Congressional Action on FY2016 Appropriations Measures
Released: 2015-11-23T00:00:00

Introduction

Congress uses an annual appropriations process to provide discretionary spending for federal government agencies. The responsibility for drafting legislation to provide for such spending is currently divided among 12 appropriations subcommittees in each chamber, each of which is tasked with reporting a regular appropriations bill to cover all programs under its jurisdiction. (The titles of these 12 bills, which correspond to their respective subcommittees, are listed in Table 1 at the end of this section.) The timetable associated with the annual appropriations process requires the enactment of all regular appropriations bills prior to the beginning of the fiscal year (October 1). If regular appropriations are not enacted by that deadline, one or more continuing resolutions (CRs) may be enacted to provide interim funding authority until all regular appropriations bills are completed or the fiscal year ends. During the fiscal year, supplemental appropriations may also be enacted to provide funds in addition to those in regular appropriations acts or CRs.

Amounts provided in appropriations acts are subject to limits, both procedural and statutory, which are enforced through mechanisms such as points of order and sequestration. Disagreement over the appropriate level of discretionary spending—as well as its distribution between defense and nondefense activities—significantly affected the focus of the FY2016 appropriations process. While the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 ( P.L. 113-67 ) revised the statutory discretionary spending limits to allow higher spending in FY2014 and FY2015, that agreement did not alter the calculation for the FY2016 limits. As a consequence, the FY2016 limits were generally less than 1% higher than both the FY2014 and FY2015 limits. In the FY2016 budget submission, the President proposed raising both the defense and nondefense limits. The congressional budget resolution ( S.Con.Res. 11 ) took a different approach in that it assumed FY2016 discretionary spending at the level allowed by the limits at that time but also allowed additional spending (largely in the defense category) that was effectively not subject to the statutory spending limits. This additional spending was proposed at a higher level than the amount requested by the President. This disagreement as to the level of discretionary spending was ultimately resolved through the enactment of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 on November 2, 2015 (BBA 2015; H.R. 1314 ; P.L. 114-74 ). The BBA 2015 raised both the defense and nondefense statutory discretionary spending limits for FY2016 and FY2017 and specified an expected level for the "Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism" (OCO/GWOT) spending adjustment for each of those fiscal years. The enactment of annual appropriations subject to those limits has yet to occur.

Consideration of FY2016 regular appropriations bills in the House began on April 15, 2015, with subcommittee approval of the Energy-Water ( H.R. 2028 ) and Military Construction-VA ( H.R. 2029 ) appropriations bills. Since that time, all 12 regular appropriations bills have been reported from committee, and six of those have passed the House. About a month after committee action began in the House, the Senate began its consideration of FY2016 appropriations measures with the subcommittee approval of the Energy-Water and Military Construction-VA appropriations bills, on May 19. The Senate Appropriations Committee subsequently reported all 12 regular appropriations bills. On June 18, the Senate rejected a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the Department of Defense appropriations bill ( H.R. 2685 ). Since that time, the Senate voted not to invoke cloture on motions to proceed to the Defense, Military Construction-VA, and Energy-Water appropriations bills. However, on November 5, the Senate agreed to proceed to consider the Military Construction-VA appropriations bill and passed that bill on November 10. The Senate proceeded to consider the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill ( H.R. 2577 ) on November 18 but has not completed that consideration as of the date of this report.

Because none of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills became law by the start of the fiscal year, a CR was enacted to provide continuing appropriations until December 11 ( H.R. 719 ; P.L. 114-53 ). (Prior to the final consideration and enactment of H.R. 719 , Senate legislative action related to FY2016 continuing appropriations occurred on a different legislative vehicle, H.J.Res. 61 .)

This report provides background and analysis of congressional action related to the FY2016 appropriations process. The first section discusses the status of discretionary budget enforcement for FY2016, including the statutory spending limits and allocations associated with the congressional budget resolution. The second section provides information on the consideration of regular appropriations bills. Further information with regard to the FY2016 regular appropriations bills is provided in the various CRS reports that analyze and compare the components of the President's budget submission and the relevant congressional appropriations proposals.

This report will be updated periodically during the FY2016 appropriations process.

For information on the current status of FY2016 appropriations measures, see the CRS Appropriations Status Table: FY2016, at http://www.crs.gov/Pages/AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx .

Discretionary Spending Budget Enforcement

The framework for budget enforcement of discretionary spending under the congressional budget process has both statutory and procedural elements. The statutory elements are the discretionary spending limits derived from the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. 112-25 ). The procedural elements are primarily associated with the budget resolution. It limits both the total spending under the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committee, as well as spending under the jurisdiction of each appropriations subcommittee.

In addition, pursuant to Section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (BBEDCA), certain spending is effectively exempt from these statutory and procedural spending limits because the limits are adjusted upward to accommodate that spending. Such spending includes budget authority specifically designated as emergency requirements, OCO/GWOT, disaster relief, and particular amounts of budget authority for certain program integrity initiatives. Since the enactment of the BCA in 2011, the vast majority of adjustments pursuant to Section 251(b) have been for budget authority designated as OCO/GWOT. Such adjustments have allowed for additional budget authority (largely in the defense category) for expenses associated with overseas operations, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other related purposes.

FY2016 Discretionary Spending Limits

The FY2016 appropriations process, as noted earlier, has been affected by disagreement over the appropriate level of discretionary spending, as well as its distribution between defense and nondefense activities. The BCA established statutory spending limits for FY2016. However, the President proposed revisions to those limits in his FY2016 budget request. In addition, the FY2016 budget resolution establishes certain procedurally enforceable limits on discretionary spending that are related to the levels of the BCA limits. Table 2 displays the initial BCA limits, the revised BCA limits, and proposed limits for FY2016, compared to the limits that were in effect for FY2014 and FY2015. It also displays the current law defense and nondefense spending levels that were ultimately established through the enactment of the BBA 2015.

FY2016 Statutory Discretionary Spending Limits

The BCA imposes separate limits on defense and nondefense discretionary spending for each of the fiscal years from FY2012 through FY2021. The defense category includes all discretionary spending under budget function 050 (defense); the nondefense category includes discretionary spending in the other budget functions. In order to require additional budgetary savings, the BCA included procedures to lower the level of the initial spending limits for each fiscal year. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calculates the amount by which each initial limit for the upcoming fiscal year is to be lowered, and announces the amount of the lowered limits in a "preview report" at the same time that the President's budget is submitted.

If discretionary spending is enacted in excess of a statutory limit, the BCA requires the level of spending to be brought into conformance through "sequestration," which involves largely across-the-board cuts to non-exempt spending in the category of the limit that was breached (i.e., defense or nondefense). Once discretionary spending is enacted, OMB evaluates that spending relative to the spending limits and determines whether sequestration is necessary. For FY2016 discretionary spending, the first such evaluation (and any necessary enforcement) is to occur within 15 calendar days after the 2015 congressional session adjourns sine die. For any FY2016 discretionary spending that becomes law after the session ends, the OMB evaluation and any enforcement of the limits would occur 15 days after enactment.

The BBEDCA also provides specific preconditions for adjusting the statutory limits to accommodate OCO/GWOT-designated spending. Such spending must be designated by Congress on an account-by-account basis, and also be subsequently designated by the President, in order for the relevant statutory limit to be adjusted. If the President were not to designate such funds as OCO/GWOT, the limit would not be adjusted to accommodate that additional spending. This could cause enacted spending to be higher than the limit and trigger a sequestration to enforce it. In recent years, appropriations acts that carried OCO/GWOT spending have generally included a provision stipulating that each amount in that act designated by Congress for OCO/GWOT "shall be available only if the President subsequently so designates all such amounts.... "

Table 2 displays the FY2014 and FY2015 limits and OCO/GWOT enacted spending, the FY2016 initial and revised levels for the limits, and various FY2016 proposed levels for the limits and OCO/GWOT spending. The total of the limits is also listed. Pursuant to Section 251A of the BBEDCA, the initial BCA limit on defense spending for FY2016 was reduced by $53.909 billion to the revised level of $523.091 billion. The initial limit on FY2016 nondefense spending was reduced by $36.509 billion to $493.491 billion. Recall that the reduced level of these limits was increase of less than 1% above both the FY2014 and FY2015 limits.

Levels of Discretionary Spending Proposed in the President's Budget Submission

The President's budget submission proposes that both the defense and nondefense limits for FY2016 be raised by similar amounts (as listed in Table 2 ). Under this proposal, the defense limit would be increased by $37.909 billion ($16 billion less than the initial BCA defense limit). The nondefense limit would be increased by $36.509 billion (equal to the level of the initial BCA nondefense limit). The budget submission also contains a number of other proposed changes to both spending and revenue that are intended to "offset" the proposed increases to the limits. The requested amount of OCO/GWOT spending is $57.996 billion—a decrease of $15.686 billion from the FY2015 enacted levels.

Levels of Discretionary Spending Assumed by the FY2016 Budget Resolution

The FY2016 congressional budget resolution ( S.Con.Res. 11 ) assumes different levels of discretionary spending than those proposed by the President's budget submission (as listed in Table 2 ). The levels of defense and nondefense discretionary spending subject to the limits that are identified in the joint explanatory statement accompanying the budget resolution are identical to the revised BCA levels. However, the budget resolution also includes certain procedural contingencies for the consideration of legislation that could alter the statutory discretionary spending limits. For example, Section 4302 would allow for Senate consideration of legislation "relating to enhanced funding for national security or domestic discretionary programs" provided it does not increase the deficit during the period covered by the budget resolution. The amount of OCO/GWOT spending assumed under the budget resolution is $96.287 billion—an increase of $22.595 billion over FY2015 enacted levels and an increase of $38.291 billion over the President's request.

"Current Law" Discretionary Spending Limits Established by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (BBA 2015)

The BBA 2015 raised both the defense and nondefense discretionary spending limits for FY2016 (as listed in Table 2 ). The reduced limits were increased by a total of $50 billion, equally divided between the defense and nondefense limit. This law also specified an expected level for the FY2016 OCO/GWOT spending adjustment of $14.8 billion for function 150 (international affairs) and $58.7 billion for function 050 (defense), for a total of $73,693.

FY2016 Budget Resolution

The procedural elements of budget enforcement generally stem from requirements under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (CBA) that are associated with the adoption of an annual budget resolution. Through this CBA process, the Appropriations Committee in each chamber receives a procedural limit on the total amount of discretionary budget authority for the upcoming fiscal year, referred to as a "302(a) allocation." The House and Senate Appropriations Committees subsequently divide this allocation among their 12 subcommittees. These divisions to each subcommittee are referred to as "302(b) suballocations." The 302(b) suballocations restrict the amount of budget authority available to each subcommittee for the agencies, projects, and activities under their jurisdictions, and effectively act as caps on each of the 12 regular appropriations bills. The Appropriations Committee may revise the 302(b) suballocations at any time by issuing a new suballocation report. Both the 302(a) and 302(b) limits may be enforced on the floor through points of order.

Final action of the FY2016 budget resolution occurred on May 5, 2015 ( S.Con.Res. 11 ). The joint explanatory statement associated with the budget resolution provides 302(a) allocations for the House and Senate Appropriations Committees that are consistent with the revised BCA levels for the statutory discretionary spending limits (see Table 2 ). Those 302(a) allocations also included a separate allocation for OCO/GWOT spending of $96.287 billion. The most recently reported 302(b) suballocations of discretionary spending for the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees are listed in Table 3 . This table also includes a comparison of the distribution of OCO/GWOT-designated budget authority among those subcommittees, which is in addition to amounts that are subject to the limits. The initial House 302(b) suballocations were reported on April 29, 2015, and subsequently revised on May 18 and July 10. The initial Senate suballocations were reported about three weeks after the initial House allocations, on May 21, 2015. The Senate Appropriations Committee later revised these suballocations on June 10, June 24, July 8, and July 16. These Senate suballocations were further revised on November 5 and November 18 after the enactment of the BBA 2015. Additional revisions to both the House and Senate suballocations may occur to reflect the increases to the defense and nondefense limits established by the BBA 2015.

Regular Appropriations

The House and Senate provide annual appropriations in 12 regular appropriations bills. Each of these bills may be considered and enacted separately, but it is also possible for two or more of them to be combined into an omnibus vehicle for consideration and enactment. Alternatively, if some of these bills are not enacted, annual funding for the projects and activities therein may be provided through a full-year CR.

As of the date of this report, the House Appropriations Committee has reported all 12 regular appropriations bills for FY2016 (see Table 4 ). Six of these bills have been passed by the House (see Table 5 ). The Senate Appropriations Committee has also reported all 12 of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills (see Table 6 ). The Senate passed one of these—Military Construction-VA (see Table 7 )—and also proceeded to consider the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill ( H.R. 2577 ). It has not completed that consideration as of the date of this report. (In addition, the Senate has voted not to invoke cloture on motions to proceed to consider two other regular bills—Defense and Energy-Water.)

House Action

Committee

Table 4 lists the regular appropriations bills that have received subcommittee or full committee action, along with the associated date of subcommittee approval, date reported to the House (if applicable), and the report number.

The first regular appropriations bills to be approved in subcommittee and reported by the full committee were Energy-Water ( H.R. 2028 ) and Military Construction-VA ( H.R. 2029 ). Both were reported to the House on April 24, 2015. Two other measures received some form of committee consideration during the month of April—Legislative Branch ( H.R. 2250 ) and Transportation-HUD ( H.R. 2577 ). Both of these measures, however, were not reported until the month of May. A fifth regular appropriations bill—Commerce-Justice-Science ( H.R. 2578 )—was reported by the committee at the end of May.

Three appropriations measures were reported by the committee during the month of June—Department of Defense ( H.R. 2685 ), State-Foreign Operations ( H.R. 2772 ), and Interior ( H.R. 2822 ). Two additional bills—Financial Services ( H.R. 2995 ) and Labor-HHS-Education ( H.R. 3020 )—were ordered reported. (These two bills were reported to the House during the month of July.) Finally, the Agriculture appropriations bill was approved in subcommittee, bringing the total number of FY2016 bills that the House Appropriations Committee had acted on to 11.

During the month of July, the House Appropriations Committee concluded its consideration of regular appropriations bills for FY2016 by reporting out the Agriculture ( H.R. 3049 ) and Homeland Security ( H.R. 3128 ) bills.

Floor

Table 5 identifies the six regular appropriations bills that have been passed by the House on initial consideration, along with the date consideration was initiated, the date consideration was concluded, and the vote on final passage.

The first FY2016 regular appropriations bills considered on the House floor were Military Construction-VA ( H.R. 2029 ) and Energy-Water ( H.R. 2028 ). The consideration of both of these measures was initiated on April 29, 2015, pursuant to modified open rules ( H.Res. 223 ), which generally limited debate of each amendment to 10 minutes. A total of 104 amendments were offered during the consideration of these two bills, of which 58 were adopted. The House passed the measures later that same week.

The Legislative Branch appropriations bill ( H.R. 2250 ) was considered on the House floor on May 19. A structured rule, as is traditional for Legislative Branch bills, limited consideration to three specified amendments. Two of these amendments were subsequently adopted. The House passed the measure on the same day that consideration began.

During the first two weeks in June, the House considered and passed three appropriations measures. All three of these were considered under the terms of modified open rules. Floor consideration of the Commerce-Justice-Science bill ( H.R. 2578 ) began on June 2, and the House passed the measure on June 3. Later that same day, the House began to consider the Transportation-HUD bill ( H.R. 2577 ) but did not pass it until the following week, on June 9. The House initiated consideration of the DOD bill on June 10 and passed it the next day. A total of 233 amendments were offered to those three measures during that two-week period, of which 124 were adopted.

The House began considering the Interior bill ( H.R. 2822 ) on June 25 but did not finish amending the bill prior to the Fourth of July district work period. The House resumed consideration of the measure on July 7 but halted consideration the following day. Prior to when consideration was halted, the House had adopted 57 amendments of the 116 that had been offered.

No further floor consideration of regular appropriations bills has occurred as of the date of this report.

Senate Action

Committee

Table 6 lists the regular appropriations bills that have received subcommittee or full committee action along with the date of subcommittee approval, date reported to the Senate (if applicable), and the report number.

The Senate Appropriations Committee began consideration of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills in the same order as the House, acting first on the Energy-Water ( H.R. 2028 ) and Military Construction-VA ( H.R. 2029 ) bills. Both were reported to the Senate on May 21, 2015.

Seven additional bills were reported by the committee during the month of June—Department of Defense ( H.R. 2685 ), Legislative Branch ( H.R. 2250 ), Commerce-Justice-Science ( H.R. 2578 ), Homeland Security ( S. 1619 ), Interior ( S. 1645 ), Labor-HHS-Education ( S. 1695 ), and Transportation-HUD ( H.R. 2577 ).

During the month of July, the committee completed its consideration of FY2016 regular appropriations by reporting the State-Foreign Operations ( S. 1725 ), Agriculture ( S. 1800 ), and Financial Services ( S. 1910 ) appropriations bills.

Floor

Table 7 identifies the one regular appropriations bill that the Senate passed on initial consideration, along with the date consideration was initiated, the date consideration was concluded, and the vote on final passage.

The Senate first attempted to initiate floor consideration of the Military Construction-VA appropriations bill ( H.R. 2029 ) on September 30. On that date, a motion to proceed to the measure was made in the Senate, and cloture was filed on that motion. The following day, the Senate voted not to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed by a vote of 50-44. After the BBA 2015 was enacted, the Senate agreed to proceed to consider the measure, by a vote of 93-0, on November 5, 2015. (An amendment in the nature of a substitute was offered and constituted the base text for consideration of the measure.) During the floor consideration, a total of 17 amendments were offered to that substitute amendment, of which 16 were adopted. The measure passed the Senate by a vote of 93-0 on November 10, 2015.

In addition to the Military Construction-VA appropriations bill, the Senate has also considered the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill. On November 16, a motion to proceed to the measure was made in the Senate, and cloture was filed on that motion. The following day, that cloture motion was withdrawn. Instead, the measure was laid before the Senate by unanimous consent on November 18. (An amendment in the nature of a substitute was offered and constituted the base text for consideration of the measure.) As of the date of this report, of the four amendments that had been offered to that substitute amendment, three had been adopted and one had not yet been disposed of. Cloture was filed on the substitute amendment and the bill itself the same day that the Senate began consideration of the measure, but both of those motions were later withdrawn by unanimous consent on November 19. No further consideration has occurred as of the date of this report.

The Senate has also addressed whether to proceed to consider two other FY2016 regular appropriations bills:

1. Department of Defense ( H.R. 2685 ). On June 16, a motion to proceed to the measure was made in the Senate, and cloture was filed on that motion. Two days later, on June 18, the Senate failed to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed by a vote of 50-45. On September 22, the Senate reconsidered the vote by which cloture on the motion to proceed was not invoked and again failed to invoke cloture by a vote of 54-42. About five weeks later, on November 3, the motion to proceed to the measure was made again the Senate, and cloture was filed on that motion. On November 5, cloture was not invoked on the motion to proceed by a vote of 51-44. 2. Energy-Water ( H.R. 2028 ). On October 6, a motion to proceed to the measure was made in the Senate, and cloture was filed on that motion. On October 8, the Senate failed to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed by a vote of 49-47.

No further Senate floor action has occurred with regard to these or any other regular appropriations measures as of the date of this report.

Continuing Resolutions

Because none of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills was expected to be enacted by the beginning of the fiscal year, a CR ( H.R. 719 ; P.L. 114-53 ) was enacted on September 30, 2015. This CR generally extended funding at last year's levels, with a small across-the-board reduction and certain enumerated exceptions, through December 11, 2015.

For further information with regard to the funding and other authorities provided by the continuing appropriations in H.R. 719 , see CRS Report R44214, Overview of the FY2016 Continuing Resolution (H.R. 719) , by [author name scrubbed].

Prior to the consideration and enactment of H.R. 719 , Senate legislative action related to FY2016 continuing appropriations occurred on a different legislative vehicle, H.J.Res. 61 . Congressional action on both of these vehicles is summarized chronologically in this section of the report.

H.J.Res. 61

On September 22, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute ( S.Amdt. 2669 ) to H.J.Res. 61 that would provide temporary FY2016 continuing appropriations through December 11, 2015, and also contained provisions that would limit the ability of Planned Parenthood to receive federal funds unless certain conditions were met. This amendment was offered to an unrelated measure that was pending before the Senate (Hire More Heroes Act of 2015; H.J.Res. 61 ). On September 24, the Senate failed to invoke cloture on that amendment to H.J.Res. 61 by a vote of 47-52. No further Senate action occurred with regard to that amendment.

H.R. 719 (P.L. 114-53)

After the Senate rejected cloture on the Senate amendment to H.J.Res. 61 on September 24, Majority Leader McConnell made a motion that proposed a Senate amendment ( S.Amdt. 2689 ) to a different, unrelated measure pending before the Senate (TSA Office of Inspection Accountability Act of 2015, H.R. 719 ) and filed cloture on that motion. More formally, the majority leader offered a motion to concur with an amendment ( S.Amdt. 2689 ) to a House amendment to a Senate amendment to H.R. 719 . As was the case for the initial CR amendment he offered to H.J.Res. 61 , this new Senate amendment contained temporary FY2016 continuing appropriations through December 11. However, this amendment did not include the Planned Parenthood–related provisions that were carried in the initial CR amendment offered to H.J.Res. 61 . On September 28, the Senate invoked cloture on a motion to concur with S.Amdt. 2689 by a vote of 77-19. On September 30, the Senate adopted that motion to concur by a vote of 78-20. By a vote of 277-151, the House concurred in that Senate action later in the day, and H.R. 719 was signed into law that evening ( P.L. 114-53 ).

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the budgetary effects of interim CRs on an "annualized" basis, meaning that those effects are measured as if the CR were providing budget authority for an entire fiscal year. According to CBO, the total amount of annualized budget authority for regular appropriations in the CR that is subject to the BCA limits (including projects and activities funded at the rate for operations and anomalies) is $1,016.582 billion.

Although the total spending in the CR that is subject to the FY2016 statutory limits is equal to the total of those limits, the CR is estimated to comply with the defense limit, but it exceeds the nondefense limit. CBO estimates defense spending in the CR to total $520.385 billion, which is about $2.7 billion below the defense limit. Nondefense spending, however, is estimated to total $496.197 billion, which is about $2.7 billion above the nondefense limit. As was previously mentioned, however, the earliest that the statutory discretionary spending limits could be enforced is 15 days after the end of the congressional session. This date is likely to occur after the expiration of the CR on December 11, 2015.

When CBO estimated the budgetary effects of the CR and included spending that is effectively not subject to the statutory discretionary spending limits—because it was designated or otherwise provided as OCO/GWOT, continuing disability reviews and redeterminations, health care fraud and abuse control, disaster relief, and emergency requirements—the total amount of annualized budget authority in the CR is $1,099.962 billion.