On February 7, 2000, President Clinton submitted the FY2001 budget request for appropriations for theDepartments ofCommerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and related agencies. The House Appropriations Committee approveditsversion of the bill on June 14, 2000 ( H.R. 4690 , H.Rept. 106-680 ). The bill was passed by the House on June26, 2000. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the bill on July 18, 2000 ( S.Rept 106-404 ). On October 27, 2000, Congress approved total funding of $40.0 billion, which was about $400 million above both thePresident's request and the total enacted for FY2000. The President signed the measure into law on December 21,2000( H.R. 5548 as contained in the conference report on H.R. 4942 ; P.L. 106-553 ). This report tracks legislative action by the second session of the 106th Congress on FY2001 appropriations fortheDepartments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and other related agencies (often referred to as CJSappropriations). P.L. 106-113 ( H.R. 3421 , Division B of H.R. 3194 , Section 1000 (a))appropriated $39.6 billion for these agencies for FY2000. The President Clinton's FY2001 budget requested about $39.6 billion for these agencies, about the same level as that appropriated for FY2000. (1) On June 19, 2000, the HouseAppropriations Committee approved its version of the CJS appropriations bill ( H.R. 4690 , H.Rept.106-680 ).It recommended funding totaling $37.4 billion-$2.2 billion below the President's request and about $2.2 billionbelow theFY2000 appropriation. The House approved the bill on June 26 by a vote of 214-195, with 1 voting present. (2) It approvedthe same overall funding total recommended by the Appropriations Committee. The House, however, did makea fewrecommended funding changes (that differed from the Committee's recommendations) for certain individualagenciescovered by the bill. These are reflected in this report. On July 18, 2000, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its version of the bill. It approved total funding of $36.7billion which is about $700 million below the House version and about $2.9 billion below both the President'srequest andthe actual FY2000 appropriation ( S.Rept. 106-404 ). ( The Senate, however, did not vote on its version of the bill. Instead,it approved the version approved by the Conference Committee which was agreed to on October 26, 2000.) On October 27, 2000, Congress approved total funding of $40.0 billion, which was about $400 million above bothPresident's request and the total enacted for FY2000. The finally enacted legislation ( H.R. 4690 ) wasincludedin the Conference Report approved by Congress in H.R. 5548 as contained in the conference report on H.R. 4942 ( H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Government of the District of ColumbiaandOther Activities Changeable in Whole or in Part Against Revenues of Said District for the Fiscal Year EndingSeptember30, 2001, and for Other Purposes ). (3) Subsequently, the District of Columbia appropriations portion of the measure wasseparated from the bill and approved by Congress ( H.R. 5663 ) on November 15. The President signed thismeasure into law on November 22, 2000. On December 21, President Clinton signed the remaining portion of H.R. 4942 contained in H.R. 5548 , the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill, into law on December 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-553 ). (4) Continuing funding resolutions. With the expiration of Fiscal Year 2000 appropriations on September 30, 2000,Congress enacted a continuing funding resolution ( H.J.Res. 109 ) which extended FY2000 appropriationsthrough midnight October 6, 2000. This was followed by a second resolution ( H.J.Res. 110 ) which extendedFY2000 funding through October 14, 2000. A third resolution was approved by Congress ( H.J.Res. 111 ),which extended funding through October 20, 2000. A fourth resolution ( H.J.Res. 114 ) was approved toextend funding through Wednesday, Oct. 25, 2000. After October 25, Congress enacted eight one day continuingresolutions ( H.J.Res. 116 , H.J.Res. 117 , H.J.Res. 118 , H.J.Res. 119 ,120, H.J.Res. 121 , H.J.Res. 122 , and H.J.Res. 123 ). On November 3, Congressapproved H.J.Res. 84 which extended FY2000 funding through November 14, the date that both Houses ofCongress were scheduled to return from the election recess. This was followed by approval on November 14 ofa longerterm extension of funding ( H.J.Res. 125 ) through December 5, 2000. After returning on December 4,Congress approved a number of short term extensions to provide funding until the President signed the CJS billinto lawon December 21, 2000. Government-wide rescissions. It is important to note that the FY2001Consolidated Appropriations Act ( H.R. 4577 ; P.L. 106-554 ) contains a provision which mandates a 0.22percent government-wide rescission of discretionary budget authority for FY2001 for all government agencies(except forcertain defense activities), including those covered by the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill. The cuts are to beapplied on apro rata basis to each applicable program, project, and activity. The Director of the Office of Management andBudgetmust include a report on these reduction in the President's budget submission for FY2002. (5) As part of the budget process, the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) enacted by Congress in 1993( P.L.103-62 ; 107 Stat 285) requires that agencies develop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, andperformancemeasures for all major programs. The GPRA requirements apply to nearly all executive branch agencies, includingindependent regulatory commissions, but not the judicial branch. Brief descriptions of the latest versions of thestrategicplans of the major agencies covered by CJS appropriations are contained in the discussions of theFY2001 budget requestsof individual agencies included in this report. The more contentious issues that were considered in the House and Senate debate over CJS appropriations for FY2001 included: Changing the focus and levels of appropriations for DOJ's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). ( Neither the 104th nor the 105th Congress reauthorized theJuvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention Act of 1974, as amended.) Funding of DOJ's legal action against the tobacco industry. White House threatened veto of CJS appropriations act, unless the bill included immigration provisions related to 1) NACARA parity, 2) advancing the registry date, 3) late amnesty, and 4) reinstating sec.245(i). (6) Whether to lift a statutory ban on judges receiving honoraria. Other issues or concerns that received attention included the following. Department of Justice: Extending the 1994 Crime Act funding authorizations beyond FY2000 under the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund (VCRTF). Increasing funding for drug-related efforts, especially the Office of Justice Programs' Zero Tolerance Drug Supervision Program, the Offender Reentry Program and the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment program. Increasing funding for community policing initiatives and community crime prevention programs. Combating gun violence by hiring more federal, state, and local prosecutors to increase gun prosecutions, and reduce youth violence. Combating cybercrime. Reducing pending case loads in immigration-related claims, particularly naturalization cases. Determining the level of INS detention capacity necessary to comply with the statutory mandate that certain criminal aliens be detained until deported; Meeting the statutory mandate that the Border Patrol be increased by 1,000 agents in FY2000 and FY2001. Restructuring INS internally as proposed by the Administration or dismantling the agency by legislation. Department of Commerce: Progress made in the streamlining and downsizing of Department programs and operations. Funding needs of the Bureau of the Census in processing and releasing the 2000 decennial census results. Extent to which federal funds should be used to support industrial technology development programs at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), particularly the Advanced TechnologyProgram. Appropriateness of the Administration's proposal to increase funding for public broadcast facilities, planning, and construction at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration(NTIA). The completion of National Weather Service Modernization and the extent to which the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would implement a number of Presidential initiatives toprotectthe environment and foster research and development in the 21st century. The extent to which the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would implement a number of new ongoing Presidential initiatives to protect the environment and foster research anddevelopment in the 21st century. The extent to which foreign countries comply with trade agreements and U.S. trade laws. Department of State: Increased funding for embassy security overseas. The Judiciary: The adequacy of compensation paid to court-appointed defense attorneys in federal criminal cases. The growing costs of the Judiciary's Defender Services account. The funding and staff requirements for the district courts due to increases in criminal filings; The Judiciary's contention that federal judges and justices should receive a cost-of-living salary increase. Other Agencies: Adequacy of funding for the Legal Services Corporation. Adequacy of funding for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, given a rapidly growing workload of civil rights cases. Adequacy of funding for programs of the Small Business Administration (SBA). The merits of attaching a rider to the CJS appropriations bill scaling back the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) low power FM radio regulations. Whether to bar the FCC from approving foreign government takeovers of U.S. telecommunications companies. This report provides background descriptions of the principal functions of the federal agencies covered by CJS appropriations and identifies and more extensively reviews the major legislative and policy issues that emergedduring thedebate on these appropriations. On February 7, 2000, President Clinton submitted the FY2001 budget request for appropriations for theDepartments ofCommerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and related agencies. The House approved the bill on June 26. Itapprovedthe same overall funding total recommended by the Appropriations Committee. The House, however, did makea fewfunding changes (that differ from the Committee's recommendations) for certain individual agencies covered by thebill. These are reflected in this report. The Senate Appropriations Committee passed its version of the bill on July 18,2000( S.Rept. 106-404 ). ( The Senate, however, did not vote on its version of the bill. Instead, it approved the versionapprovedby the Conference Committee which was agreed to on October 26, 2000.) On October 27, 2000, Congress approved total funding of $39.9 billion which was about $300 million above bothPresident's request and the total enacted for FY2000. H.R. 4690 was included in Conference Report approvedby Congress in H.R. 4942 ( H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Government of theDistrict ofColumbia and Other Activities Changeable in Whole or in Part Against Revenues of Said District for the Fiscal YearEnding September 30, 2001, and for Other Purposes ). Subsequently, the District of Columbia appropriationsportion ofthe measure was separated from the bill and approved by Congress ( H.R. 5663 ) on November 15. ThePresident signed this measure into law on November 22. On December 21, President Clinton signed the remaining portion of HR. 4942 contained in H.R. 5548 , theFY2001 CJS appropriations bill, into law on December 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-553 ). (7) With the expiration of Fiscal Year 2000 appropriations on September 30,2000, Congress enacted a continuing fundingresolution ( H.J.Res. 109 ) which extended FY2000 appropriations through midnight October 6, 2000. Thiswas followed by a second resolution ( H.J.Res. 110 ) which extended FY2000 funding through October 14,2000. A third resolution was approved by Congress ( H.J.Res. 111 ), extending funding through October 20,2000. A fourth resolution ( H.J. Res. 114) was approved to extend funding through Wednesday, Oct. 25, 2000.AfterOctober 25, Congress enacted eight one day continuing resolutions (H. J. Res. 116. 117, 118, 119,120, 121,122,and123).On November 3, Congress approved H.J. Res. 84 which extended FY2000 funding through November 14, the datethatboth Houses of Congress were scheduled to return from the election recess. This was followed by approval onNovember14 of a longer term extension of funding(H.J. Res. 125) through December 5, 2000. After returning on December4,Congress approved a number of short term extensions to provide funding until the CJS bill was signed into lawby thePresident on December 21, 2000. The table below shows the key legislative steps necessary for the enactment of FY2001 CJS appropriations legislation. It is also important to note that the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2001 ( H.R. 4577 ; P.L.106-554 )also includes a provision that mandates a 0.22% government-wide rescission of discretionary budget authority forFY2001appropriations, including CJS appropriations. For more details see page 3 of this report. Table 1. Status of CJS Appropriations, FY2001 * The Senate did not vote on its version of the bill. Instead, it approved the version approved by the ConferenceCommittee which was agreed to on October 26, 2000. ** H.R. 4690 was included in Conference Report approved by Congress on October 27, 2000 ( H.R. 4942 ; H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Government of the District of ColumbiaandOther Activities Changeable in Whole or in Part Against Revenues of Said District for the Fiscal Year EndingSeptember30, 2001, and for Other Purposes ). The CJS appropriations bill contained in the Conference Report wasgiven a new billnumber: H.R. 5548 . The creation, legislative authority, and principal activities of the major agencies covered by the CJSappropriationslegislation for each fiscal year are described below. Brief descriptions of most of the related agencies covered bythelegislation are also included in this section. Title I of the CJS legislation typically covers the appropriations for the Department of Justice and related agencies. Established by an Act of 1870 (28 U.S.C. 501) with the Attorney General at its head, the Department of Justice(DOJ)provides counsel for citizens and protects them through its efforts for effective law enforcement. It conducts all suitsin theSupreme Court in which the United States is concerned and represents the government in legal matters generally,providinglegal advice and opinions, upon request, to the President and the executive branch's department heads. The Department contains several divisions: Antitrust, Civil, Civil Rights, Criminal, Environmental and Natural Resources,and Tax. Major agencies within the Department of Justice include: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigates violations of federal criminal law, protects theUnited States from hostile intelligence efforts, provides assistance to other federal, state and local law enforcementagencies, and has concurrent jurisdiction with Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) over federal drugviolations. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is the lead drug law enforcement agency at the federal level,coordinating its efforts with state, local, and other federal officials in drug enforcement activities, developing andmaintaining drug intelligence systems, regulating legitimate controlled substances activities, and undertakingcoordinationand intelligence-gathering activities with foreign government agencies. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is responsible for administering laws relating to theadmission, exclusion, deportation, and naturalization of aliens, including the oversight of the process involving theadmission of aliens into the country and applications to become citizens, the prevention of illegal entry into theUnitedStates, and the investigation, apprehension, and removal of aliens who are in this country in violation of thelaw. Federal Prison System provides for the custody and care of the federal prison population, themaintenance of prison-related facilities, and the boarding of sentenced federal prisoners incarcerated in state andlocalinstitutions. Office of Justice Programs (OJP) carries out policy coordination and general management responsibilities for the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice, OfficeofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), and the Office ofVictims ofCrime, including administering programs, awarding grants, and evaluating activities. United States Attorneys prosecute criminal offenses against the United States, represent thegovernment in civil actions in which the United States is concerned, and initiate proceedings for the collection offines,penalties, and forfeitures owed to the United States. United States Marshals Service is primarily responsible for the protection of the federal judiciary,protection of witnesses, execution of warrants and court orders, management of seized assets, and custody andtransportation of unsentenced prisoners. Interagency Law Enforcement consists of 13 regional task forces composed of federal agents workingin cooperation with state and local investigators and prosecutors to target and destroy major narcotic trafficking andmoneylaundering organizations. The total appropriation for the Department of Justice in FY2000 was $18.6 billion. (For more details on the funding ofindividual programs, see Table 1A in the Appendix.) Appropriators also considered funding for criminal justice programs under the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund(VCRTF), which was established in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 ( P.L. 103-322 ). TheVCRTF provides authorization for criminal justice spending over a 6-year period, from FY1995 through FY2000.TrustFund monies were to be derived in part from projected savings to be realized by eliminating over 250,000 federaljobs asrequired by the Federal Workforce Restructuring Act ( P.L. 103-226 ). Spending was provided in the annualappropriationsbills, extending indefinitely authorizations of appropriations not fully appropriated. Across-the-board sequestrationofspending from the VCRTF is required, if outlays exceed the outlay limits set for the Trust Fund. The fund authorized $30.2 billion in spending from FY1995 through FY2000. The Omnibus Consolidated and EmergencySupplemental Appropriations Act for FY1999 ( P.L. 105-277 ) provided a total of $5.5 billion for DOJ's anti-crimeinitiatives from the VCRTF. Legislation has been offered in the 106th Congress to extend the VCRTFbeyond FY2000. Title II typically includes the appropriations for the Department of Commerce and related agencies. The Department wasestablished on March 4, 1913 (37 Stat.7365; 15 U.S.C. 1501). The origins of the Department of Commerce dateback to1903 with the establishment of the Department of Commerce and Labor (32 Stat. 825). In 1913, a separate theDepartmentof Commerce was designated (37 Stat. 7365; 15 U.S.C. 1501). Though the responsibilities of the Department arenumerous and quite varied, it has five basic missions: promoting the development of American business andincreasingforeign trade; improving the nation's technological competitiveness; fostering environmental stewardship andassessment;encouraging economic development; and compiling, analyzing, and disseminating statistical information on the U.S.economy. These missions are carried out by the following agencies of the Department: Economic Development Administration (EDA) provides grants for economic development projects ineconomically distressed communities and regions. Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) seeks to promote private and public sectorinvestment in minority businesses. Bureau of the Census collects, compiles, and publishes a broad range of economic, demographic, andsocial data. Economic and Statistical Analysis Programs provide (1) timely information on the state of theeconomy through preparation, development, and interpretation of economic data; and (2) analytical support toDepartmentofficials in meeting their policy responsibilities. International Trade Administration (ITA) seeks to develop the export potential of U.S. firms and toimprove the trade performance of U.S. industry. Export Administration enforces U.S. export control laws consistent with national security, foreignpolicy, and short-supply objectives. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides scientific, technical, andmanagement expertise to (1) promote safe and efficient marine and air navigation; (2) assess the health of coastalandmarine resources; (3) monitor and predict the coastal, ocean, and global environments (including weatherforecasting); and(4) protect and manage the nation's coastal resources. Patent and Trademark Office examines and approves applications for patents for claimed inventionsand registration of trademarks. Technology Administration advocates integrated policies that seek to maximize the impact oftechnology on economic growth, conducts technology development and deployment programs, and disseminatestechnological information. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) assists industry in developing technology toimprove product quality, modernize manufacturing processes, ensure product reliability, and facilitate rapidcommercialization of products based on new scientific discoveries. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) advises the President ondomestic and international communications policy, manages the federal government's use of the radio frequencyspectrum,and performs research in telecommunications sciences. The total appropriation for the Department of Commerce in FY2000 was $8.6 billion. A very large share of the totalreflected a special appropriation, designated an emergency appropriation ($4.5 million), to fund final preparationsfor andimplementation of the year 2000 decennial census. (For more details on the funding of individual programs, seeTable1A in the Appendix.) Typically, Title III of a Commerce, Justice, State-Judiciary appropriations bill covers funding for the Judiciary. By statute(31 U.S.C. 1105 (b)) the judicial branch's budget is accorded protection from presidential alteration. Thus, whenthePresident transmits a proposed federal budget to Congress, the President must forward the judicial branch's proposedbudget to Congress unchanged. That process has been in operation since 1939. The total appropriation for theJudiciary inFY2000 was $3.96 billion. The Judiciary budget consists of more than 10 separate accounts. Two of these accounts fund the Supreme Court of theUnited States -- one covering the Court's salary and operational expenses and the other covering expenditures forthe careof its building and grounds. Traditionally, in a practice dating back to the 1920s, one or more of the Court's Justicesappearbefore either a House or Senate appropriations subcommittee to address the budget requirements of the SupremeCourt forthe upcoming fiscal year, focusing primarily on the Court's salary and operational expenses. Subsequent to theirtestimony,the Architect of the Capitol appears to request a funding amount for the Court's building and grounds account. (8) Althoughit is at the apex of the federal judicial system, the Supreme Court represents only a very small share of the Judiciary'soverall funding. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2000 (PL. 106-113), for instance, provided a totalof $43.5million for the Supreme Court's two accounts, which was 1.1% of the Judiciary's overall appropriation of $ 3.96billion. The rest of the Judiciary's budget provides funding for the "lower" federal courts and for related judicial services. Amongthe lower court accounts, one dwarfs all others -- the Salaries and Expenses account for the U.S. Courts of AppealsandDistrict Courts. The account, however, covers not only the salaries of circuit and district judges (including judgesof theterritorial courts of the United States), but also those of retired justices and judges, judges of the U.S. Court ofFederalClaims, bankruptcy judges, magistrate judges, and all other officers and employees of the federal Judiciary notspecificallyprovided for by other accounts. Other accounts for the lower courts include Defender Services (for compensation and reimbursement of expenses ofattorneys appointed to represent criminal defendants), Fees of Jurors, the U.S. Court of International Trade, theAdministrative Office of the U.S. Courts, the Federal Judicial Center (charged with furthering the development ofimproved judicial administration), and the U.S. Sentencing Commission (an independent commission in the judicialbranch, which establishes sentencing policies and practices for the courts). The annual Judiciary budget request for the courts is presented to the House and Senate appropriations subcommittees afterbeing reviewed and cleared by the Judicial Conference, the federal court system's governing body. Thesepresentations,typically made by the chairman of the Conference's budget committee, are separate from subcommittee appearancesaJustice makes on behalf of the Supreme Court's budget request. The Judiciary budget does not appropriate funds for three "special courts" in the U.S. court system: the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the Armed Forces (funded in the Department of Defense appropriations bill), the U.S. Tax Court(funded in theTreasury, Postal Service appropriations bill), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (funded in theDepartment of Veteran Affairs and Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill). Construction of federalcourthouses is not funded within the Judiciary's budget. The usual legislative vehicle for funding federal courthouseconstruction is the Treasury, Postal Service appropriations bill. (For more details on individual appropriations forJudiciaryfunctions, see Table 1A in the Appendix.) The State Department, established July 27, 1789 (1 Stat.28; 22 U.S.C. 2651), has a mission to advance and protect theworldwide interests of the United States and its citizens. Currently, the State Department represents the activitiesof 38 U.S.agencies operating at over 250 posts in 163 countries. As covered in Title IV, the State Department fundingcategoriesinclude Administration of Foreign Affairs, International Operations, International Commissions, and RelatedAppropriations. The total FY2000 State Department appropriation was $5.9 billion. Typically, more than half ofState'sbudget (about 70% in FY1999) is for Administration of Foreign Affairs, which consists of salaries and expenses,diplomatic security, diplomatic and consular programs, and security/maintenance of overseas buildings. The Foreign Relations Authorization within P.L. 105-277 provides for the consolidation of the foreign policy agencies. Asof the end of FY1999, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) and the United States InformationAgency(USIA) were abolished and their budgets and functions were merged into the Department of State. International broadcasting, which had been a primary function of the USIA prior to 1999, will remain as an independentagency referred to as the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The BBG includes the Voice of America(VOA), RadioFree Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Cuba Broadcasting, Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Iraq and Radio FreeIran. The BBG's FY2000 appropriation is $421.8 million with just under 2,700 positions. Title V covers several related agencies. FY2000 appropriations for these agencies were as follows: (9) Maritime Administration administers programs to aid in the development, promotion, and operationof the nation's merchant marine: $178.1 million. Small Business Administration provides financial assistance to small business and to victims ofphysical disasters: $ 847.0 million. Legal Services Corporation provides financial assistance to local, state, and national non-profitorganizations that provide free legal assistance to persons living in poverty: $305 million. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces laws relating to race, sex, religion,national origin, age, or handicapped status: $282 million. Commission on Civil Rights collects and studies information on discrimination or denials of equalprotection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, and national origin: $8.9million. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates interstate and foreign communications byradio, television, wire, satellite, and cable: $24.2 million. (10) Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) regulates the domestic offshore and international waterbornecommerce of the United States: $14.1 million. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) administers laws to prevent the free enterprise system from beingfettered by monopolies or restraints on trade and to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive trade practices:Noappropriation. (11) Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) administers laws providing protection for investors andensuring that securities markets are fair and honest: No appropriation. (12) State Justice Institute is a private, non-profit corporation that makes grants and undertakes otheractivities designed to improve the administration of justice in the United States: $6.85 million. Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is located in the Executive Office of thePresident and is responsible for developing and coordinating U.S. international trade and direct investment policies. TheUSTR is also the chief trade negotiator for the United States: $25.6 million. U.S. International Trade Commission is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that advises thePresident and the Congress on the impact of U.S. foreign economic policies on U.S. industries and is charged withimplementing various U.S. trade remedy laws. Its six commissioners are appointed by the President for 9-yearterms: $44.5million. The CJS appropriations also cover funding for several relatively small governmental functions, including several specialgovernment commissions. (For additional information on the funding of other related agencies covered by thismeasure,see: Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2001-Appendix (106th Cong.,2nd sess.) The second session of the 106th Congress addressed a number of issues during the CJS appropriations processforFY2001. Major issues or concerns included: building more prisons; extending the 1994 Crime Act fundingauthorizationbeyond September 30, 2000; increasing funding for drug-related efforts among the Department of Justice (DOJ)agencies;increasing funding for community law enforcement; combating cybercrime; funding of DOJ's legal action againstthetobacco industry; changing the focus and levels of appropriations for DOJ's Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquencyPrevention; providing funding for programs that would reduce gun and youth violence; reducing pending caseloadsinimmigration-related claims, particularly green card and naturalization applications; meeting the statutory mandatethat theBorder Patrol be increased by 1,000 agents in FY2001, and accounting for the shortfall in hiring in FY1999;determiningthe level of detention capacity necessary to comply with the statutory mandate that certain criminal aliens bedetained untildeported; and restructuring INS internally as proposed by the Administration or dismantling or restructuring theagency bylegislation; the downsizing of Commerce Department programs, processing and releasing the 2000 decennial censusresults, the use of federal funds to support industrial technology, implementing the modernization of the NationalWeatherService, and the monitoring of foreign compliance with trade agreements and U.S. trade laws; improving embassysecuritythrough a doubling of funding as well as a request for an advance appropriation to cover the period FY2002 toFY2005;whether to lift a statutory ban on judges receiving honoraria; whether to increase funding to compensatecourt-appointeddefense attorneys in federal criminal cases; how to contain the growing costs of the Judiciary's Defender Servicesaccount;and the merits of providing a cost-of-living pay increase for federal judges. Traditionally, state and local governments have primary responsibility for crime control. Especially within the last decade,a greater federal role has developed. Congress has enacted five major omnibus crime control bills since 1984,establishingnew penalties for crimes and providing increased federal assistance for law enforcement efforts by state and localgovernments. Federal justice-related expenditure is one of the few areas of discretionary spending that has increaseditsshare of total federal spending over the last two decades. FY2001 Budget Request. For FY2001, Congress approved (House Conference Report 106-1005) $21.1 billion in fundingfor DOJ. President Clinton's budget request for DOJ was $21.7 billion for FY2001 compared with the SenateAppropriations Committee's recommendation of $18.7 billion, and the House's $20.2 billion. DOJ received fundingof$18.65 billion in FY2000. DOJ's request for FY2001 was intended to address major concerns such as fighting crimeandgun and youth violence, building prisons, checking drug abuse, improving the department's information resourcesandimproving the border management of INS. On July 18, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $18.7 billion in funding for FY2001 for the Department ofJustice. The Senate Committee rejected by a tie vote, 14-14, Senator Ernest Hollings's amendment to spend $20.5millionto finance a federal lawsuit against tobacco companies to offset the federal government's expenses of treatingveterans andMedicare and Medicaid patients for smoking-related illnesses. The CJS bill, H.R. 4690 , passed by the House on June 26, provided $20.2 billion in funding for DOJ. On June23, Representative Henry A. Waxman offered an amendment to H.R. 4690 , the CJS Appropriations bill,whichwould allow the Veterans Administration to reimburse DOJ for its lawsuit against tobacco companies. The Housepassedthe amendment by a vote of 215 ayes to 183 noes. Congress provided $201.4 million for the Telecommunications Carrier Compliance Fund for FY2001. Under theTelecommunications Carrier Compliance Fund of the General Administration account, the Senate AppropriationsCommittee did not recommend additional funds for FY2001 for the Communications Assistance for LawEnforcement Act(CALEA). In January 2000, the Senate Committee denied a reprogramming request of DOJ for an additional $100millionin FY2000 for this account based on the source of funds the Department chose to use as an offset for these funds. Congressrecently passed a FY2000 supplemental appropriation, which upon enactment, will provide $183 million forCALEA. Thisamount exceeded DOJ's request for the program in FY2000 and FY2001. With enactment of the supplementalappropriation for FY 2000, a total of $301 million was appropriated for CALEA. For FY2001, the House approvedtheAppropriations Committee's recommendation of $278 million for the Telecommunications Carrier Compliance Fundtoreimburse equipment manufacturers and telecommunications carriers and providers of telecommunications supportservicefor implementing the Communications Assistance for Law enforcement Act of 1994. Of this amount, $141.3million wasfor national security purposes. The Senate Committee recommended $205 million for the NarrowbandCommunicationsaccount for FY2001 compared to $95.4 million that the House provided for this account. The Clinton administration requested a total of $240 million for the Telecommunications Carrier Compliance Fund, ofwhich $225 million is new funding to reimburse the telecommunications industry for costs associated withmodifying theirnetworks (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act). Total funding was divided between DOJ andtheDepartment of Defense (DOD) as follows: $120 million for DOJ and $120 million for DOD. DOJ wouldimplement all ofthe funds. For its program to convert to narrowband radio communications, DOJ requested $205 million. In theFY2000appropriations cycle, this program was controversial as the Administration requested $86 million for narrowbandconversion, but received $10.6 million in direct funding and was directed to transfer $92.5 million for the programfromother departmental components. To address terrorism, the Senate Committee recommended $5 million for FY2001 for the counterterrorism fund comparedto the $10 million that the House provided and the $10 million that the President requested. The Senate Committeereported that there will be carryover balances available in FY 2001 of more than $36 million for this account. TheSenateCommittee expressed concern that DOJ was using funds in this account for any effort associated with counteringterrorisminstead of for extraordinary costs for providing support to counter, investigate or prosecute domestic or internationalterrorism. The President designated a National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, andCounterterrorism toprovide leadership in preparing the nation for acts of terrorism by coordinating interagency terrorism policy issuesandreviewing ongoing terrorism-related activities. But, according to the Senate Committee, confusion at all levels ofgovernment remains over jurisdiction. To better coordinate and centralize the policy-making structure in addressingdomestic terrorism issues within the United States, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended the creationof aDeputy Attorney General for Combating Domestic Terrorism.(DAG-CT) position within DOJ. The SenateCommitteerecommended an additional $23 million for this office. Funding to combat terrorism is also recommended underthe Officeof Justice Programs, Justice Assistance account. Congress approved $4.67 billion for FY2001 for the Office of Justice Programs (OJP). The Senate AppropriationsCommittee for FY2001 for OJP recommended $3.07 billion, while the House provided $4.08 billion. The Presidentrequested$3.74 billion for OJP compared with FY2000 funding of $4.08 billion. To address gun and youth violence,theAdministration requested $215.9 million, of which new funding of $150 million was to hire 1,000 local prosecutorsinjurisdictions designated by DOJ as High Gun Violence areas. For FY2001, Congress provided $418 million for the Justice Assistance account, including funding of $220.9 million forcounterterrorism programs. For the Justice Assistance account for FY2001, the Senate Committee recommended$426.4million, of which $25.5 million was for the Missing Children Program to combat crimes against children, including$6million for state and local law enforcement for continuation of specialized cyberunits and for units that investigateandprevent child sexual exploitation on the internet; $13.5 million for the National Center for Missing and ExploitedChildren,with $2 million of that amount for the operation of the CyberTipline (which collects leads from Internet ServiceProviderson incidences of child pornography and exploitation) and for Cyberspace training; and $3 million for the JimmyRyce LawEnforcement Training Center to train state and local law enforcement officials in investigating missing and exploitedchildren cases. Also, to address incidents of domestic terrorism, the Committee recommended $257.5 million fortheOffice for State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support, of which $35 million was for the National DomesticPreparedness Consortium, and $120 million was for equipment block grants to states and the District of Columbiafor thepurchase of specialized equipment needed to respond to terrorist incidents involving chemical, biological,radiological, andexplosive weapons of mass destruction. Congress provided funding of $1.03 billion for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) including $100 million for community prosecutors, $130 million for crime identification technology, $17.5 million for the NationalInstitute ofJustice to develop school safety technologies, $30 million for state and local DNA laboratories to reduce states'DNAconvicted offender sample backlog, among other purposes; $535 million for public safety and community policinggrants,$180 million for school resource officers; $35 million for tribal law enforcement including equipment and training;$48.5million to combat the manufacture and distribution of methamphetamine and to improve policing initiatives in drug"hotspots;" and $30 million for an offender re-entry program. The Senate Committee recommended for FY2001, $812 million for COPS which was $523 million less than the Presidentrequested; the House provided $595 million for COPS. Of these funds, $423 million was for the following policehiringinitiatives: $180 million for school resource officers; $183 million in direct appropriations for the universal hiringprogram(UHP); $20 million from unobligated carryover balances from FY2000 to be used for UHP; and $40 million forIndianCountry. The Safe Schools Initiative received $20 million. For non-hiring initiatives, the Senate Committeerecommended: $100 million for the COPS technology program for development of technologies and automatedsystems toassist state and local law enforcement agencies in investigating, responding to, and preventing crime; $130 millionfor theCrime Identification Technology Program of which $20 million was for Safe Schools technology to fund NationalInstituteof Justice's development of new more effective safety technologies such as less obtrusive weapons detection andsurveillance equipment and information that allows communities quick access to information to identify potentiallyviolentyouth; $33 million for states to upgrade criminal history records, and $30 million for state and local units ofgovernmentcrime laboratories to develop or improve the capability to analyze DNA in a forensic laboratory and other forensicsciencecapabilities; $41.7 million for the COPS Methamphetamine/Drug 'Hot Spots' program to fight the manufacture,distribution, and use of methamphetamine, and for proper removal and disposal of hazardous materials atclandestine methlabs; and $15 million for the COPS Safe Schools Initiative/School Prevention Initiatives to provide grants topolicingagencies and schools to address violence in public schools and to allow the assignment of officers to work incollaborationwith schools and community-based organizations concerning crime, gangs, and drug activities. The House provided $595 million for the COPS program, including $130 million for crime identification technology, $41.7for manufacturing and trafficking in methamphetamine, and $389.5 million for public safety and communitypolicinggrants. The Administration sought to continue improving community law enforcement. It requested FY2001 funding of $1.3billion for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) compared to FY2000 funding of $595 million. ForPublicSafety and Community Policing grants, funding requested was $225 million, which included $67.9 million to fundadditional officers and to stay on course to hire 150,000 officers by the end of 2005. Earmarks provided $45 millionforIndian country law enforcement, $25 million for the bullet-proof vest program, $20 million for school safetyproblem-solving partnerships, and $20 million for National Police scholarships, among other programs. Under the COPS account for FY2001, the Administration requested $350 million for the Crime Identification AssistanceProgram, an increase of $220 million over FY2000 funding to support crime-fighting technologies efforts. Thisincluded$70 million for upgrading criminal history, criminal justice and identification record systems, promotingcompatibilityamong systems at the federal, state, and local levels, and obtaining information for statistical and research programs. Another $50 million was used to improve forensic laboratories, of which $35 million was for grants to state, tribaland locallaboratories for improving their DNA and general forensic capabilities and $15 million in grants to state and locallaboratories to reduce their convicted offender DNA sample backlog. For FY2001, Congress approved $2.85 billion for state and local law enforcement assistance including $523 million forlocal law enforcement grants, $50 million for drug courts; $250 million for juvenile accountability incentive blockgrants;$63 million for state prison drug treatment; $686.5 million for violent offender incarceration and truth in sentencingincentive grants, of which $165 million is to be used for payments to states for incarceration of criminal aliens; $569million for Byrne grants ($69 million is for discretionary grants). Congress provided $288 million for violenceagainstwomen grants, of which $31.6 million is to be used for strengthening civil legal assistance programs for victims ofdomestic violence The Senate Committee for FY2001 recommended $400 million for local law enforcement grants, $123 million less than theHouse; the Administration did not request funding for this program. The Senate Committee recommended $40million fordrug courts and $63 million for state prison drug treatment, the same funding that the House provided, while thePresidentrequested $10 million more in funding for drug courts and $2 million more for state prison drug treatment. ForViolenceAgainst Women grants, the Senate Committee recommended $284.9 million compared to $283.8 provided by theHouseand $12 million less than the Administration requested. These funds were to be used to develop and implementeffectivearrest and prosecution policies for the prevention, identification, and response to violent crimes against women, tostrengthen programs that address stalking, and to provide victim services such as specialized domestic violence courtadvocates who obtain protection orders, among other purposes. In FY2000, drug courts received funding of $40million,state prison drug treatment, received $63 million, and VAWA received $284 million. For FY2001, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $452 million for the Byrne grant programs ($400 millionfor formula grants and $52 million for discretionary grants) compared to the House which provided $552 million,the sameamount appropriated in FY2000 ($500 million for formula grants and $52 million for discretionary grants). ThePresidentrequested $459.5 million for Byrne grants ($400 million for formula grants and $59.5 million for discretionarygrants). Congress approved $34 million for the Weed and Seed program for FY2001. The Senate Committee recommended $40million for the Weed and Seed program for FY2001 compared to $33.5 million that the House provided; thePresidentrequested $42 million for the program. Congress provided $1.36 billion for the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) in FY2001 for purchasing 1,358 passengermotor vehicles, of which 1,079 would be for replacement only, for police-type use without regard to the generalpurchaseprice limitation for the current fiscal year, for contracting for automated data processing and telecommunicationsequipment, for laboratory equipment, and for conducting drug education and training programs. The SenateAppropriationsCommittee recommended $1.35 billion for DEA for FY2001, to provide for drug education and training programsandtechnical equipment. For the Methamphetamine Initiative, the Senate Committee recommended $27.5 million fortheagency to target and investigate methamphetamine trafficking, production, and use and to clean-up hazardous wasteassociated with the manufacture of the drug. This compared with total FY2000 funding for DEA of $1.28 billion. Fundswere for purchasing 1,358 passenger motor vehicles of which 1,079 would be for replacement only, for police-typeusewithout regard to the general purchase price limitation for the current fiscal year. Also, the Senate Committeerecommended additional emergency spending for the Southwest Border Initiative for DOJ under Salaries andExpenses of$22.5 million for one plane, a helicopter, a forensic laboratory, equipment, and upgrades to and maintenance of theEl PasoIntelligence Center's Information System. On the other hand, the House provided $1.37 billion for DEA. PresidentClinton requested $1.37 billion for the agency. To support the enforcement of federal law and investigations, DEArequested $864 million. DEA requested $56 million for FY2001 for FIREBIRD, its primary office automationinfrastructure. FIREBIRD supports DEA's global operations and these funds were to allow its continued highqualityoperation. The President requested funding of $215 million, for drug prevention programs, including $171.39 million in new fundingfor programs designed to break the cycle of drug use and its consequences by providing support services for drugabusersto enable them to reenter the community. The Administration requested $75 million for FY2001 for OJP'S ZeroToleranceDrug Supervision program to provide discretionary grants to states, local governments, Indian tribes, and courtsto planand enforce comprehensive drug testing and treatment programs and graduated sanctions for persons within thecriminaljustice system. Of this amount, $60 million was for an Offender Reentry program that would combine surveillance,sanctions, and support services to provide more protection for communities that have high returns of inmates. Congress approved $4.3 billion for the Federal Prison System for FY2001, of which $835.6 million is for buildings andfacilities. For FY2001, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $4.30 billion for the Federal PrisonSystem, ofwhich $724 million would be for buildings and facilities compared to the House which provided $4.27 billion fortheFederal Prison System, including $836 million for buildings and facilities. The President's FY2001 budget requestfor theFederal Prison System was $5.71 billion compared to $3.67 billion enacted in FY2000. These funds were for theBureau ofPrisons to reduce overcrowding and to accommodate future prison needs, including the long-term housing needsofImmigration and Naturalization Service detainees. This request included $2 billion for FY2001 through FY2003forconstruction of prisons ($791 million in advance appropriations were requested for FY2002 and $535 million inFY2003for construction of 6 more prisons); $80.18 million to activate prison facilities and address the 54% overcrowdingin highsecurity prisons and provide needed detention bed space; and, $84.46 million to provide contract beds toaccommodate theneeds of short and long term non-U.S. citizen inmates, as well as the increase in other sentenced offender contractpopulation. Congress provided $3.3 billion for the Federal Bureau ofInvestigations (FBI) for FY2001, of which $438 million is forcounterterrorism investigations, counterintelligence and other national security purposes, and $50 million is forautomateddata processing and telecommunications equipment. FY2000 funding for the Federal Bureau of Investigations was$3.04billion. For FY2001, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $3.12 billion for the FBI, of which $222millionwas for Criminal Justice Services, including $72 million for the National Instant Criminal Background CheckSystem(NICS) and $43 million to construct or acquire buildings. The Senate Committee recommended additionalemergencyspending funding of $62.9 million for the United States Marshals Service under the Southwest Border Initiative,of which$5.3 million was for salaries and expenses, $5.6 million for construction, and $52 million for the Justice Prisonerand AlienTransportation System Fund. The House Committee, on the other hand, would have provided $3.23 billion for theFBI, ofwhich $68 million in direct appropriations was for NICS. President Clinton's FY2001 budget request for the FederalBureau of Investigations (FBI) was $3.28 billion. With the number and complexity of computer crime increasing,DOJrequested $37 million to create a permanent network of experts to prevent and prosecute computer crime. ByFY2001, theFBI expects cases involving computer forensic examination to more than double those in FY1999. DOJ requested$19million for its Technology Crimes Initiative of which $11.4 million was for its Computer Analysis and ResponseTeam tosupport 100 response team members who would be sent to help investigate computer related crimes and $7 millionwas tofurther law enforcement counter-encryption capabilities. In OJP, the House Committee recommended that theNationalWhite Collar Crime Center receive $8.75 million to expand training initiatives for state and local law enforcementandregulatory agencies to meet the rising incidences of computer crime by acting as a clearinghouse, providinginformation onfederal computer crime training and offering a "directory" of resources available in forensic computer science. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is the principal federal agency charged with administering theImmigration and Nationality Act (INA). From FY1993 to FY2000, Congress has increased the INS budget from$1.5 to$4.3 billion. During these years, INS staffing has increased from 18,000 to nearly 33,000 funded permanentpositions. ForFY2001, according to the CBO's revised scoring, the Administration has requested $4.85 billion in total fundingfor INS($3.31 billion in direct funding and $1.54 billion in fee receipts). (13) The FY2001 request also included four fee proposals:1) a "voluntary premium service fee" for businesses, 2) a renewed penalty fee under a permanent section 245(i)adjustmentof status program (14) , 3) an increase in the user feefor airport inspections, and 4) an end to the cruise ship user feeexemption. The FY2001 CJS appropriations act ( P.L. 106-553 ; H.R. 5548 ) provides INS with $4.8 billion ($3.26 billion indirect funding and $1.55 billion in offsetting receipts). This amount is more than triple the INS budget in FY1993. It isalso $530 million over last year's appropriation, and $40 million less than the Administration's request. It alsoincludesprogram increases of $101 million for border control and management and $121 million for interior enforcementand theremoval of deportable aliens. While it would authorize a new expedited service fee for employers petitioning forskilledH-1B visa nonimmigrant workers, it does not establish or raise user fees for inspections. Furthermore, the FY2001 CJS appropriations act includes a set of substantive immigration provisions known as the "LegalImmigration Family Equity Act" (LIFE act) (15) ,which were amended by language included in the FY2001 Labor-HHSappropriations act ( P.L. 106-554 ; H.R. 4577 ). These provisions provide for 1) the temporary reinstatementofsection 245(i) through April 30, 2001, 2) the opportunity for members of certain class action suits to reapply forlegalization under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, 3) the creation of a new nonimmigrant "V" visaprogramto allow spouses and minors of legal immigrants to enter the country temporarily with a work authorization untiltheirimmigrant visa becomes available, and 4) technical amendments to the Nicaraguan Adjustment and CentralAmericanRelief Act (NACARA) and the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA) that waive certain grounds ofadmissibility. These provisions, however, are not nearly as expansive as those originally sought by the WhiteHouse. (16) Nonetheless, these provisions, along with other enacted legislation that expands the H-1B program, are likely toincreaseINS adjudications workloads significantly. The House-passed bill, by contrast, included $4.67 billion for INS ($3.23 billion in direct funding and $1.44 billion inoffsetting receipts). This amount was $392 million over last year's appropriation, and $178 million less than theAdministration's request. While the House-passed bill included a provision to authorize an H-1B premium servicefee, itdid not include provisions to reinstate section 245(i), nor did it include provisions to establish/raise user fees forinspections. The Senate-reported CJS appropriations act, on the other hand, included $4.6 billion in FY2001funding forthe INS ($3.03 billion in direct funding and $1.53 billion in offsetting receipts). This amount was $275 million overlastyear's appropriation, and $295 less than the Administration's request. The Senate recommendation, however, alsoincluded$414 million in emergency funding for the Southwest border initiative, of which $322 million was earmarked forINS. TheSenate-reported bill would have reinstated section 245(i), but it was silent on the proposed H-1B premium servicefee andthe proposals to establish/raise user fees for inspections. The bill also included provisions to repeal sections 110and 641 ofthe Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Division C; P.L. 104-208 ). Regarding section 110, this provision as originally enacted would have required the development of a system that wouldrecord the entry and exit of every alien arriving and departing from the United States. Many congressionaldelegationsfrom northern border states strongly opposed the implementation of section 110 at the northern land border, sinceit wouldhave represented a significant departure from the status quo. Canadians who enter the United States through landborderports were and are not required to present a passport, and are usually not required to obtain a visa. Similarly, U.S.citizenswho enter Canada through land border ports are not required to present a passport or visa in most cases. Somefeared that,if Section 110 were implemented at northern land border ports of entry, additional documents would be required. The Immigration and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 2000 ( P.L. 106-215 ),enacted on June15, 2000, amended and rewrote section 110 to require the development of a system that would use available datato recordalien arrivals and departures, without establishing additional documentary requirements. The law was viewed bymany as acompromise; nevertheless, the Senate-reported bill would repeal section 110, as amended. The conference report,however,does not include the provision to repeal section 110. (For further information, see CRS Report RS 20627, Immigration:Integrated Entry and Exit Data System , by [author name scrubbed].) In addition, the Senate-reported measure would have repealed section 641 of P.L. 104-208 . This provision required INS toimplement a foreign student data collection reporting program by January 1, 1998. Academic administrators havelobbiedfor this provision's repeal, principally because it requires them to collect fees from foreign students for INS. Theconference report does not include a provision to repeal section 641, but this provision was significantly amendedby theHouse- and Senate-passed H.R. 3767 , a bill that makes the visa waiver pilot program permanent. This billwasrecently presented to the President for signature. Major INS budget-related issues for FY2000 and FY2001 have included: 1) reducing pending caseloads in immigration-related claims, particularly green card and naturalization applications; 2) meeting the statutory mandatethatthe Border Patrol be increased by 1,000 agents in FY2001, and accounting for the shortfall in hiring in FY1999; 3)determining the level of detention capacity necessary to comply with the statutory mandate that certain criminalaliens bedetained until deported; and 4) restructuring INS internally as proposed by the Administration or dismantling orrestructuring the agency by legislation. Large pending caseloads continue to plague INS despite increased funding. From FY1992 to FY2000, funding for theadjudications and nationality program increased from $137 to $496 million. In FY1999, INS processed more than1.2million naturalization applications; however, as of the end of the first quarter of FY2000, the pending caseload fornaturalization applications (Form N-400) was 1.3 million, and the pending caseload for green card applications(FormI-485) was more than 1 million. In addition, there was a pending caseload of more than 1.7 million for all otherapplications. For FY2001, the Administration requested $152 million to improve service, reduce pending caseloads, and prevent fraud. This funding would have been derived from several sources: 1) $25 million from the voluntary H-1B visa premiumservicefee (to be deposited into the examinations fee account); 2) another $55 million from the H-1B premium service fee;3)$37.5 million from section 245(i) fees; and 4) $34.8 million in a direct appropriation. While the Senate-reportedbill wouldhave reinstated section 245(i), the House Appropriations Committee strongly rejected the Administration's proposaltoreinstate provision. Conversely, the House accepted the H-1B premium service fee proposal, but the Senate-reportedbilldid not include such a provision. The House Committee also noted that over the past 3 years INS has been providedwith$463 million to reduce pending caseloads and improve the integrity of the naturalization process. Indeed, exceptfor thedetention and deportation program, the adjudications and nationality program's budget increased at a greater rate(262%)than any other INS program budget from FY1993 to FY2000. For FY2001, House report language earmarks anincrease of$87 million, including $44 million in a direct appropriation, to continue the backlog reduction. Conference reportlanguagestates that examination fee receipts will provide nearly $95 million in program increases for adjudications. Border control and security continue to be an ongoing issue for Congress. From FY1992 to FY2000, funding for theBorder Patrol has increased from $362 million to more than $1 billion. For FY1999, Congress provided INS with$97million to hire 1,000 additional agents. The agency, however, was unable to hire a full contingent of new agents,citing alack of qualified candidates due to a strong labor market and high washout rates at the Border Patrol Academy. Atthe endof FY1999, there were 8,274 Border Patrol agents who were on duty and deployed, as compared to 7,904 at the endof FY1998. For FY2000, Congress provided $50 million to hire an additional 1,000 agents. The Administration,meanwhile,only requested $52 million to hire 430 agents for FY2001, rather than the 1,000 agents mandated in the IllegalImmigrationReform and Immigrant Responsibility Act ( P.L. 104-208 ). Given hiring shortfalls in FY1999 and the current fiscal year, House report language included an earmark, matching theAdministration's FY2001 request, rather than funding 1,000 new agent positions. (17) As requested by the Administration,$20 million is earmarked for deployment of the integrated surveillance intelligence system, on both the southernandnorthern land borders. House report language also included an earmark of $22 million for border patrol information. TheSenate report language included an earmark of $93 million to hire an additional 1,000 Border Patrol agents inFY2001, tocontinue recruitment bonuses, and to provide for the journey level upgrade. It also included an earmark of $67million for26 new border patrol helicopters. The conference report language earmarks include the same amounts as in theHouse-passed bill. Ths conference agreement does not assume a journey level upgrade. Also, earmarked is $18million todeploy the integrated surveillance intelligence system and $16 million for additional equipment. In recent years, INS has come under intense criticism for failing to deport criminal aliens in an expeditious manner. FromFY1993 to FY2000, funding for the detention and deportation program increased from $193 to $879 million. INSofficialscontinue to report that the agency does not possess the detention capacity to fully comply with statutory mandatesset out inthe Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act ( P.L. 104-132 ) and the Illegal Immigration Reform andImmigrantResponsibility Act ( P.L. 104-208 ). To improve and expand detention facilities and increase efforts to identify andremovecriminal aliens, the Administration has requested $120 million in increased funding for FY2001, which wouldincrease thedetention and deportation budget to more than $1 billion. Nearly matching the Administration's request, Housereportlanguage included earmarks of $87 million to increase INS detention space to 19,702 beds (daily average), including120juvenile beds; $16 million for the Justice Prisoner Alien Transportation System; $8 million to enter criminal alienrecordsinto the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC); and $25 million for detention construction projects. Also,there isan earmark for an additional $5 million and 46 positions to expand the criminal alien apprehension program (CAAP)and$11 million and 100 positions to form 23 additional quick response teams that work with state and local lawenforcement toidentify and remove deportable aliens. Neither of these increases was requested by the Administration. Conferencereportlanguage parallels House earmarks, except that amounts for NCIC and CAAP, $4 and $3 million respectively, arelower. Also, an additional $1.5 million is earmarked for the Law Enforcement Support Center in Vermont. Regarding INS restructuring, FY2001 conference report language stresses, as did language in the FY2000 conferencereport, that "a lack of resources is no longer an acceptable response to INS's inability to adequately address itsmissionresponsibilities." On March 22, 2000, the House Judiciary Committee's Immigration and Claims Subcommitteeapproveda bill to split INS, establishing a bureau of immigration services and a bureau of immigration enforcement withintheDepartment of Justice ( H.R. 3918 ). Last year, the Senate Judiciary's Immigration Subcommittee held ahearing on another INS restructuring proposal ( S. 1563 ) on September 23, 1999, but in the last session theSenate did not addressed this issue. The Administration, meanwhile, moved forward with formulating plans torestructureINS internally. (See CRS Report RS20279, Immigration and Naturalization Service Reorganization andRelatedLegislative Proposals , and CRS Report RL30257, Proposals to Restructure the Immigration andNaturalization Service ,both by [author name scrubbed].) Congress provided additional funding in the amount of $30.4 million for FY2001 for the Department of Justice in theDepartment of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill H.R. 4577 ( P.L.106-554 , December 21, 2000) (House Conference Report 106-1033, December 15, 2000). This funding included$500,000for salaries and expenses for the Federal Prison System. Under the Office of Justice Programs account, Congressprovidedfunding of $300,000 for Justice Assistance, $3.1 million for Community Oriented Policing Services, and $1 millionforJuvenile Justice programs. The General Provisions account receivedtotal funding of $25 million, which included $12million for the United States Attorneys, $9 million for the Strom Thurmond Boys and Girls Club National TrainingCenter,$500 thousand for Violations of Federal Trucking Laws, and $4 million for COPS technology. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires the Department of Justice, along with other federalagencies, to prepare a 5-year strategic plan which contains a mission statement, a statement of long-range goals ineach ofthe Department's core functions and a description of information to be used to assess program performance. TheDOJsubmitted its Strategic Plan for 1997-2002 to Congress in September 1997. During the FY1999 budget process, theSenateAppropriations Committee commended the Assistant Attorney General for Administration for preparing DOJ'sFY1999performance plan, finding it timely, with objective, measurable performance goals. The committee found thestrength ofthe performance plan in its clear strategies for meeting performance goals. DOJ was urged to follow therecommendationsof the General Accounting Office (GAO) in preparing a plan for fiscal year 2000, because the committee'srecommendations for fiscal year 2000 would be based on the GAO model. The DOJ FY2000 Summary Performance Plan described what the Department of Justice plans to accomplish in FY2000,consistent with the long-term strategic goals, and complements the Department's budget request. It provided asummarystatement of themes and priorities of DOJ for seven core functional areas (investigation and prosecution of criminaloffenses, assistance to tribal, state, and local governments, legal representation, enforcement of federal laws, anddefense ofU.S. interests; immigration; detention and incarceration; protection of the federal judiciary and improvement of thejusticesystem; and management). It summarized and synthesized detailed performance plans of specific Justice componentorganizations such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the United StatesAttorneys, the United States Marshals Service, and others. In his FY2001 budget request to Congress, the President requested total funding for the Department of Commerce andrelated agencies (18) of $5.5 billion, about a $3.2billion decrease (or 36.7%) from the $8.7 billion appropriated by Congressfor FY2000. The much higher appropriation for FY2000 reflected primarily a large special appropriation to covertheexpenses of preparing for and implementing the 2000 decennial census. The amount requested for the Department for FY2001 was $5.4 billion, which was about $3.2 billion (or 37%) below the$8.6 billion appropriated for FY2000. Again, virtually all of this additional money for FY2000 to cover the costof the year2000 decennial census. All agencies within the Department, including the Bureau of the Census (excluding the costsof thedecennial census), would receive increases in funding from FY2000 levels under the President's FY2001 request. On June 14, 2000, the House Appropriation Committee approved a recommended level of funding for the Departmentwhich totaled $4.3 million, which was about $1.1 million below what the President requested. The full Houseessentiallyapproved the same level of funding on June 26. On July 18, 2000, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a funding total for the Department of about $4.8billion, which was about $600 million below the President's request and about $500 million above the amountapproved bythe House-passed bill. Congress approved about $5.2 billion for the Department, about $220 million below the President's request. The FY2001total approved for the Department and related agencies amounted to $5.3 billion, about $220 million below therequest. The major funding issues that were considered during congressional deliberations on the President's request forCommerceappropriations included: the progress made in the streamlining and downsizing the Department's programs and operations; the needs of the Bureau of the Census in processing and releasing the 2000 decennial census results; and the extent to which federal funds should be used to support industrial technology development programs at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), particularly the Advanced TechnologyProgram. the completion of National Weather Service Modernization and the extent to which the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would implement a number of Presidential initiatives toprotectthe environment and foster research and development in the 21st century. the extent to which foreign countries comply with trade agreements and U.S. trade laws. The President's FY2001 budget request for the Department called for $74.1 million for Departmental Management, which was about $22.6 million above the $51.5 million appropriated for FY2000. This total also included therequest forthe Inspector General's office, amounting to $22.7 million-- about $2.7 million above the $20.0 million appropriatedforFY2000. The House Appropriations Committee recommended a level of $52.4 million which is $900 thousandbelow theFY2000 appropriation and about $21.7 million below the amount requested by the Administration for FY2001. TheHouseapproved an amendment by Rep. English which decreased the Committee's recommendation for GeneralAdministration by$3 million to $28.4 million. This amount would be transferred to the office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Hence, thetotal for Departmental Management (formerly referred to as General Administration) would be reduced form theCommittee's figure of $52.4 million to $49.4 million. This total included $21 million for the office of InspectorGeneral,which was less than that requested by the President and appropriated for FY 2000. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended total funding of $67.1 million, which is $7 million below thePresident's request, $15.6 million above the FY2000 appropriation, and $17.7 million above the amount approvedby theHouse. The total includes $19 million for the Office of the Inspector General, which is lower than the amountsrecommended bythe House and requested by the President It is also less than the amount appropriated for FY2000. Congress approved $56 million which is $18 million below the President's request, but $5.1 million above the FY2000appropriation. This total includes $20 million for the Office of the Inspector General, the same level appropriatedfor FY2000. To fund the Department's Economic and Statistical Analysis programs, the President requested $54.7 million, which wasabout $5.2 million above the total appropriated for FY2000--$49.5 million. The House Appropriations Committee recommended $49.5 million which is the same level appropriated for FY2000 and $5.2 million below the President'srequest. The full House approved the same amount. The House approved the Committee recommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $54 million, about $.7 less than the President's request and $4.5million more than that approved in the House-passed bill and that appropriated in FY2000. Congress approved $53.7 million, about $4.2 million above the FY2000 appropriation and $1 million below the President'srequest. For the Bureau of the Census , the President requested a total of $719.2 million for FY2001, an amount about $4.0 billionlower than the almost $4.8 billion appropriated for FY2000. Most of this larger total for FY2000 reflected a specialappropriation, designated an emergency appropriation, to fund final preparations for and implementation of the year2000decennial census. (19) The FY2001 budget requestfor the decennial census was $421 million. The House AppropriationsCommittee recommended $670.9 million for the Bureau, which was $48.3 million below the Administration'srequest.For the decennial census in FY2001, the Committee recommended $ 392.9 million. The House approved theCommitteerecommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommends $693.6 million for the Bureau, which was $25.6 million below thePresident's request and $22.7 million more than the House-approved amount. The Senate Committee recommended about$399.7 million for the decennial Census in FY2001, which was $3.2 million less than the amount approved by theHouse. For the Bureau in FY2001, the Conference Committee agreed to total spending of $733.6 million, instead of the $670.9million approved by the House as a direct appropriation, and the direct appropriation of $693.6 million approvedby theSenate. The conference agreement included $390.9 million for the decennial census in FY2001, of which $130.9millionwas a direct appropriation and $260 million was a carryover of prior year funds. The $390.9 million contrasted withtheHouse-passed direct appropriation of $392.9 million and the Senate-passed direct appropriation of $389.7 millionfor thedecennial census. In the area of international trade, the Congress approved $337.4 million for the International Trade Administration ($334.4 million in appropriations plus $3 million in fee collections). This amount was $17.7 million less than thePresident's request of $355.1 million ($352.1 million in appropriations plus $3 million in fee collections) but $25.9millionmore than the FY2000 level of $311.5 million ($308.5 million in direct appropriation plus $3 million from feecollections). The Senate Appropriations Committee had recommended $318.7 million (including $3 million from feecollections), andthe House had approved $321.4 million (including $3 million in fee collections). The Administration had askedforfunding of a trade compliance initiative, where additional staff would monitor trade compliance and market accessproblems facing U.S. exporters, with special attention to Asia, and would conduct verifications in antidumping andcountervailing duty cases. The FY2001 amount approved by Congress for the Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) was $64.9 million. Thisamount was $6.7 million less than what the President had requested ($71.6 million) but $10.9 million more thantheamount appropriated in FY2000 ($54.0 million). The Senate Committee had recommended $61.0 million, and theHousehad approved $53.8 million. The President had requested funds for additional inspections under the new ChemicalWeapons Convention (CWC) and for support of a joint counter-terrorism program with the U.S. Customs Service. Thefinal total approved for BXA in the conference report included $7.3 million for CWC enforcement, which was morethanwhat the President had requested for this purpose in FY2001 ($5.1 million) and much more than the amount fundedfor thispurpose in FY2000 ($1.9 million). The Economic Development Administration (EDA) has experienced a tumultuous appropriations history over the past fewyears. (20) Its funding level was sharply reduced bythe 104th Congress, then partially restored by the 105th. In the firstsession of the 106th Congress, appropriators placed EDA programs in jeopardy until the last possiblemoment. In the end, P.L. 106-113 reduced the agency's funding by $4 million compared to its FY1999 level. More specifically, forFY2000 theagency received a total adjusted appropriation of $387 million - $26.5 million for Salaries and Expenses (S&E)and $360.5million for Economic Development Assistance Programs (EDAP). For FY2001, the Administration requested $27.7 million for S&E and $409.3 million for EDAP, for a total appropriation of$436.9 million. The House bill, following the recommendation of the Appropriations Committee, provided $26.5millionfor S&E and $361.9 million for EDAP, for a total CJS appropriation of $388.4 million for FY2001, or $48.5million lessthan requested. This recommendation was the same level as the FY2000 appropriation. The Senate Appropriations Committee provided $31.5 million for S&E and $218 million for EDAP, for a totalrecommended appropriation of $249.5 million for FY2001, or $187.5 million less than requested and $138.9 lessthan thetotal approved by the House. This recommendation was also $138.9 million less than the level appropriated for FY2000. Congress approved $286.7 million for EDAP and $28 million for S&E, for a total FY2001 appropriation of $411.9 millionfor EDA. Of the amounts provided, $286.7 million is for Public Works and Economic Development, $49.6 millionis forEconomic Adjustment Assistance, $31.5 million is for Defense Conversion, $24 million is for Planning, $9.1million is forTechnical Assistance (including University Centers), $10.5 million is for Trade Adjustment Assistance, and $.5million isfor Research. The President requested $28.2 million for the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) , which was about $1million above the $27.3 million appropriated for FY2000. The House Appropriations Committee recommends thesameamount appropriated for FY2000. The House approved this amount. The Senate Appropriations Committeerecommendeda slightly lower level of $27.0 million. Congress approved $27.3 million. The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees collected from customers. The ConsolidatedAppropriations Act, P.L. 106-113 , provided the PTO with the authority to spend $871 million for FY2000 (althoughthereare no direct appropriations from the General Fund). Included in this figure were $755 million from current yearfees and$116 million in carryover fees. This was an increase of 11% over FY1999 (when funds were returned to theTreasury tobalance the budget). For FY2001, the President requested that the PTO be given budget authority to spend $1038.7 million; $783.8 millionderived from fees expected to be paid to the Office during FY2001, $229 million from FY2000 carry over fees, and$25.9million in fees originally collected in FY1999. The estimated total of patent and trademark charges to be collectedinFY2001 is $1151.5 million, of which $367.7 million can not be spent until FY2002. H.R. 4690 , as passed by the House, provided the Patent and Trademark Office with the authority to spend $904.9 million of which $650 million was to be derived from fees collected in FY2001 ($501.5 million less thantheestimated $1151.5 million) and $254.9 million from funds carried over since FY1999 and FY2000. The versionof this billreported to the Senate from the Committee on Appropriations would permit the PTO to spend $1038.7 million, thesame asthe President's budget request. Included in this was $783.8 million from FY2001 fees ($112.8 million less than theexpected collections) and $254.9 million from prior fiscal years. P.L. 106-553 approves the funding levels providedin theSenate bill report and recommended in the President's budget request. This represents a 19 percent increase abovetheFY2000 operating level for the PTO. Appropriation measures that limit the Patent and Trademark Office's use of the full amount of fees collected in the currentfiscal year remain an area of controversy. Opponents argue that since agency operations are supported by fees forservices,the total amount of the fees collected should be available to provide for those services in the year the expenses areincurred. They claim that the fees not used instead fund other, non-related programs. Proponents maintain that fees generatedin pastyears and made available in the current fiscal year make up any difference. The President requested $2.76 billion in budget authority for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) for FY2001. This amount was $435 million greater than FY2000appropriations, an increase of 19%, and was12% greater than the $2.5 million requested by the President for FY2000. Of the FY2001 request total, nearly $1.9billion(68%) was slated for Operations Research and Facilities (ORF), and $635 million (22%) for Procurement,Acquisition, andConstruction (PAC). Other NOAA funding totaled $281 million (10%). The request included $160 million forPacificCoastal Salmon Recovery (PCSR), and related treaty implementation; $100 million for a newly proposed CoastalImpactAssessment Fund; and $10 million for a Fisheries Assistance Fund. NOAA requested new budget authority of $30millionthrough collection Navigation Services and Fisheries Management and Enforcement fees. The President requestedincreased funding for NOAA's part in Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) initiativesincludingNational Disaster Reduction ($110 million); Land Legacy ($265.8 million); South Florida Ecosystems RestorationInitiative ($1.6 million); Clean Water ($6.9 million); DOC Minority Serving Institutions ($17 million); and grantsunder theCoastal Zone Management Act ($92.7 million). New in the FY2001 request were a Climate Observation andServicesInitiative ($28 million) and America's Ocean Future Initiative (formerly "Ocean 2000" initiative). Funding for traditional line offices at NOAA was requested as follows: National Ocean Service (NOS) $517 million ($11million of that PAC), includes $100 million for Coastal Impact Assessment Fund; National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) $657 million ($22 million PAC), includes $160 million for Pacific Salmon Recovery and $10 million forFisheriesAssistance Fund; Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) $319 million ($11 million PAC), includes $32 millionforClimate Observation and Services and $59 million for Sea Grant; National Weather Service (NWS) $710 million($75million PAC); National Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service (NESDIS) $613 million ($505 millionPAC),includes funding for a new satellite operation facility in Suitland, MD; Program Support (PS) $87 million ($16millionPAC), includes $17 million for Minority Serving Institutions and $15.8 million for a Commerce AdministrativeManagement System; Facilities (FAC) $9 million ($3 million PAC); and Office of Marine and Aviation Operations(OMAO), formerly Fleet Planning and Maintenance and Aircraft Services under PS), $21 million ($200,000 PAC). On June 26, 2000, the House passed H.R. 4690 , approving funding levels recommended by the House Appropriations Committee on June 14, 2000 ( H.Rept. 106-680 ), with one amendment. This amounted to $2.23billiontotal for NOAA, which is about 5% less than that appropriated by Congress for FY2000, and about 19% less thanthePresident's request of $2.761 billion for FY2001. The House approved ORF funding at $1.607 billion, about $30millionless than the President's request. PAC funding was approved at $566 million for FY2001, with an amendment foradditional funding for NMFS, which was $1.2 million more than House Appropriations Committeerecommendations. Thebalance of other NOAA appropriations totaled $63.4 million. Major funding differences between final Houseapprovedlevels and the President's request include a $145 million reduction for NOS and a $50 million reduction for NMFS. Inaddition, the House approved $58 million of the $160 million requested for PCSR. Most NOAA programs werefunded at,or slightly below, FY2000 appropriations levels, with few exceptions. Some CENR initiatives were not fundedbecause thecommittee cited that many of these programs were not authorized. The House funded NOAA line offices as follows: NOS-$260.6 million; NMFS; $405.4 million; OAR-$264.6 million;NWS-$621.7 million; NESDIS-$106.6 million; PS-$58.1 million (includes aircraft services); FM&P-$7million; FAC-$11million; for an ORF Total $1,607 million. PAC was approved at $ 565 million but, the House did not approveadvancedappropriations for PAC of $6,417.5 million through FY2019. No funding was approved for GLOBE or ClimateObservations and Services (OAR), nor was the $100 million for Coastal State Grants to mitigate the impacts ofoffshoredrilling activities and other purposes, for which the House cited $1 billion of mandatory funding passed previouslyin H.R. 701 . The House did not approve an increase in NOAA budget authority of $30 million from collectionofproposed offsetting fees. On September 8, 2000, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 4960 ( S.Rept. 106-404 ). The Committee approved a total of $2.687 billion for NOAA. This amount was 21% higher than House passed levelsfor H.R. 4690 , about 3% below the Clinton Administration's request, and about 15% greater than FY2000appropriations. Of this amount, $1,961 million in budget authority was approved for ORF, with $66.2 million ofthat to bederived from PDAF. This amount was 22% greater than the House approved levels, and 6% greater than thePresident'srequest for ORF for FY2001. PAC funding was approved at $669.5 million, which is 5% greater than levelsrequested bythe President, but 16% above House approved levels. Senate Appropriations Committee line totals for NOAA were as follows: $321.3 million for NOS, which is 23% greaterthan House levels and 21% less than the FY2001 request; $543.9 million for NMFS, which is 34% greater thanHouselevels and 20% greater than the request; $318.2 million for OAR, which is 20% greater than House levels and about5%greater than the request for FY2001; $632.5 million for NWS, 1.7% below the House and 0.7% less than theFY2001request; $112.1 million for NESDIS; $71.3 million for PS; $19 million for FM&P; $35.3 million for FAC. PAC wouldreceive $669.5 million which is about 5% greater than the President's request of $635 million for FY2001, but18.5%greater than House approved levels of $565 million. PCSR would be funded at $58 million, the same as Houseapprovedlevels. CZMF was approved at $3.2 million, $0.8 million below the House and President's request. Other fisheriessupporting accounts were approved at $1.5 million, slightly higher than House and President's request for FY2001. Nofunding was approved for GLOBE. The Senate Appropriations Committee concurred with the House and did notapprove$100 million for a coastal assessment fund or $30 million in new budget authority from proposed offsetting fees. However,the Committee did approve $14 million of the $32 million requested for Climate Observation and Services initiativeforocean observations. Sea Grant was funded $64.8 million and underwater research at $17 million, significantlyhigher thanthe President's request. Increases were also realized for aircraft services, fleet maintenance and planning, and $15millionwas included for construction of a new NOAA facility in Suitland, MD. With passage of the Interior Appropriations bill for FY2001 on October 11, 2000 ( P.L. 106-291 ), the Balanced Budget andEmergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 was amended to raise spending caps on certain Federal programs. In asection on Conservation Spending , subparagraphs xv-xvii , dealing with NOAA activities whichsupport coastal and Great Lakeconservation, and are directly tied to the President's Land Legacy initiative, funding caps were raised to allow theagency tospend an additional $420 million for a number of NOAA activities including Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery,additionalfunding for Operations, Research and Facilities (ORF), CZMA, National Marine Sanctuaries, National EstuarineResearchReserves Systems, Coral Restoration programs, and Coastal Impact Assistance. Most of this funding had beenapproved bythe Senate Appropriations Committee in its version of H.R. 4690 , except for $420 million for coastal andocean activities. On October 25, 2000, Conferees on H.R. 4942 reported Appropriations for the District of Columbia for FY2001 ( H.Rept. 106-1005 ). Attached as Title II to this Act is Commerce, Justice, and State Appropriations forFY200,which became P.L. 106-533 on December 21, 2000. The conference agreement provided NOAA a total fundinglevel of$3,048 million for all NOAA programs. This is about 12% greater than the amount approved by the SenateAppropriationsCommittee; 27% greater than House approved levels; 30% greater than FY2000 appropriations of $2,343 million;and about 4.4% less than the President's request for FY2001 (if the $420 million for coastal and ocean activities isincluded. Operations Research and Facilities funding totaled some $1,869 million, $68 million of which would be derivedby transferfrom the Promote and Develop Fishery Products and Research Pertaining to American Fisheries (PDAF) and $3.2millionin offsets from the Coastal Zone Management Fund. Procurement, Acquisitions and Construction (PAC) is slatedtoreceive $683 million, including $7.5 million in previous FY deobligations. Other NOAA accounts include fundingof $74million for Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery; $3.2 million for the Coastal Zone Management Act (ORF); and $1.43millionfor other fisheries financing programs. Conferrees also appropriated $420 million for "Coastal and Ocean Activities," which was authorized in Title VIII of H.R. 4578 , Land Conservation Preservation and Infrastructure Improvement, under the InteriorAppropriationsbill which became P.L. 106-291 . Some $150 million of this is for a Coastal Impact Assessment and another $135million isfor NOAA programs authorized under Title IX ï¿½903 of H.R. 4942 . The Conference committee approved funding for traditional NOAA budget lines as follows: NOS-$290.7 million;NMFS-$517.9 million; OAR-$323.2 million; NWS-$630.8 million; NESDIS-$125.2 million; PS-$81.3 million;FP&M-$11 million; and FAC-$11.2 million. Conferees reduced Senate approved funding levels for a numberof programsthat were authorized under ï¿½903 of the Act. These include the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Program, CZMA,andadditional funding for some ORF programs, such as National Marine Sanctuaries, NERRS, Coral Restoration, andCoastalImpact Assistance. In most cases, final conference approved levels for NOAA are in between House and SenateAppropriations Committee approved totals, with obvious exceptions. For example, the conference committeeapproved$15 million for Minority Serving Institutions, boosting overall funding for the Program Support budget line. Theyalsoapproved the Senate Appropriations Committee funding level for the Stellar Sea Lion recovery program underNMFS. Furthermore, the conference committee approved $12.3 million for Climate Observations and Services (about halfof thePresident's request), approved $3 million for GLOBE, and close to or slightly more than the President's request forotherclimate change research activities. A $10 million increase was targeted for Marine Prediction research under OceansandGreat Lake Programs. Final Sea Grant and NURP approved funding remained close to Senate AppropriationCommitteelevels, which were substantially higher than the President's request. The committee also funded the Global DisasterInformation Network at $3 million, which was not funded by the House or Senate Appropriations Committee. National Weather Service funding levels remained consistent with the House except for some reductions in base fundingfor local forecast and warning to offset increased funding for NOAA weather radio transmitters. Other increaseswereprovided for NESDIS Data and Information Services and Ocean remote sensing. The Conference committee didnotapprove the Senate Appropriations request for $15 million for a new Suitland, MD facility under the NOAAFacilitiesaccount, but approved it instead under the PAC construction account. The FP&M line for FY2001 was reducedby the costof a new fishery research vessel that was approved instead under PAC. Funding for CAMS was increased $4million abovethe agency's request for a total of $19 million. The Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery account realized a $16 millionincrease under conference committee actions for a total of $74 million. In the conference report that accompanies H.R. 4577 , Making Omnibus Consolidated and EmergencySupplemental Appropriations for FY2001 ( H.Rept. 106-1033 , December 15, 2000), there was an additional$61.5 millionappropriated for NOAA. This funding includes $750,000 for ORF for a study by the National Academy of Sciencespursuant to Exploration of the Seas Act ( H.R. 2090 , sec. 4, September 6, 2000); and for other funding of $7.5million for Alaskan Salmon Disaster; $3 million for Hawaii Long Line fishery; and $50 million for Sea LionProtection. Taken together appropriations for H.R. 4942 (see above), NOAA's total budget authority for FY2001,amounts to $3,109 million. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) received an appropriation of $639.0 million in FY2000 afterthe rescission mandated in P.L. 106-113 . This was fundamentally the same support as the previous year, but 13%belowthe President's request. Funding included $282.1 million for the Scientific and Technical Research and Services(STRS)account (with $4.9 million for the Baldrige Quality Program); $246.8 million for Industrial Technology Services(ITS),including $142.6 million for the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and $104.2 million for the ManufacturingExtension Partnership (MEP); and $106.9 million for construction. Continued financing of the Advanced Technology Program has been a major funding issue. ATP provides seed financing,matched by private sector investment, to businesses or consortia (including universities and governmentlaboratories) fordevelopment of generic technologies that have broad applications across industries. Opponents of the program citeit as aprime example of "corporate welfare," whereby the federal government invests in applied research activities that,theymaintain, should be conducted by the private sector. The Administration has defended ATP, arguing it assistsbusinesses(and small manufacturers) develop technologies that, while crucial to industrial competitiveness, would not or couldnot bedeveloped by the private sector alone. For FY2000, the appropriations bill passed by the Senate included a 15%increase infunding for ATP. However, H.R. 2670 , as passed by the House, contained no appropriation for ATP. Theaccompanying House Committee report stated that the program has not produced a body of evidence to overcomethosefundamental questions about whether the program should exist. While the Advanced Technology Program wasultimatelyfunded in the version of the bill that became law, the support provided, $142.6 million, reflected a 28% decreasefromFY1999. The original appropriations bill passed by the House, H.R. 4690 , did not include any ATP fundingfor FY2001. The President's FY2001 budget requested $713 million for NIST, 12% above FY2000. Included was $337.5 million forthe STRS account (with $5 million for the Quality Program). Support for ITS totaled $339.6 million of which$175.5million was for ATP (an increase of 23%) and $114.1 was for MEP (9.5% above FY2000). In addition, a newprogramunder ITS, the Institute for Information Infrastructure Protection (IIIP), would be funded at $50 million. This effortwouldsupport R&D designed to protect information and telecommunications infrastructures from attack or otherfailures. Theconstruction budget would be $35.9 million. H.R. 4690 , as passed by the House, provided funding for NIST at $422.9 million for FY2001, a decrease of34% from the previous year and 41% below the President's request. Most of the decrease in support was due to theabsence of funding for the Advanced Technology Program and a decrease in the construction budget as the buildingof thenew measurement laboratory progresses. Included in this figure was $292.1 million for the STRS account, $104.8millionfor the Manufacturing Extension Program under ITS, and $26 million for construction. The version of H.R. 4690 reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee would have made available $596.6 million for NIST. Included in this FY2001 funding was $305 million for STRS activities (an 8% increaseoverFY2000), $109.1 million for MEP (a 5% increase), $153.6 million for ATP (8% above the previous year), and $28.9million for construction. The decrease in support for construction reflects activities to complete building the newadvancedmeasurement laboratory. P.L. 106-553 provides $598.3 million for NIST in FY2001. The total includes $312.6 million for STRS, $105.1 million forMEP, $145.7 million for ATP, and $34.9 million for construction. The Office of the Undersecretary for Technology and the Office of Technology Policy (OTP) was funded at $7.9 millionin FY2000, a 21% decrease from the previous fiscal year. Part of the decline in support was due to the decision tocease theawarding of grants under the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Technology (EPSCoT) and performanevaluation of the project. This activity is designed to strengthen the technological infrastructure in states that are"...traditionally under-represented in federal R&D funding." For FY2001, the President requested $8.7 millionfor OTP, 9.3%above the current funding levels. The original appropriations bill passed by the House, H.R. 4690 , wouldhaveprovided support at $7.9 million, the same as FY2000. The version reported by the Senate AppropriationsCommitteewould have funded OTP at $8.2 million, a 4% increase. P.L. 106-553 provides a funding level of $8.1 million forFY2001. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) provides guidelines and recommendationsfor domestic and global communications policy, manages the use of the electromagnetic spectrum for publicbroadcast, andawards grants to industry-public sector partnerships for research on new telecommunications applications anddevelopmentof information infrastructure. For the current fiscal year, the budget for NTIA includes funding for its operations, administration, salaries, and expenses; support for the Technology Opportunity Program (TOP), formerly called theTechnology Information Infrastructure Assistance Program; and continued development and construction of publicbroadcast facilities. In addition, for FY2001, the Clinton Administration requested that NTIA's budget includeprograms toaddress the perceived "digital divide" separating the Internet "haves" from the Internet "have nots." For FY2001, the Clinton Administration requested an overall budget for NTIA of $423 million, well above its FY2000funding of $52.9 million. While the House Appropriations committee recommended $57.4 million for NTIA inFY2001,the Senate Appropriations has recommended $76.9 million for NTIA's overall budget in FY2001. The Confereesapproveda total of $100.4 million for NTIA's overall FY2001 budget. Among the most significant increases within the NTIAbudget would come from the Administration's request for public broadcast facilities, planning, and construction. ForFY2001, the Clinton Administration requested $110.1 million for public broadcast facilities, planning, andconstruction,well above the $26.5 million appropriated for this program for FY2000. The House approved $31 million for thisNTIAactivity in FY2001, while the Senate Appropriations has approved $50 million for this program. The Confereesprovided$43.5 million. For NTIA salaries and expenses, the Clinton Administration recommended $20.3 million forFY2001, anincrease over FY2000 appropriations of $10.9 million; the House approved funding of $10.9 million for salariesandexpenses while the Senate Appropriations approved $11.4 million. FY2001. The Conferees approved the fundinglevelrecommended by the Senate. For the TOP, the Administration requested: $45.1 million for FY2001, an increasefrom theFY2000 appropriation of $15.5 million. The House and Senate Appropriations both approved $15.5 million forTOP inFY2001. The Conferees approved $45.5 million, which slightly exceeds the Administration request. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) enacted by Congress in 1993 ( P.L. 103-62 ; 107 Stat 285) requiresthat agencies develop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, and performance measures for all majorprograms. The strategic plan issued by the Department of Commerce in 1997 enunciated three strategic themes: Theme l. Build for the future and promote U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace, by strengthening and safeguarding the nation's economic infrastructure. Theme 2. Keep America competitive with cutting edge science and technology and a world class information base. Theme 3. Provide effective management and stewardship of the nation's resources and assets to ensure sustainable economic opportunity. As stated by the Department: The Themes within the Commerce Strategic Plan help identify and capitalize on relationships among bureaus and on partnerships with other agencies and external groups. The Strategic Plansupportsthe concept that strong working relationships will serve to strengthen the effectiveness of the Department as a whole,aswell as demonstrate how individual bureaus logically and critically support the core mission of theDepartment. The Commerce Strategic Plan provides the framework for strengthening existing relationships among bureaus and with external partners. Success for Commerce programs in the changingtechnological world and global economy will depend increasingly on alliances with businesses and industry,universities,State and local governments, and international parties. In its Budget in Brief for FY2001, the Department stated that: With the publication of the first Annual Program Performance Report in March 2000, the Department will have completed the first full cycle of GPRA mandated activities involving theStrategicPlan, the Annual Performance Plan, and the Annual Performance Report. The revised Commerce Strategic Plan(FY2000-FY2005) will be submitted to Congress in September 2000, and it will replace the first Strategic Plan(FY1997-2002) thatwas issued in September 1997. Commerce Department Abolition Issue During the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses, several legislative proposals wereconsidered that called for the abolition of the Department of Commerce by eliminating certain departmentalfunctions andallowing others to operate as independent agencies or be transferred to other federal agencies. Those in Congresswho havefavored the abolition of the Department argued that it "is an unwieldy conglomeration of marginally relatedprograms,nearly all of which duplicate those performed elsewhere in the federal government." The Clinton Administration,on theother hand, has strongly opposed abolishing the Commerce Department, arguing that "it would result in the needlessshuffling of governmental functions while eliminating successful activities that clearly benefit the Americanpeople,"especially in areas that promote economic growth, increase the international competitiveness of U.S. firms in globalmarkets, and advance U.S. technology. None of these proposals passed 104th Congress. There continued to be some congressional interest in reorganizing or downsizing the Department in the 105th Congress,although interest in abolishing the Department was considerably less than in the 104th Congress. (21) A bill calling for abolition of the Department was introduced by Representatives Royce and Kasich and several other cosponsors( H.R. 2667 ) on October 9, 1997. This bill was referred to the House Committee on Commerce and two otherHouse Committees that have jurisdiction over certain functions of the Department. A very similar version of theproposalwas also introduced in the Senate by Senator Abraham and others on October 24, 1997 ( S. 1316 ). This wasreferred to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. No further action was taken on this issue. In the106th Congress,similar legislation was introduced by Representative Royce on July 1, 1999-- H.R. 2452 . The bill was referredto several committees: Commerce, Transportation and Infrastructure, Banking and Financial Services, InternationalRelations, Armed Services, Ways and Means, Government Reform, the Judiciary, Science, and Resources. Nofurtheraction was taken in the House. No similar legislation was introduced in the Senate. For FY2001, Congress approved $4.26 billion in total budget authority for the Judiciary, less a .22% (.0022) government-wide rescission. (22) This totalrepresented a 7.7% increase over FY2000 funding of $3.96 billion and was higher than both the $4.21 billion included in the earlier House-passed FY2001 CJS bill, H.R. 4690 , and the$4.24 billion in total funding for the Judiciary recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee. During October 26, 2000 floor debate, the House CJS Subcommittee chairman, Representative Harold Rogers, underscoredthat the FY2001 House-Senate conference agreement: provided necessary funding to address the federal court system's "ever-increasing caseload"; authorized a cost-of-living pay increase for federal judges; and provided a new increase in the hourly rate paid to court-appointed "panel attorneys" who represent indigentdefendantsin federal criminal cases. (23) The Congress-passed agreement contained other noteworthy language affecting the Judiciary. One provisionauthorized tennew district judgeships (one each for Arizona, the Southern District of Florida, the Eastern District of Kentucky,Nevada,New Mexico, South Carolina, the Southern District of Texas, the Western District of Texas, the Eastern District ofVirginia, and the Eastern District of Wisconsin). Another provision brought the Supreme Court police into paritywith theretirement benefits provided to the United States Capitol police and other federal law enforcement agencies. Theconference agreement, however, did not include a controversial Senate provision relating to honoraria or outsideearninglimits for federal judges. For the Judiciary's largest account, Salaries and Expenses for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts and Other JudicialServices, (24) Congressapproved $3.36 billion, compared with $3.11 billion enacted for FY2000. The total enacted forFY2001 was the same amount as recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee, and slightly more thantheappropriation of $3.33 billion passed earlier by the House. The Judiciary, in its official newsletter The Third Branch ,expressed appreciation for the level ultimately approved by Congress for this account, noting that it funded 1,559new courtsupport staff. (25) A significant increase in thisaccount was urgently needed, the Judiciary had maintained, largely becauseof increased workload in judicial districts on the nation's southwestern border. (26) As it had been in previous years, one of the more sensitive parts of the Judiciary's FY2001 budget was Defender Services . This account funds the operations of the federal public defender and community defender organizations, and thecompensation, reimbursement and expenses of "panel attorneys." The latter are private practice attorneys appointedby thecourts under the Criminal Justice Act to serve as defense counsel to indigent individuals accused of federal crimes. ForFY2001 Congress approved $435.0 million for Defender Services, instead of $420.4 million as provided in theHouse billand $416.4 million as recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee. (The Judiciary had requested anappropriation of $440.4 million for Defender Services, a 14.3% increase over FY2000 budget authority of $385.1million.) A matter of increasing concern to the Judiciary in recent years has been the relatively low rate of pay panel attorneysreceive relative to compensation paid to private counsel by other government agencies. (27) In response to that concern,House-Senate conferees directed that a portion of the Judiciary's Defender Services funding for FY2001 be usedfor anincrease to $75 an hour for panel attorneys' in-court time and $55 an hour for their out-of-court time. (28) During consideration of the Judiciary's FY1999 and FY2000 budgets, congressional appropriators also had expressedconcerns about rising overall Defender Services costs. A particular concern both years had been the costs ofcompensatingattorneys who represent indigents in federal death penalty and death row appeal cases (often referred to as "capitalcases"). In its FY2001 budget submission to Congress, the Judiciary noted various ongoing initiatives on its part to containcosts forfederal capital habeas corpus cases. (29) TheJudiciary also said it was continuing to pursue implementation ofrecommendations included in its January 1998 report to Congress on controlling costs associated with the DefenderServices program. In its June 14, 2000 report on H.R. 4690 , the House Appropriations Committee noted that it had received areport regarding measures undertaken by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to reduce costs for capitalhabeascorpus representations in the Circuit's District Courts, particularly the District Courts in California. Thosemeasures, theCommittee noted, appeared to be working, "as evidenced by the 40 percent reduction in the average annual cost perpetitioner in the Ninth Circuit." While commending the Ninth Circuit for its efforts to reduce costs, the Committeeobserved that the average cost per petitioner in California was still almost twice that of the national average. Accordingly,the Committee urged the Ninth Circuit to continue its cost-cutting efforts and to include results in its OptimalUtilization ofJudicial Resources Report. The House committee language subsequently was adopted by reference in the CJSFY2001appropriations conference report. Congress also approved a provision authorizing a cost-of-living increase in judges' and justices' salaries for FY2001 (30) and appropriating $8.8 million for this purpose. The provision cleared the way for judges and justices to receivea 2.7 %pay adjustment along with Members of Congress and Executive Schedule employees on January 1, 2001. Theadjustmentrate of 2.7% was based on a formula set by law involving the Employment Cost Index (ECI), while at the same timebeing limited by the General Schedule (GS) salary adjustment rate. (31) In early 2000, the Judiciary had requested funding for a cost-of-living increase in judges' and justices' salaries for FY2001consistent with the expected FY2001 salary increase for the federal government's General Schedule employees. TheJudiciary contended that this requested adjustment, and subsequent adjustments on an annual basis, were "essentialif thejudiciary is to maintain its high standards." (32) TheHouse, however, declined to include an appropriation for increasedjudicial salaries in FY2001 in the CJS bill that it passed, H.R. 4690 . (The House Appropriations Committee, in its report on H.R. 4690 , stated that it had "deferred without prejudice" the Judiciary's request for a payadjustment.) By contrast, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a pay adjustment for the Judiciary, andit was theSenate committee recommendation which ultimately prevailed in conference. (33) House-Senate conferees dropped from the Judiciary's FY2001 appropriations title a provision approved by the SenateAppropriations Committee concerning honoraria received by justices and judges .Specifically, Section 305(a) in theGeneral Provisions of Title III of the Senate bill had provided that a statutory prohibition against Members ofCongress orGovernment officers or employees receiving honoraria shall not apply to "any individual while that individual isa justiceor judge of the United States." (34) At the same time,Section 305 authorized the Judicial Conference, if it so chose, to setits own honoraria limits for justices and lower federal court judges. (35) Section 305 also excluded honoraria received byjudges from the definition of "outside earned income" in 5 U.S.C. App. Sec 501(a), making judicial honoraria nolongersubject to the statutory curb, in effect since 1989, which has limited the "outside earned income" of judges (and ofofficersand employees in the legislative and executive branches) to 15% of a level II in the Executive Schedule. The most prominent supporter of lifting the ban on honoraria for judges was Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, whodefended it as a means of improving compensation for lifetime federal judges. However, the Senate committeelanguageto lift the ban generated controversy, with various news media editorials and some Senators and House Membersspeakingout in opposition. Their criticisms included the view that allowing honoraria for judges could lessen publicconfidence injudges (particularly if they were perceived as accepting money from special interests), that it would raise anothercontroversial issue--of whether Congress should lift the ban (which also had been in place since 1989) on its ownMembers receiving honoraria, and that a more appropriate means of increasing judicial income, if called for, wouldbe byraising judges' salaries. Against this backdrop, Senate negotiators ultimately dropped the honoraria provision fromtheSenate's CJS-Judiciary bill Congress, as recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee, approved $199.6 million for Court Security , theaccount which covers the expenses of security and protective services for the lower federal courts in courtroomsandadjacent areas. For FY2001, the Judiciary sought an appropriation of $215.4 million for this account, an 11.6%increaseover FY2000 funding of $193.0 million. (36) TheHouse, as recommended by its Appropriations Committee, had approved$198.3 million, $17.1 million less than the Judiciary's request but $5.2 million, or 2.7%, more than FY2000funding. Of all of its budget accounts, the Judiciary requested the largest proportional increase in funding for the United StatesSentencing Commission , which sets, reviews, and revises sentencing guidelines and policies forthe federal criminaljustice system. The Judiciary requested $10.6 million for the Commission in FY2001, a 24.7% increase over itsFY2000appropriation of $8.5 million. Throughout most of FY1999 and part of FY2000, all of the seats on theseven-memberSentencing Commission were vacant, and against this backdrop of disarray in the Commission, Congress decreaseditsFY2000 appropriation 10.4% below its FY1999 funding level of $9.5 million. The FY2001 request sought restoredfunding for the Commission at a full staffing level. In response, Congress, as recommended by the SenateAppropriationsCommittee, approved $9.9 million for the Commission in FY2001. The House had approved $9.6 million for thisaccount. Congress approved $37.6 million for Supreme Court's Salaries and Expenses account, $2.1 million over FY2000 funding.As passed earlier by the House and recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee, Congress approved $7.5million for the Court's Building and Grounds account (less than the $8 million enacted for FY2000 but preciselywhat theArchitect of the Capitol estimated was required for FY2001). Congress, as noted earlier, also approved the creation of ten new U.S. district judgeships. In July 2000, the JudicialConference transmitted to Congress a request for six permanent and four temporary court of appeals judgeships and30permanent and 23 temporary district judgeships, citing the courts' growing workload. However, neither theHouse-passed FY2001 CJS bill, H.R. 4690 , nor the amended version of H.R. 4690 approved by the SenateAppropriations Committee, authorized or provided funding for any additional new judgeships. The decision tocreate theten judgeships was made later, in conference committee (37) As part of the budget process, the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) enacted by Congress in 1993 ( P.L.103-62 ; 107 Stat. 285) requires that agencies develop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, and performancemeasures for all major programs. However, as noted earlier, the Judicial branch is not subject to the requirementsof thisAct. The Administration's FY2001 budget request for the Department of State and international broadcasting totaled nearly $7billion, 10% above the FY2000 enacted level of $6.3 billion. The request was comparable to the FY1999 enactedlevelwhich had included the $1.56 billion emergency supplemental appropriation for overseas security and Y2Kcomputercompliance. The House Appropriation Committee recommended $6.55 million for State and internationalbroadcastingFY2001 budgets. The House-passed legislation set the Department of State and broadcasting total to $6.54 billion.TheSenate Appropriations Committee set a similar funding level-$6.56 billion-for both international broadcasting andtheDepartment of State. Congress approved total funding for State and international broadcasting at $7.1 billion, $97millionmore than the Administration had requested. Reorganization of the foreign policy agencies occurred throughout FY1999, with both the U.S. Information Agency (USIA)and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) abolished, and their functions fully merged into theDepartmentof State as of October 1, 1999. The FY2001 State Department appropriation includes ACDA and USIA funds. International broadcasting remains an independent agency, referred to as the Broadcasting Board of Governors(BBG). The August 7, 1998 terrorist attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa prompted the Administration and Congress to seekmore funding to protect U.S. personnel overseas. An immediate response was a $1.56 billion supplemental enactedby theend of that year. In November 1999, the Overseas Presence Advisory Panel reported its findings on embassysecurity needsand recommendations. Also in November 1999, Congress authorized ( P.L. 106-113 ) $900 million annually forFY2000through FY2004 for embassy security spending within the embassy security, construction andmaintenance account(ESCM), in addition to worldwide security funds in the diplomatic andconsular programs account . The final FY2000appropriation passed by Congress and signed by the President set the total for overseas security upgrades at $568million. The Department of State FY2001 request included more than $1 billion for worldwide security upgrades in the diplomatic& consular programs account ($410 million) and the embassysecurity, construction and maintenance account ($648million) with which the House concurred. In addition, the Administration sought advance appropriations totaling$3.35billion for anticipated embassy security needs; however, the House did not agree with providing funds for futureyears. Beyond security needs, the Administration requested $431.2 million for regular ESCM spending. The House fullCommittee recommended $417 million (about $10 million less than the FY2000 level for this account) and theHousepassed that amount. The Senate full Committee recommended the same-$417 million for ESCM, but offered muchless-$364 million-for worldwide security upgrades within the ESCM account. The Senate Committee also specified$272.7 million within the D&CP account for worldwide security upgrades. The conference report passed byCongress putthe ESCM funding at $417 million, in addition to $663 million for worldwide security upgrades. The combinedlevelequals the total of the two in the President's request. The President's FY2001 request of $4,711.2 million for State's administration of foreign affairs was nearly $700 millionabove the FY2000 enacted level. The FY2001 request included: $97 million for the capitalinvestment fund , an increaseof more than $20 million in the education and cultural exchanges account , and adoubling of funds in the emergencies inthe diplomatic and consular service account which pays for embassy evacuations andrewards regarding terrorist arrests. The House Appropriation Committee recommended slightly less-$4,654.9 million-for State's administration of foreignaffairs. The House reduced this amount by $10.5 million to $4,644.4 million,transferring out of the diplomatic andconsular programs account $10 million to Legal Services Corp. and $500,000 to theInternational Water and BoundaryCommission. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $4,465.9 million-$178 million less than theHouse-passed level. The reduction was largely because of the reduced level of funding for worldwide securityupgrades. The conference report set funding for State's administration of foreign affairs at $4,782.0 million, $71 million more thanthe President's request. The capital investment fund , which was established in 1994, provides for purchasing information technology and capitalequipment to ensure efficient management, coordination, operation, and utilization of State's resources. TheAdministration request for FY2001 was $97 million--$17 million above the FY2000 level. Noting the need forimprovedcommunication and information technology at the Department's headquarters in Washington and in its overseasposts,Congress authorized $150 million for this account for FY2001. The House full Committee, however, recommendedfunding of $79.7 million, just under the current-year level of $80 million. The House agreed with this amount. TheSenateCommittee, on the other hand, set their version of funding for the capital investment fund at $104 million-higherthan boththe Administration request and the House level. The final level Congress passed was exactly equal to the President'srequest of $97 million. The United States contributes in two ways to the United Nations and other international organizations: voluntary paymentsfunded in the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill and assessed contributions included in the Commerce, Justice,andState Appropriations measure. Assessed contributions are provided in two accounts, internationalpeacekeeping and contributions to international organizations (CIO) . Following a periodof dramatic growth in the number and costs ofU.N. peacekeeping missions during the early 1990s, a trend that peaked in FY1994 with a $1.1 billion appropriation,funding requirements have declined in recent years. The FY2000 enacted appropriation for CIO was $885 million,$500million for international peacekeeping, and $351 million for U.S. arrearage payments to the U.N. if certain reformcriteriaare met by the United Nations. Only $100 million of the appropriated arrearage payments have been releasedbecause of alack of U.N. reform. The President's FY2001 budget sought $946.1 million for CIO and $738.7 million for international peacekeeping, with thebulk of funds going for peacekeeping activities in Kosovo, East Timor, and Sierra Leone. The HouseAppropriationsCommittee recommended setting both accounts below the FY2000 level: CIO-$880.5 million; internationalpeacekeeping-$498.1 million. The House passed these amounts. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommendedCIO funding of $943.9 million-closer to the Administration request-and $500 million for internationalpeacekeeping-thesame as the FY2000 level and similar to the House level. Also, the Senate Committee recommended rescinding$217million of unobligated funds in the international organizations account. Congress passed $870.8 million for CIOand $846million for peacekeeping for FY2001. The total of the two accounts is $32 million greater than the President'sFY2001request. Education and cultural exchange programs (formerly funded within USIA) include programs such as the Fulbright,Muskie, and Humphrey academic exchanges, as well as the international visitor exchanges and Freedom SupportActprograms. As a result of the foreign policy reorganization, this account is within State's Bureau for PublicDiplomacy andInternational Exchanges. The FY2000 enacted level for this account was $205 million, plus $3.6 million withinasupplemental for education and cultural exchanges with Kosovo. In the FY2000 enacted budget, Congress did notspecifyan amount for the Fulbright Educational Exchange Program. The Administration requested $225 million for education and cultural exchanges for FY2001. The $20 million increasewas to meet wage and price increases, enhance the Fulbright Program, and fully implement the United States/ChinaHighSchool Exchange Initiative. The House agreed with the CJS subcommittee and the full House AppropriationsCommitteein splitting the difference between the current budget level and the President's request, setting the education and culturalexchange account at $213.8 million. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended therequested $225 million tothe exchange account for FY2001. Congress passed $231.6 million for this account-$6 million more than theAdministration had requested. USIA's international broadcasting operations account, established after consolidation under the Broadcasting Board ofGovernors (BBG) in FY1995, includes Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), CubaBroadcasting, and newer surrogate facilities: Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Iraq and Radio Free Iran. WhenUSIAintegrated into the Department of State at the end of FY1999, the BBG became an independent agency. ForFY2000,Congress appropriated $410.5 million for international broadcasting activities and $11.3 million for capitalimprovements. The Administration FY2001 request totaled $428.5 million for broadcasting (including $23.5 million for Cuba Broadcasting) and $19.8 million for capital improvements. The House Appropriations Committee recommended$419.8million for international broadcasting and $18.4 million for capital improvements. The House passed these amounts.Included in the international broadcasting funds were $131.2 million for VOA, $68 million for RFE/RL, $23.3million forRFA, and $22.8 million for Broadcasting to Cuba. The Senate full Committee recommended a total of $441.6million forinternational broadcasting-$31.1 million for capital improvements (including security upgrades), $388.4 million forbroadcasting operations, and $22.1 million for Cuba Broadcasting. The final level passed by Congress includes$451.6,similar to the Senate level and about $7 million below the President's request. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) enacted in 1993 ( P.L. 103-62 ; 107 stat 285) required that agenciesdevelop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, and performance measures for all major programs. Thesubsequentlypublished reports: U.S. Department of State FY1999-2000 Performance Plan released February 1,1999, and the UnitedStates Department of State Performance Report, Fiscal Year 1999 established target goals and measured howsuccessfulthe State Department was in attaining those goals. With most of the 27 specified goals, State was close to, orcompletelysuccessful in, meeting its stated goals. This section includes all other related agencies covered by the CJS appropriations bill whose FY2001 appropriations exceed $1.8 million. (38) Maritime Administration (MARAD). MARAD administers programsthat aid in the development, promotion, and operation of the nation's merchant marine (including programs thatbenefitvessel owners, shipyards, and ship crews). The Administration requested $185.1 million for MARAD for FY2001,$7million more than Congress appropriated to it in FY2000. The request consisted of $98.7 million for the MilitarySecurityProgram (MSP), $80.2 million for operating MARAD and training ship crews, $2.0 million for ship constructionmortgageguarantees ("Title XI Program"), and $4.2 million for administering that guarantee program. The MSP programreplacesthe ODS (Operating Differential Subsidy) program. Only a few ships remained in the ODS program at the end ofFY1999,and the last ship contract in the ODS expires in FY2002. The House Appropriations Committee recommended$198million for MARAD for FY2001, $20 million more than was appropriated in FY2000, and about $13 million abovetheAdministration's request. The recommendation consisted of $98.7 million for the Military Security Program (MSP),whichis $2.5 million more that Congress appropriated for FY2000, and about $84.8 million for operating MARAD andtrainingship crews. The Committee also recommended $10.6 million for ship construction mortgage guarantees ("Title XIProgram"). This amount is $8.6million above the Administration's request and $4.6 million above the FY2000amount. The House Committee's recommendation also included $3.8 million to administer the guarantee program, the sameamountprovided in FY2000 and a reduction of $384,000 below the Administration's request. The House passed billapproved theCommittee's recommendations. The Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended $203.3 million for the Maritime Administration, $25.2 millionmore than Congress appropriated to it in FY2000, $18.2 million more than the Administration requested and $5.3millionmore than the House's recommendation. The Senate also recommended a total of $24.4 for loan guarantees andadministration of the Title XI Program which is $16.6 million above the amount Congress appropriated in FY 2000,$18.2million more than the Administration's request and $10 million more than what the House recommended. The conference agreement included a total of $219.6 million for the Maritime Administration, $41.5 million more thanCongress appropriated it in FY 2000, $34.5 million more than the Administration requested and $21.7 million thantheHouse recommended and $16.3 million more than the Senate recommendation. The conference agreement included$98.7million for the Maritime Security Program as proposed by the Administration and in both the House bill andtheSenate reported amendment. The agreement included $86.9 for the Maritime Administration Operations andTrainingaccount instead of the $72 million that Congress appropriated it in FY 2000. The approved total for FY2001 ishigherthan the $80.2 as proposed by the Administration and in the Senate-reported amendment and the $84.8 as proposedin theHouse bill. Within this amount, $47.2 was for the operation and maintenance of the U.S. Merchant MarineAcademy. Theconference agreement provided $34 million in appropriations for the Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program, $24millionabove the amount appropriated in FY 2000, $27.8 million more than the Administration requested, more thandouble the$14.4 the House had proposed, and $9.6 million more than the Senate reported amendment. Census Monitoring Board. The Administration requested $4 millionfor the Census Monitoring Board for FY2001. This body is an eight-member bipartisan oversight board charged withobserving and monitoring all aspects of the preparation and implementation of the 2000 decennial census. (39) Congressapproved $3.5 million for the Board, as part of the overall appropriation for the Census Bureau for FY2000. TheHouseAppropriations Committee recommended, and the full House approved, $3.5 million for the Board in FY2001,again aspart of the Bureau's total appropriation. The Senate bill contained no explicit reference to the Board. Congressapprovedthe recommendation of the House Committee. The Small Business Administration (SBA). The SBA is an independentfederal agency created by the Small Business Act of 1953. While the agency administers a number of programsintended toassist small firms, arguably its three most important functions are: to guarantee -- via the 7(a) general business loanprogram -- business loans made by banks and other financial institutions; to make long-term, low-interest loans tovictimsof hurricanes, earthquakes, and other physical disasters; and, to serve as an advocate for small business within thefederalgovernment. (40) For FY2001, the Administration requested a total appropriation of $1,057.8 million -- a figure which included $50.5million in an emergency supplemental appropriation to support the agency's disaster loan program. This comparedto a$847 million CJS appropriation for SBA for FY2000. More specifically, the FY2001 request included $419 millionforSalaries & Expenses (S&E), an increase of $96.3 million over the FY2000 appropriation. The House CJS bill followed the recommendation of the Appropriations Committee. An amendment, however, added $4.5million for the Women's Business Centers program. The result: a total FY2001 appropriation for SBA of $860.7million,including $304.1 million for S&E. For its part, the Senate Appropriation Committee recommended a totalFY2001appropriation for SBA of $887.5 million, including $143.5 for S&E. (41) Congress approved a total FY2001 appropriation for SBA of $$859.5 million, including an appropriation of $331.6 millionfor the SBA's S&E account. The conference agreement did not split funding for non-credit business assistanceprogramsinto a separate account, as proposed in the budget request and the Senate-reported amendment, but rather includedfundingfor such programs under this account. In addition, the conference agreement includes $37 million for programs related to the New Markets Venture CapitalProgram subject to the authorization of that program, including $7 million for BusinessLINC and $30 million fortechnicalassistance. (42) Legal Services Corporation (LSC). This agency is a private, non-profit,federally funded corporation that provides grants to local offices that, in turn, provide legal assistance to low-incomepeoplein civil (non-criminal) cases. The LSC has been controversial since its inception in the early 1970s, and has beenoperatingwithout authorizing legislation since 1980. There have been ongoing debates over the adequacy of funding for theagency,and the extent to which certain types of activities are appropriate for federally funded legal aid attorneys toundertake. Inannual appropriations laws, Congress traditionally has included legislative provisions restricting the activities ofLSC-funded grantees, such as prohibiting representation in certain types of cases or conducting any lobbyingactivities. For FY2001, the Administration requested $340 million for the LSC. The proposal would continue all restrictions onLSC-funded activities currently in effect. The Administration has requested $340 million every year since FY1997,in aneffort to partially restore recent cutbacks in funding. The Administration's FY2001 request for LSC is $35 millionhigherthan the $305 million FY2000 appropriation for the program. Historically, the Corporation's highest level offunding was$400 million in FY1994 and FY1995. P.L. 106-113 , the omnibus appropriations bill for FY2000, provided $305millionfor LSC for FY2000. For FY2001, the House Appropriations Committee recommended a total of $141 million for the LSC. This amount is $164million lower than the FY2000 appropriation and $199 million lower than the Administration's request. TheCommitteerecommendation of $141 million for LSC includes $134.6 million for basic field programs, $5.3 million formanagementand administration, and about $1.1 million for the inspector general. On June 26, 2000, the House approved $275 million for the LSC. This amount is $30 million lower than the FY2000appropriation and $65 million lower than the Administration's request. The $275 million for LSC includes $265millionfor basic field programs and required independent audits, $7.9 million for management and administration, and $2.1million for the inspector general. For FY2001, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a total of $300 million for the LSC. This amount is $5million lower than the FY2000 appropriation, $40 million lower than the Administration's request, and $25 millionhigherthan LSC amount in the House-passed bill. The Committee recommendation of $300 million for LSC includes $289million for basic field programs, $8.9 million for management and administration, and about $2.1 million for theinspectorgeneral. The Conference Committee report on H.R. 4690 included $330 million for LSC for FY2001. This is $25 million higher than the FY2000 LSC appropriation and $10 million lower than the Administration' s request. TheConference Committee report recommendation of $330 million for LSC includes $310 million for basic fieldprograms andindependent audits, $10.8 million for management and administration, $2.2 million for the inspector general, and$7million for client self-help and information technology. Both the House and the Senate approved the ConferenceCommittee recommendation for LSC. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). TheCommission enforces laws banning employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin,orhandicapped status. The EEOC's workload has increased dramatically since the agency first was created under TitleVII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964. As new civil rights laws have been enacted and employees' increased awareness oftheirrights has grown, the agency's budget and staffing resources have not been able to keep pace with the substantialincreasein its case load. The Congress increased the agency's budget for FY1999, giving it $279 million, an increase of $37millionover the FY1998 appropriation. The additional funds have helped to speed resolution of a large backlog of casesandexpand the use of alternative dispute resolution techniques. The agency's budget for FY2000 was increasedminimally to$282 million. For FY2001, the President requested $322 million, an increase of $40 million to continue the agency's effort to lowercharge inventories by increasing collaboration between investigatory and legal staffs, reduce excess backlogs inhearingsand appeals, provide training and technical assistance to employers on how to comply with equal pay requirements,andfacilitate compliance with EEO laws in the private and public sectors. The House Appropriations Committeerecommended $290.9 million, or almost $9 million more than the enacted FY2000 amount, but $31 million less thanthePresident's request. The House approved the Committee's recommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committeerecommended $294.8 million, or $12.8 more than the enacted FY2000 amount, $27.2 million less than thePresident'srequest, and $3.9 million more than the House amount. The Congress approved a compromise of $303.86 millionbetweenthe House and Senate recommendations for FY2001 funding of the EEOC. Commission on Civil Rights. The Commission collects and studiesinformation on discrimination or denials of equal protection of the laws. It received an appropriation of $8.9 millionforFY2000. The President's request for FY2001 calls for an increase to $11 million. The House AppropriationsCommittee recommended the same level as that appropriated for FY2000-$8.9 million, and $2 million below the President'srequest The House approved the Committee's recommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved the samelevelapproved by the House. The Congress approved $8.9 million. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC is anindependent agency charged with regulation of interstate and foreign communication by means of radio, television,wire,cable and satellite. For FY2001 Congress approved $230.0 million in total FCC funding, compared with $237.2millionboth requested by the Commission and recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee, $207.9 million aspassedby the House, and $210.0 million enacted for FY2000. Congress provided that of the FCC's total FY2001resources,$200.2 million was to be derived from offsetting fee collections (as provided in the House bill and recommendedby SenateAppropriations Committee), resulting in a net direct appropriation of $29.9 million (instead of $7.8 million includedin theHouse bill and $37.0 million recommended by the Senate committee). The FY2001 appropriations bill as enacted also included a new provision requiring the FCC to take certain actionsregarding lower power FM radio regulations. The provision, taken from the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Actof 2000( S. 3020 ), significantly scaled back the LPFM program. The measure, it was estimated, would have theeffect of reducing the number of LPFM licenses that the FCC could issue, from about 300-400 (under the FCC'scurrentrules) down to about 70 licenses nationwide. The provision also required the FCC to conduct further field tests ofLPFMsignals to determine whether these limitations could be dropped without causing harmful interference to incumbentradiobroadcasters. (43) Initially, the ClintonAdministration had expressed its opposition to this provision but stopped short ofsaying it was grounds for a presidential veto. Congress also approved, as part of its FY2001 CJS legislation, the "Launching Our Communities Access to LocalTelevision Act." This measure, as finally enacted, was a new version of legislation that, earlier in the106th Congess, passed the House as H.R. 3615 and the Senate as S. 2097 . (No conference was held to reconcilethe differences between those bills.) The intent of the legislation is to ensure that consumers can obtain localbroadcasttelevision channels via satellite or other technologies. (44) This legislation created a $1.25 billion loan guarantee program toassist recipients build systems that would ensure that consumers in all television markets, large and small, canreceive localtelevision signals. Recipients will be selected by a four-person Board composed of the Secretaries of Treasury,Agriculture,and Commerce, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, or their designees. The Board is to take into accountfactors suchas whether a project would provide service to "nonserved" or "underserved" areas and whether it also would providehigh-speed Internet access. The program will be administered by the Rural Utilities Service in the U.S. DepartmentofAgriculture. (45) Congress declined to include in its final FY2001 CJS legislation a provision, approved earlier by the Senate AppropriationsCommittee, to restrict takeovers of U.S. telecommunications companies by foreign government-backed entities.Specifically, the Senate-reported measure would have prohibited the FCC from expending funds to grant alicense or operating authority "to a corporation of which more than 25 percent of the stock is directly or indirectlyowned orvoted by a foreign government or its representative." (46) In October 2000, however, press reports said the provision hadbeen dropped as part of efforts by House and Senate conferees on the CJS bill to resolve their differences. Also absent from the final CJS bill passed by Congress was an amendment, contained in House-passed H.R. 4690 , limiting funding for the FCC's Office of Media Relations to not more than $640,000. (47) Affecting the FCC in FY2001 will be Senate Appropriations Committee report language concerning a broadcast code of conduct for the content of programming (which House-Senate conferees incorporated byreference). Inits report, the Senate committee had expressed concern about the "declining standards of broadcast television andtheimpact this decline is having on American's children." The committee instructed the FCC to report to Congress byJune 1,2001, on issues associated with "resurrecting a broadcast industry code of conduct for content of programming"to "protectagainst the further erosion of broadcasting standards." House-Senate conferees also had noted, without endorsing, Senate Appropriations Committee report language on publicbroadcast stations' access to spectrum. In that report (on its version of the CJS appropriations bill, H.R. 4690 ), the Appropriations Committee had directed the FCC to reconsider a portion of a Commission report andorder(released in April 2000) affecting public broadcasters' access to spectrum, which, the committee said, requiredpublicbroadcasters to engage in the competitive bidding process against commercial broadcast stations when they applyforbroadcast spectrum not specifically reserved for noncommercial educational use. House-Senate conferees notedthat theFCC was examining this issue, which also was pending as a case before a U.S. circuit court of appeals. Theconferees saidthat their agreement reflected "the belief that this issue can be resolved through the administrative or judicialprocess, so nolegislative action is required at this time." (48) In keeping with the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act, the FCC, as part of its FY2001 budgetrequest presented a strategic plan setting forth its overall mission and general and specific goals for a 5-year timeframe. (49) Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). The FMC regulates a large partof the waterborne foreign offshore commerce of the United States. The Administration requested $16.2 million fortheFMC for FY2001, $2 million more than Congress appropriated to it in FY2000. The House AppropriationsCommittee recommended $14.1 million, which was about the same level funded for FY2000 and $2.1 million less than thePresident'srequest. The House passed bill approved the Committee's request. The Senate Appropriations Committeerecommended$16.2 million for the FMC for FY2001, $2.2 million more than Congress appropriated to it in FY2000. TheSenate'srecommendation was equal to the Administrations request and $2.1 above the House's recommendation. Theconferenceagreement included $15.5 million for the salaries and expenses of the Federal Maritime commission which is lessthan the$16.2 that the Administration requested and Senate-reported amendment proposed but more than the $14.1 millionthat theHouse bill proposed. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC, an independentagency, is responsible for enforcing a number of federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Last fall, Congressapproved a total FY2000 appropriation for the agency of $125 million, a reduction of $8.4 million from the agency'sFY1999 figure. More specifically, the $125 million is comprised of $104 million in offsetting fee collections and$21million in prior-year collections; as a result, no net direct appropriations were required. For FY2001, the Administration requested an increase in its program level from $125 million to $164.6 million. TheFY2001 request included $7 million derived from estimated FY2000 carryover fee balances and an anticipated$157.6million from premerger filing fees under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act; therefore, as was the case last year, for FY2001theFTC requested no net direct appropriation. The House Appropriations Committee recommended a CJSappropriation of$134.8 million for the agency for FY2001. That request included $13.7 million derived from estimated FY2000carryoverfee balances and an anticipated $121.1 million for premerger filing fees. The House bill mirrored the committee'srecommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a program level for the agency for FY2001 of $159.5 million, to bederived exclusively from the collection of premerger filing fees. The conference agreement approved by Congress includes a total operating level of $147.2 million for the FTC forFY2001. The conference agreement assumed that, of the amount provided, $145.3 million will be derived from feescollected in FY2001 and $1.9 million will be derived from estimated unobligated fee collections available fromFY2000. These actions result in a final direct appropriation of $0. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC administers andenforces federal securities laws in order to protect investors and to maintain fair and orderly markets. In 1999,Congressapproved a total operating level of $367.8 million for the SEC for FY2000, an increase of $43.8 million overFY1999. Thefigure was comprised of $173.8 million in offsetting fee collections for FY2000 and $194 million in prior-year feecollections. The result: no direct appropriations were required for the agency for FY2000. For FY2001, the Administration requested a total operating level of $422.8 million for the SEC, an increase of $55 millionover FY2000. This figure would have been comprised of $282.8 million in offsetting fee collection for FY2001and $140million in prior-year collections. As was the case in 1999, no direct appropriations would be needed. The House Appropriations Committee recommended FY budget authority of $392.6 million, $30.2 million less than theAdministration's request. This figure would consist of $252.6 million in FY2001 offsetting fees and $140.0 millioninprior-year fees. No direct appropriations would be needed. The House approved the Appropriations Committee'srecommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $489.7 million for the SEC, or $66.9 million more than theAdministration's request. The additional funds were earmarked to raise salaries of certain SEC employees to levelscomparable to those of federal bank examiners. (See S. 2107 , reported by the Senate Banking CommitteeonJuly 14, 2000.) The total would have consisted of $194.6 million in fees collected during FY2001, and $295 millionfromfees collected during FY1999. No direct appropriations would be needed. The Conference and the final legislation approved $422.8 million for the SEC in FY 2001, the amount of the administration's request. Of this, $127.8 million will come from fees collected during FY2001, while the remaining$295million will come from FY1999 fees. No direct appropriations will be needed. The State Justice Institute. The Institute is a private, non-profitcorporation that makes grants and conducts other activities to further the development of judicial administration inStatecourts throughout the United States. Under the terms of its enabling legislation, SJI is authorized to present itsrequestdirectly to Congress, apart from the President's budget. For FY2001, the President requested the same fundingamount forSJI as appropriated for FY2000--$6.85 million. The President's budget request stated that appropriations for SJI inFY2001 were "intended to provide for continuation of Institute operations at a reduced level." (50) For its part, however, theInstitute requested $15.0 million for FY2001, more than double its FY2000 funding amount. (51) Subsequently, the House,as recommended by its Appropriations Committee, approved an FY2001 appropriation of $4.5 million. For its part,theSenate Appropriations Committee approved total funding resources of $14.85 million for the Institute--consistingof $6.85 million in direct appropriations and $8.0 million to the Institute in the form of a transfer from the Judiciarytitle in H.R. 4690 , Title III. (52) Against thisbackdrop, Congress ultimately approved the $6.85 million amount for theSJI as requested by the President. (53) Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). The amount approvedby Congress included $29.5 million for appropriations for FY2001, which was only slightly less than the President'srequest of $29.6 million, but $3.9 million more than the FY2000 level of $25.6 million. The Senate AppropriationsCommittee had recommended $29.6 million, and the House had approved $29.4 million. The increased level isexpected toadd new employees for negotiations, monitoring, and enforcement of trade agreements. U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). For FY2001, the Congressprovided $48.1 million, which was $1.0 million less than the level requested by the Administration ($49.1 million)and$3.6 million more than the FY2000 level ($44.5 million). The Senate Appropriations Committee had recommended$49.1million, and the House had approved $47.0 million. U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. The Presidentasked for $3 million for this body for FY2001. The Commission, established in Public Law 105-292, is anindependentagency charged with the annual and ongoing review and reporting of the facts and circumstances of violations ofreligiousfreedom. The appropriation for FY1999 was $3 million. No additional funds were appropriated for FY2000. TheHouseAppropriations Committee did not recommend additional funding for FY2001. The House took no further action. TheSenate version of the CJS bill makes no reference to this Commission. Congress provided no additional fundingfor FY2001. As noted earlier in this report, the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) passed by Congress in1993 ( P.L.103-62 ) requires that agencies develop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, and performance measures forallmajor programs. In its report on the FY1999 CJS appropriations bill ( S. 2260 ; S.Rept. 105-235 , pp. 5-6), theSenate Appropriations Committee made the following evaluation regarding agency compliance with GPRArequirements: The Committee has received a number of strategic plans from different organizations receiving appropriated funds within the bill. The Committee found weaknesses with the fiscal year1999performance plans of the Departments of Commerce and State and the Small Business Administration. TheCommittee wasespecially troubled by the lack of results-oriented, measurable goals in the performance plans. The Committee isalsoconcerned that the plans did not uniformly display clear linkages between performance goals and the programactivities inagencies' budget requests. Also, some plans did not sufficiently describe approaches to produce credibleperformanceinformation. The Committee considers the full and effective implementation of the Results Act to be a priority forallagencies under its jurisdiction. We recognize that implementation will be an interactive process, likely to involveseveralappropriations cycles. The Committee will consider agencies' progress in addressing weaknesses in strategic andannualperformance plans in tandem with their funding requests in light of their strategic goals. This effort will helpdeterminewhether any changes or realignments would facilitate a more accurate and informed presentation of budgetaryinformation.Agencies are encouraged to consult with the Committee as they consider such revisions prior to finalizing anyrequests. The plan prepared by the Department of Justice was given high marks by the committee. It stated that: "The plan wasreceived in a timely fashion and contained objective, measurable performance goals. The strength of theperformanceplans was its presentation of reasonably clear strategies for its intended performance goals." (54) In its report on its version of the CJS bill, the House Appropriations Committee in 1998 noted that "performance planshave generally been of mixed utility in considering the fiscal year budget request." The committee requested thateachagency consult with it early in the process of formulating the budget and performance plan for FY2000, to improvetheplan's usefulness to the committee when it examines the FY2000 request ( H.Rept. 105-636 , p. 8.). In its report ontheFY2000 CJS appropriations, the Senate Appropriations Committee stated that it had "...sent a memorandum to allorganizations subject to GPRA funded within this Act. It requested information about the agencies' experiencesresultingfrom the Act. The Committee reiterates that all responses be provided no latter than July 1, 1999." (55) Brief descriptions ofthe latest versions of the Strategic plans of the major agencies covered by CJS appropriations arecontained in thediscussions of the FY2000 budget requests of individual agencies included in this CRS report. In his budget forFY2001,President Clinton made the following observations regarding the GPRA process, stating that it: ...requires agencies to measure performance and results-not just funding levels-so that we can better track what taxpayers are getting for their dollars. Agencies are not only working todevelop anduse performance measures in program management but are also working to integrate this information into budgetandresource allocations, so that we can better determine the cost of achieving goals. The task is not simple. Theagencies mustdefine the specific goals, determining the proper level of resources, assess which programs are working, and fixthose thatare not. Progress will depend on GPRA becoming more than a paper exercise. Over the next year, OMB will workwith allagencies to better integrate planning and budgeting and systematically associate costs withprograms. A review of the final reports of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill( H. Rept. 106-680 and S. Rept. 106-404 )finds that neither Committee made any general comments regarding agencycompliance with GPRA requirements. The table below shows funding trends for the major agencies included in CJS appropriations over the periodFY1997-FY2001. As seen in the table below, funding increased, in current dollars, for the Department of Justice by$4,022 million ( or 27.5%); for the Department of Commerce by $5,009 million ( or 37.6%); (56) for the Judiciary by $906million (or 29.7%); and for the Department of State by $1,930 million (or 49%). (57) Table 2. Funding Trends for Departments of Commerce, Justice,and State, and theJudiciary (in millions of current dollars) Sources : Funding totals provided by Budget Offices of CJS and Judiciary agencies, and U.S.House of Representatives. Committee on Appropriations. President Clinton's FY2001 budget requested about $39.6 billion for the agencies covered by the CJSappropriationsbill, about the same level as that appropriated for FY2000. On June 14, 2000, the House AppropriationsCommitteeapproved its version of the CJS appropriations bill ( H.R. 4690 , H.Rept. 106-680 ). It recommended fundingtotaling $37.4 billion-$2.2 billion below the President's request and about $2.2 billion below the FY2000appropriation. The House approved the bill on June 26 by a vote of 214-195, with 1 voting present. (58) It approved the same overallfunding total recommended by the Appropriations Committee. On July 18, 2000, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its version of the bill. It approved total funding of $36.7billion which is about $700 million below the House version and about $2.9 billion below both the President'srequest andthe actual FY2000 appropriation ( S.Rept. 106-404 ). ( The Senate, however, did not vote on its version of the bill. Instead, it approved the version approved by the Conference Committee which was agreed to on October 26, 2000.) On October 27, 2000, Congress approved total funding of $40.0 billion which was about $400 million abovebothPresident's request and the total enacted for FY2000. H.R. 4690 was included in Conference Reportapproved by Congress in H.R. 4942 ( H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Governmentof theDistrict of Columbia and Other Activities Changeable in Whole or in Part Against Revenues of Said District for theFiscalYear Ending September 30, 2001, and for Other Purposes ). Subsequently, the District of Columbiaappropriationsportion of the measure was separated from the bill and approved by Congress ( H.R. 5663 ) on November 15. The President signed this measure into law on November 22. On December 21, President Clinton signed theremainingportion of H.R. 4942 contained in H.R. 5548 , the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill, into law onDecember 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-553 ). On December 15, 2000, Congress approved additional funding of about $103millionfor CJS appropriations in the miscellaneous funding section of H.R. 4577 ( H.Rept. 106-1033 ). This bill wassigned into law by the President on December 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-554 ). Agency totals affected by this additionalfundinghave been changed in this report to reflect this action. Continuing funding resolution. With the expiration of Fiscal Year 2000 appropriations on September 30,2000, Congressenacted a continuing funding resolution ( H.J.Res. 109 ; P.L. 106-225 ) which extended FY2000 appropriationsthrough midnight October 6, 2000. This was followed by a second resolution ( H.J.Res. 110 ) which extendedFY2000 funding through October 14, 2000. A third resolution was approved by Congress ( H.J.Res. 111 ), extending funding through October 20, 2000. A fourth resolution ( H.J. Res. 114) was approved to extend fundingthroughWednesday, Oct. 25, 2000. After October 25, Congress enacted eight one day continuing resolutions. OnNovember 3,Congress approved H.J.Res. 84 which extended FY2000 funding through November 14, the date that bothHouses of Congress were scheduled to return from the election recess. This was followed by approval onNovember 14 ofa longer term extension of funding(H.J. Res. 125) through December 5, 2000. After returning on December 4,Congressapproved a number of short term extensions to provide funding until the President signed the FY2001 CJS bill intolaw onDecember 21, 12000. Government-wide rescissions. It is important to note that the FY2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act( H.R. 4577 ; P.L. 106-554 ) contains a provision which mandates a 0.22 percent government-wide rescissionofdiscretionary budget authority for FY2001 for all government agencies (except for certain defense activities),includingthose covered by the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill. For further information, see page 3 of this report. Table 3 shows the FY2000 appropriations totals and the President's request for the major agencies covered by the FY2001CJS Appropriations bill. Similar information for other agencies covered by the bill, but not shown in this table, areincluded in the Appendix of this report. Table 3. Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, and the JudiciaryAppropriations (in millions of dollars) ** H.R. 4690 is included in Conference Report approved by Congress on October 27, 2000 ( H.R. 4942 ; H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Government of the District of Columbia and OtherActivitiesChangeable in Whole or in Part Against Revenues of Said District for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2001,and forOther Purposes ). Subsequently, the District of Columbia appropriations portion of the measure wasseparated from thebill and approved by Congress ( H.R. 5663 ) on November 15. The President signed this measure into law onNovember 22. On December 21, the President signed the remaining portion of H.R. 4942 contained in H.R. 5548 , the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill, into law on December 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-553 ). Sources : U.S. House Committee on Appropriations; U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations. H.R. 12 (Delay) Limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts with respect to prison release orders. Introduced January 6, 1999;referred toCommittee on Judiciary. H.R. 357 (Conyers) Combats violence against women by providing for law enforcement and prosecution grants, for education andtraininggrants to promote appropriate responses to victims of violence, for a National Domestic Violence Hotline, forcounselingservices and for transitional compensation for victims of violence. Introduced January 19, 1999; referred toCommittee onJudiciary. H.R. 1501 (McCollum) Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1999. Contains several drug-related provisions, including but not limited to,increasedmandatory minimum penalties for using a firearm to commit a violent crime or drug trafficking offense, usingminors todistribute drugs, selling drugs to minors, and engaging in drug trafficking near a school or other protected location. Includes reauthorization language for the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, amended,throughFY2003; provides for the establishment of Juvenile Delinquency Block Grant Program to eligible states for variouspurposes including drug use reduction; and renews the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants, amended, to providegrantsfor various purposes including juvenile drug courts. Introduced April 21, 1999; referred to Committee on Judiciary. Passed House, amended, June 17. (Related bills: H.R. 988 , H.R. 2987 .) H.R. 3918 (Rogers) Immigration Reorganization and Improvement Act of 1999. This bill is identical to H.R. 2528 , asintroduced. It would dismantle INS and create two new bureaus at the Department of Justice, one for Immigration services, theotherfor enforcement. Introduced on March 14, 2000. Approved by the House Judiciary Committee's Immigration andClaimsSubcommittee on March 22, 2000. S. 5 (DeWine) Drug Free Century Act. Includes provisions to reduce the transportation and distribution of illegal drugs andstrengthendomestic demand reduction. Provides for international reduction of drugs by denying safe havens to internationalcriminals,promotion of global cooperation to fight international crime, money laundering deterrence, increased penalties byraisingmandatory minimum sentencing for powder cocaine offenses and drug offenses committed in the presence of achild.Authorizes additional funding for drug eradication and interdiction operations and confirms funding goals set bytheWestern Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act ( P.L. 105-277 , Title VIII). Contains provisions to protect children andteachersfrom drug-related school violence. Provides for drug education, prevention and treatment programs. IntroducedJanuary19, 1999; referred to Committee on Judiciary. S. 9 (Daschle) Safe Schools, Safe Streets, and Secure Borders Act. Addresses violent crime in schools, reforms the juvenilejusticesystem, combats gang violence, penalizes the sale and use of illegal drugs, enhances the rights of crime victims, andprovides assistance to law enforcement officers in their battle against street crime, international crime, and terrorism. Authorizes funding to hire or deploy 25,000 additional police officers, and for other crime and drug programs byextendingthe Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund through FY2002. Permits federal prosecution of juveniles only when theAttorneyGeneral certifies that the state cannot or will not exercise jurisdiction, or when the juvenile is alleged to havecommitted aviolent, drug, or firearm offense. Contains provisions allowing prosecutors sole, nonreviewable authority toprosecute asadults 16- and 17-year-olds who are accused of committing the most serious violent and drug offenses. Enumeratesprevention programs to reduce juvenile crime and includes grants to youth organizations and 'Say No to Drugs'Community Centers. Increases penalties for selling drugs to children, for drug trafficking in or near schools, andor use of"club drugs." Encourages pharmacotherapy research to develop medications for the treatment of drug addiction, andfundsdrug courts, which subject eligible drug offenders to programs of intensive supervision. Contains provisions to fightdrugmoney laundering. Introduced January 19, 1999; referred to Committee on Judiciary. S. 254 (Hatch) Violent and Repeat Juvenile Offender Accountability and Rehabilitation Act. Contains various drug-relatedprovisions:increases the penalties for using minors to distribute controlled substances. Authorizes $1 billion for selected crimeanddrug programs by extending the Violence Crime Reduction Trust Fund through FY2001. Introduced January 20,1999;placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders; passed Senate with amendments, May 20,1999. H.R. 1553 (Calvert) A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001 for the National Weather Service,AtmosphericResearch, and National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service activities of the National OceanicandAtmospheric Administration, and for other purposes. Introduced April 26, 1999; referred to House Committee onScience. Reported by Committee, May 18, 1999 ( H.Rept. 106-146 ). Passed House by voice vote, May 19, 1999. H.R. 1744 (Morella) A bill to authorize appropriations for the National Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal years 2000and 2001,and for other purposes. Introduced May 10, 1999; referred to the House Committee on Science. Mark-up sessionheld, May26, 1999. H.R. 1907 (Coble) Patent and Trademark Office Efficiency Act. Establishes the PTO as an independent agency under the policydirection ofthe Secretary of Commerce. Provides that all revenues collected by PTO will be for the exclusive use of the PTO. Introduced May 24, 1999; referred to House Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported May 26, 1999. H.R. 2452 (Royce) A bill to dismantle the Department of Commerce. Introduced on July 1, 1999. Referred to the Committees onCommerce,Transportation and Infrastructure, Banking and Financial Services, International Relations, Armed Services, WaysandMeans, Government Reform, the Judiciary, Science, and Resources. H.R. 833 (Gekas) A bill to amend title 11 of the United States Code. Among many provisions of this bankruptcy reform bill,Section 128 (Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 1999) creates 18 new temporary bankruptcy judgeships and extends temporarybankruptcyjudgeships in five districts. Referred to House Committee on Judiciary and in addition to Committee on BankingandFinancial Services, February 24, 1999; referred to Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, March11,1999. Subcommittee hearings held March 16, 17 and 19, 1999; subcommittee markup, March 25, 1999. Committeeconsideration and markup, April 21, 22, 27 and 28, 1999. Reported to House (Amended), April 29, 1999. Committee onBanking and Financial Services discharged, April 29, 1999. Passed House by roll call vote, 313-108, May 5, 1999. Received in Senate, May 6, 1999; read twice and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, May 12,1999. Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent, all after Enacting Clause is struck with Senatesubstitutinglanguage of S. 625 as amended, and by 83-14 roll call vote measure is passed in lieu of S. 625 with an amendment, with Senate, insisting on its amendment, requesting a conference, February 2, 2000. H.R. 1752 (Coble) Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1999. Bill would effect various changes in federal court jurisdiction,authority ofjudicial officers, judicial financial administration, and judicial personnel administration. Referred to HouseCommittee onJudiciary, May 11, 1999; referred to Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property, May 25, 1999. Subcommitteehearings held June 16, 1999; subcommittee markup, July 15, 1999. Committee consideration and markup, July 27,1999. Reported to House (Amended) and placed on Union Calendar, September 9, 1999. Considered in House undersuspensionof the rules, passed as amended by voice vote, May 22, 2000. Received in the Senate and referred to the Committeeon theJudiciary, May 23, 2000. See related bill, S. 2915 , Public Law 106-518, below. S. 159 (Moynihan) A bill to amend chapter 121 of title 28, United States Code, to increase fees paid to federal jurors, and for otherpurposes. Bill would increase fee federal jurors are paid for the first thirty days of a trial from $40 per day to $45 per day. Referredto Senate Committee on Judiciary, January 19, 1999; referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts, March24, 1999. S. 253 (Murkowski) Federal Ninth Circuit Reorganization Act of 1999. Bill organizes U.S. Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit intothreeregional divisions, as recommended by the Commission on Structural Alternatives for Federal Courts of Appeals. Referredto Senate Committee on Judiciary, January 19, 1999; referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts, March 24,1999; Subcommittee hearings held July 16, 1999. S. 625 (Grassley) Companion bill to H.R. 833 , above, including among its provisions Section 1126, Bankruptcy JudgeshipActof 1999, which creates new temporary bankruptcy judgeships and extends temporary bankruptcy judgeships in fivedistricts. Referred to Senate Committee on the Judiciary, March 16, 1999. Committee consideration and markup,April 15and 22, 1999. Reported to Senate and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders, May 11, 1999. Laidbefore Senate and cloture motion presented, September 16, 1999. Cloture not invoked in Senate by roll call vote,53-45,September 21, 1999. Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent, November 5, 1999. Considered by Senate,November 5, 8, 9, 10, 16 and 17, 1999. Cloture motion presented in Senate, November 19, 1999. Cloture motionwithdrawn by unanimous consent in Senate, January 24, 2000. Considered by Senate, January 26 and 31, February1 and2, 2000. By 83-14 roll call vote, incorporated by Senate in H.R. 833 as an amendment, which in turn ispassedby Senate in lieu of S. 625 , February 2, 2000. S. 1564 (Cochran) Federal Courts Budget Protection Act. Bill would allow the Judiciary to submit its annual budget, includingbuildings,directly to Congress, without going through the Office of Management and Budget. Referred jointly to SenateCommitteeson Budget and Governmental Affairs, August 5, 1999. Reported by Committee on Governmental Affairs with anamendment in nature of a substitute, with written report No. 106-379, August 25, 2000. Discharged from SenateCommittee on the Budget (pursuant to order of August 4, 1977) and placed on Senate Legislative Calendar underGeneralOrders, September 27, 2000. S. 2915 (Grassley); P. L. 106-518 Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2000. To improve operation and administration of federal courts, bill,among otherthings, expands civil and criminal contempt authority of magistrate judges, establishes magistrate judge positionsin districtcourts of Guam and Northern Mariana Islands, allows senior judges to participate in circuit judicial councils,increasescertain bankruptcy fees, and authorizes court clerks, under specified conditions, to determine whether persons arequalified,unqualified, exempt or excused from jury service. Unlike related bill, H.R. 1752 , above, it does not containprovision to allow cameras in courtrooms with the consent of all parties. Referred to Senate Committee onJudiciary, July25, 2000. Ordered to be reported favorably, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, September 28, 2000. Asamended, agreed to by Senate by Unanimous Consent, October 19, 2000. Received in House, October 23, 2000. PassedHouse without objection, October 25, 2000. House amendments to Senate bill agreed to by Senate by UnanimousConsent,October 27, 2000. Signed by President, becoming Public Law 106-518, November 13, 2000. S. 886 (Helms) A bill to authorize appropriations for the Department of State for fiscal years 2000 and 2001; to provide forenhancedsecurity at U.S. diplomatic facilities; to provide for certain arms control, nonproliferation, and other national securitymeasures; to provide for the reform of the United Nations; and for other purposes. Introduced April 21, 1999;originalmeasure ordered reported by Senate Foreign Relations Committee April 27, 1999. ( S.Rept. 106-43 ). H.R. 2415 (C. Smith) The American Security Act of 1999. Provides authorization for State Department and related agencies and forincreasesoverseas security. Introduced July 1, 1999. Passed by voice vote on July 21, 1999. H.R. 1211 (Smith, C.) A bill to authorize appropriations for the Department of State and related agencies for fiscal year 2000, and forotherpurposes. Introduced March 22, 1999; subcommittee marked-up and forwarded to full committee on March 23;Committee International Relations reported it out April 29, 1999. ( H.Rept. 106-122 ). CRS Issue Briefs CRS Issue Brief IB90078. Crime Control: The Federal Response , by David Teasley. CRS Issue Brief IB95025. Drug Supply Control: Current Legislation , by David Teasley. CRS Issue Brief IB92061. Prisons: Policy Options for Congress , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Issue Brief IB98049. Police and Law Enforcement: Selected Issues , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Issue Brief IB10014. Gun Control, by William Krouse. CRS Reports CRS Report 97-265. Crime Control Assistance through the Byrne Programs , by Garrine Laney. CRS Report 98-622. Federal Crime Control Assistance to State and Local Governments: Department of Justice , bySuzanne Cavanagh and David Teasley CRS Report 98-95. Juvenile Justice Act Reauthorization: The Current Debate , by Suzanne Cavanagh and David Teasley. CRS Report 98-498. Federal Drug Control Budget: An Overview , by David Teasley. CRS Report 97-248. Prison Grant Programs , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20183. Immigration and Naturalization Service's FY2000 Budget , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20279. Immigration and Naturalization Service Reorganization and Related Legislative Proposals , by[author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30257. Proposals to Restructure the Immigration and Naturalization Service , by William Krouse. CRS Report RS20627, Immigration: Integrated Entry and Exit Data System, by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20618, Immigration and Naturalization Service's FY2001 Budget, by William Krouse CRS Issue Briefs CRS Issue Brief IB95100. Economic Development Administration: Overview and Issues , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Issue Brief IB95051. The National Information Infrastructure: The Federal Role , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Issue Brief IB10018. Research and Development Funding: Fiscal Year 2000 , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Reports CRS Report 95-36 . The Advanced Technology Program, by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30284. Census 2000: The Sampling Debate, by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30182. Census 2000: Sampling as an Appropriations Issue in the 105th and 106th Congresses, by JenniferD. Williams. CRS Report 96-537. Department of Commerce Science and Technology Programs: Impacts of Dismantling Proposals , by[author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 97-126. Federal R&D Funding Trends In Five Agencies: NSF, NASA, NIST, DOE (Civilian) and NOAA , by[author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 97-104 . Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 95-30 . The National Institute of Standards and Technology: An Overview, by [author name scrubbed] and WendyH. Schacht. CRS Report 95-834. Proposals to Eliminate the U.S. Department of Commerce: An Issue Overview , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30139(pdf) . The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): Budget Activities and Issues forthe 106th Congress , by Wayne Morrissey. CRS Reports CRS Report 98-510(pdf) . Judicial Nominations by President Clinton During the 103rd- 106th Congresses , by Denis StevenRutkus. CRS Report RS20278. Judicial Salaries: Current Situation , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20554. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals: Should It Be Split into Two Circuits? , by [author name scrubbed]. Other Information U.S. Administrative Office of the United States Courts. "106th Congress Ends; A COLA for Judges, New Judgeships andJudiciary Funding in Final Bills," The Third Branch , vol. 32, December 2000, pp.1,2&9; also at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/dec00ttb/dec00.html ----- . "The [Chief Justice's] 1999 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary," The Third Branch , vol. 32, January 2000,pp. 1-8; also at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/jan00ttb/jan2000.html -----. [The Chief Justice's] 2000 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary," The Third Branch, vol. 33, January 2001, pp.1-8; also at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/jan01ttb/jan01.html U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State,the Judiciary, and Related Agencies, Department of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and RelatedAgencies Appropriations for 2001 , hearings, part 3, 106th Cong., 2nd sess.(Washington: GPO, 2000), pp. 1505-1801 (Justification ofJudiciary budget estimate). CRS Reports CRS Report RL30591 . State Department and Related Agencies FY2001 Appropriations , by Susan Epstein. CRS Report RL30197(pdf) . State Department and Related Agencies FY2000 Appropriations , by Susan Epstein. CRS Report 98-624. State Department and Related Agencies FY1999 Appropriations , by Susan Epstein. CRS Report 98-771. Embassy Security: Background, Funding, and FY2000 Budget Request , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30662 . Embassy Security: Background, Funding, and the FY2001 Budget , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Reports CRS Report 95-178. Legal Services Corporation: Basic Facts and Current Status , by [author name scrubbed] and CarmenSolomon-Fears. CRS Report 96-649 . Small Business Administration: Overview and Issues , by [author name scrubbed]. House Committee on Appropriations http://www.house.gov/appropriations Senate Committee on Appropriations http://www.senate.gov/~appropriations/ CRS Appropriations Products Guide http://www.loc.gov/crs/products/apppage.html#la Congressional Budget Office http://www.cbo.gov General Accounting Office http://www.gao.gov Office of Management & Budget http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/ Table 1A. Appropriations Funding for Departments ofCommerce, Justice, and State,the Judiciary, and Related Agencies, FY2000 and FY2001 (in millions of dollars)* *Figures are for direct appropriations only; in some cases, agencies supplement these amount with offsetting feecollections, including collections carried over from previous years. These agencies include: Immigration andNaturalization Service, Patent and Trademark Office, Small Business Administration, Federal CommunicationsCommission, Federal Trade Commission, and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Information on such feesarecontained in the background and issues sections of this report. ** H.R. 4690 is included in Conference Report approved by Congress on October 27, 2000 ( H.R. 4942 ; H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Government of the District of Columbia and OtherActivitiesChangeable in Whole or in Part Against Revenues of Said District for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2001,and forOther Purposes ). Subsequently, the District of Columbia appropriations portion of the measure wasseparated from thebill and approved by Congress ( H.R. 5663 ) on November 15. The President signed this measure into law onNovember 22. On December 21, the President signed the remaining portion of HR. 4942 contained in H.R. 5548 , the FY2001 CJS appropriations bill, into law on December 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-553 ). On December 15, 2000,Congress approved additional funding of about $103 million for CJS appropriations in the miscellaneous fundingsectionof H.R. 4577 ( H.Rept. 106-1033 ). This bill was signed into law by the President on December 21, 2000 ( P.L.106-554 ). Agency totals affected by this additional funding have been changed in this table to reflect this action. Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. 1 Funds from the Violent Crime Reduction Programs (VCRTF) are provided as a subtotal inparentheses. These areincluded in the overall total for each federal agency. 2 The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees. The fees collected, but not obligated during thecurrent year, are available for obligation in the following fiscal year. 3 As of October 1, 1999 both USIA and ACDA were consolidated into the Department of State. International Broadcastingwill remain an independent agency. 4 In addition to appropriations, State has authority to spend certain collected fees from machine readable visas, expeditedexport fees, etc. For FY2000 this amount equals $404.7 million; the estimated amount for such fees for FY2000 in thePresident's FY2001 request is $76.2 million. 5 Appropriation of $3.5 million for FY2000 is contained in the appropriation for the Bureau of the Census. Theappropriation of $3.5 million for FY2001 is contained in the appropriation total for the Bureau of the Census in thefinalbill approved by Congress. 6 For FY2000, Congress approved $210 million in overall funding resources for the FCC, consisting of a directappropriation of $24.2 million and $185.8 million in offsetting regulatory fee collections. The President requested$237.2 million in overall FY2001 funding resources, consisting of a direct appropriation of $37.0 million and $200.1million inoffsetting fee collections. The House Appropriations Committee recommended $207.9 million in overall FY2001funding,consisting of a direct appropriation of $7.8 million and $200.1 million in offsetting fee collections. The SenateAppropriations Committee recommended $237.2 million in overall FY2001 funding, consisting of a directappropriationof $37.0 million and $200.1 million in offsetting fee collections. Ultimately, Congress approved $230.0 millionin overallFY2001 funding, consisting of a direct appropriation of $29.9 million and $200.1 million in offsetting feecollections. 7 The FTC is fully funded by the collection of premerger filing fees. 8 The SEC is fully funded by transaction fees and securities registration fees. 9 Under the terms of its enabling legislation, the State Justice Institute is authorized to present its budget request directly toCongress. For FY2001, the Institute requested $15.0 million--as distinguished from the President's request, whichcalledfor $6.9 million. 10 Other includes agencies receiving appropriations of less than $1.8 million in FY1999 and FY2000. These agenciesinclude Commission for the Preservation of American Heritage Abroad; Commission on Security and CooperationinEurope; Commission on Electronic Commerce; the Marine Mammal Commission, the Commission on Ocean Policy,andthe Congressional/Executive Commission on China. Sources: U. S. House of Representatives. Committee on Appropriation; U.S. Senate. Committee on Appropriations; Congressional Record, vol. 146, October 27,2000, pp. H11272-11281; and CongressionalRecord, vol. 146, December15, 2000, pp. H12466-12482. 

Summary: This report tracks action by the 106th Congress on FY2001 appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, andState, the Judiciary, and other related agencies (often referred to as CJS appropriations). P.L. 106-113 appropriated $39.6 billion for these agencies for FY2000. President Clinton's FY2001 budget requested $39.6billion forthese agencies. On June 14, 2000, the House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the CJSappropriations bill( H.R. 4690 ) It recommended funding totaling $37.4 billion-$2.2 billion below the President's request and$2.2 billion below the FY2000 appropriation. The House-passed bill on June 26, approved the same overall fundingtotalrecommended by the Committee. On July 18, 2000, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved total fundingof $36.7billion-about $700 million below the House version and $2.9 billion below both the President's request and theactualFY2000 appropriation. On October 27, 2000, Congress approved total funding of $40.0 billion-about $400 millionaboveboth President's request and the total enacted for FY2000 ( H.R. 5548 ). The measure was signed into law bythe President on December 21, 2000 ( P.L. 106-553 ). The major CJS appropriations issues and concerns that received attention in both the Senate and the House include thefollowing. Department of Justice: building more prisons; extending the 1994 Crime Act fundingauthorization beyondSeptember 30, 2000; increasing funding for drug-related efforts among the Department of Justice (DOJ) agencies;increasing funding for community law enforcement; combating cybercrime; changing the focus and levels ofappropriationsfor DOJ's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; providing funding for programs that would reducegunand youth violence; funding of DOJ's legal action against the tobacco industry; reducing pending caseloads inimmigration-related claims, particularly green card and naturalization applications; meeting the statutory mandatethat theBorder Patrol be increased by 1,000 agents in FY2001, and accounting for the shortfall in hiring in FY1999;determiningthe level of detention capacity necessary to comply with the statutory mandate that certain criminal aliens bedetained untildeported; and restructuring INS internally as proposed by the Administration or dismantling or restructuring theagency bylegislation. Department of Commerce: the progress made in streamlining and downsizing Departmentprograms;implementation of the decennial census including followup operations; federal financial support of industrialtechnologydevelopment programs; monitoring foreign compliance with trade agreements and U.S. trade laws; andimplementing newWhite House environmental initiatives at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Departmentof State: improving embassy security through a doubling of funding as well as a request for an advance appropriationto cover theperiod FY2002 to FY2005. The Judiciary : whether the salaries of judges and justices should receivea cost-of-livingincrease and whether a statutory ban on judges receiving honoraria should be lifted. Other Related Agencies: adequacy offunding levels for the Legal Services Corporation, Small Business Administration, and the Equal EmploymentOpportunity Commission. Key Policy Staff Division abbreviations: A = American Law; G&F = Government and Finance; RSI = Resources; Science, and IndustryDivision, DSP = Domestic Social Policy Division; FTD = Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade.