................................................................................................................. .......................... 239,356 239,356 ∂239,356 ..........................

Total, United States Postal Service ........................................................................................................................ 117,864 322,187 351,187 ∂233,323 ∂29,000 

United States Tax Court ....................................................................................................................................................... 45,326 48,463 48,463 ∂3,137 ..........................

Total, title V, Independent Agencies ...................................................................................................................... 23,859,468 23,680,551 24,063,715 ∂204,247 ∂383,164 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (23,545,604 ) (23,597,720 ) (23,980,884 ) (∂435,280 ) (∂383,164 ) 

(Mandatory) ........................................................................................................................................... (20,866,000 ) (20,129,000 ) (20,129,000 ) (¥737,000 ) ..........................(Discretionary) ....................................................................................................................................... (2,679,604 ) (3,468,720 ) (3,851,884 ) (∂1,172,280 ) (∂383,164 ) 
159 

Emergency appropriations ............................................................................................................................. (225,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥225,000 ) ..........................Advances ........................................................................................................................................................ (88,864 ) (82,831 ) (82,831 ) (¥6,033 ) ..........................(by transfer) ................................................................................................................................................... (48,328 ) (52,975 ) (52,975 ) (∂4,647 ) ..........................

Grand total .............................................................................................................................................................. 43,658,154 44,226,913 44,750,883 ∂1,092,729 ∂523,970 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (43,052,980 ) (44,144,082 ) (44,668,052 ) (∂1,615,072 ) (∂523,970 ) Emergency appropriations ............................................................................................................................. (516,310 ) .......................... .......................... (¥516,310 ) ..........................Advances ........................................................................................................................................................ (88,864 ) (82,831 ) (82,831 ) (¥6,033 ) ..........................(by transfer) ................................................................................................................................................... (48,328 ) (52,975 ) (52,975 ) (∂4,647 ) ..........................

Discretionary total ................................................................................................................................................... 20,710,266 22,367,274 22,870,000 ∂2,159,734 ∂502,726 

Æ