Division abbreviations: ALD = American Law Division; G&F = Government and Finance Division; RSI = Resources, Science, and Industry Division, DSP =Domestic Social Policy Division; FDT = Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. The CJS conferees met on November 8, 2001 and agreed to a total budget authority (after scorekeepingadjustments) of $39.3 billion. The conference report wasfiled on November 9th. In the absence of signed appropriations, the following continuing resolutionshave kept the government running into the new fiscal year: H.J.Res. 65 ( P.L. 107-44 ) which expired October 16th, H.J.Res. 68 ( P.L. 107-48 ) which expiredOctober 23rd, H.J.Res. 69 ( P.L. 107-53 ) which expired October31st, H.J.Res. 70 ( P.L. 107-58 ) which expired November 16th, and H.J.Res. 74 ( P.L.107-70 ) which expired December 7, 2001. The House adopted the conferencereport on November 14th and the Senate adopted it the following day. The President signed the CJSappropriation into law ( P.L. 107-77 ) on November 28th, 2001with a total budget authority of $41.6 billion . This report tracks legislative action by the first session of the 107th Congress on FY2002 appropriations for theDepartments of Commerce, Justice, and State, theJudiciary, and other related agencies (often referred to as CJS appropriations). P.L. 106-553 ( H.R. 5548 ascontained in the conference report on H.R. 4942 ) appropriated $40 billion ($38.1 billion after adjustments) for these agencies for FY2001. TheAdministration's request for FY2002totaled $40.8 billion. The House CJS Subcommittee and full House Appropriations Committee approved a total of$41.46 billion in funding for these agencies inFY2002. The Senate Appropriations Committee and full Senate approved $41.5 billion, $700 million higher thanthe administration's request and slightly higherthan the House version. After the September 11th terrorist attacks, Congress reconsidered fundingallocations in conference to bolster counter-terrorism activitieswithin each agency's title in the bill. Congress enacted its CJS appropriation totaling $41.6 billion for FY2002. Total funding after adjustments was $39.3billion-$38.7 billion in discretionary funding and $627.5 million in mandatory funding. On October 27, 2000, Congress approved total FY2001 CJS funding of $40.0 billion which was about $400 million above both President Clinton's request and thetotal enacted for FY2000. H.R. 4690 was included in the Conference Report approved by Congress in H.R. 4942 ( H.Rept. 106-1005 : Making Appropriations for the Government of the District of Columbia and Other Activities Changeable in Wholeor in Part Against Revenues of Said District forthe Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2001, and for Other Purposes ). Subsequently, the District of Columbiaappropriations 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. OnDecember 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 ). On December 15, 2000, Congress approved additional funding ofabout $103 million for CJS appropriations inthe miscellaneous funding section of H.R. 4577 ( H.Rept. 106-1033 ). This bill was signed into law by thePresident on December 21, 2000 ( P.L.106-554 ). Agency totals affected by this additional funding have been adjusted in this report to reflect this action. The table below shows funding trends for the major agencies included in CJS appropriations over the period FY1997-FY2001. As seen in the table below,funding increased, in current dollars, for the Department of Justice by $650 million (28.3%); for the Departmentof Commerce by $1,360 million (35.8%); for theJudiciary by $1,003 million (30.7%); and for the Department of State by $2,636 million (66%). (1) Every agency except the Department of Commercehas seen acontinual increase in funds between FY1997 and FY2001. The Department of Commerce budget generallyincreased over these years, with a greater than $3.5billion increase in FY2000, largely due to funding the cost of the 2000 decennial census. The FY2001 level iscomparable to its pre-census level. Of the CJS andrelated agencies, the Department of Justice received the greatest nominal increase of $4.65 billion from FY1997 toFY2001. The Department of State fundingtrend since FY1997 shows the greatest percent increase of 66%. Much of the State Department increase wasattributable to increases in embassy security fundingand the consolidation of the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency(ACDA) into the Department of State. Table 1. Funding Trends for Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, and the Judiciary (inmillions 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 Bush's FY2002 budget request totaled $37.9 billion for discretionary spending for Commerce, Justice, State, Judiciary, and Related Agencies. It is $373million above the FY2001 appropriation which totaled $37.6 billion (after adjustments). (2) Government-wide rescissions of discretionary budget authority (exceptfor certain defense activities) were passed by the 106th Congress in H.R. 4577 ( P.L. 106-554 ). The FY2002 total CJS budget authority requested was$40.8 billion; the House total budget authority was $41.5 billion; the Senate budget authority was $41.5 billion; andthe enacted total CJS budget authority forFY2002 is set at $41.6 billion. Table 2. Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, and the Judiciary Appropriations (in millions ofdollars) Sources : U.S. House Committee on Appropriations. This table does not include funds for relatedagencies in the CJS legislation. In addition to heightened interest in counter-terrorism and security activities since the September 11th attacks, some other contentious issues and proposals thatsurfaced in the House and Senate debate over CJS appropriations for FY2002 included: Restructuring the Immigration and Naturalization Service; reducing pending immigration and naturalization caseloads; and increasing borderenforcement. Funding for community policing initiatives and crime programs under the Office of Justice Programs. Combating the drug war. Reducing gun crimes through enforcement of existing laws and other initiatives. Other issues or concerns receiving attention included the following: Department of Justice: Combating terrorism. Reducing violence against women. Providing legal assistance for victims of crime. Protecting against worker exploitation. Addressing civil rights violations, including racial profiling and voting rights. Combating cybercrime. Combating drug abuse. Department of Commerce: Funding needs of the Bureau of the Census for processing, tabulating, and disseminating detailed Census 2000 results; evaluating the qualityand coverage of the census; completing the orderly closeout of census activities; and beginning to plan for the 2010census. The extent to which federal funds should be used to support industrial technology development programs at the National Institute ofStandards and Technology (NIST), particularly the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). The extent to which foreign countries comply with trade agreements and U.S. trade laws. The extent to which federal funds should support local economic development activities, specifically in the areas of public works andeconomic adjustment assistance. Funding needs of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to procure the next generation of weather satellites,mainly for the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS); and to ensure thecontinuity of environmental satelliteobservations. The extent to which funding is needed for Technology Opportunities Program (TOP) Grants in FY2002. Congressional policymakers agreedwith President Bush's request to reduce the NTIA's Technology Opportunities Program (TOP) grants, from $45.5million in FY2001 to $15.5 million for thecurrent fiscal year. Department of State: Overseas embassy security. Creation of a deputy secretary for management at State. More than double the funding for technology upgrades worldwide. A major push toward increased hiring of foreign, civil service and security experts. The Judiciary: Whether to substantially increase the hourly rate of pay to court-appointed "panel attorneys" representing defendants in federal criminalcases. Whether, as the Judiciary contended, federal judges and justices should receive a cost-of-living salary increase (as they had the previous twofiscal years); Whether, or to what extent, to provide funding for the first major renovation of the Supreme Court building since its opening in 1935. Other Agencies: Adequacy of funding for the Legal Services Corporation. Adequacy of funding for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Adequacy of funding for programs of the Small Business Administration (SBA). 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 thatagencies develop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, and performance measures for all major programs.The GPRA requirements apply to nearly allexecutive branch agencies, including independent regulatory commissions, but not the judicial branch. Briefdescriptions of the latest versions of the strategicplans of the major agencies covered by CJS appropriations are contained in the discussions of theFY2002 budget requests of individual agencies included in thisreport. On April 9, 2001, President Bush submitted the FY2002 budget request for appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary andrelated agencies. The House and Senate CJS Appropriations Subcommittees held hearings throughout April, May,and June. The House Subcommittee markedup and passed its CJS appropriation on June 27, 2001. The House Appropriations Committee reported out the CJSappropriations on July 10, 2001. The Housepassed the bill ( H.R. 2500 ) on July 18th, 2001. The Senate Appropriations Committee passedthe CJS appropriations ( S. 1215 ) on July19th. On September 13th, 2001, the Senate substituted S. 1215 for House languagein H.R. 2500 and passed its version of H.R. 2500 , as amended. After numerous continuing resolutions, the CJS appropriations was signed into law( P.L. 107-770 ) on November 28, 2001. The table below shows the key legislative steps that occurred for the enactment of FY2002 CJS appropriations legislation. Table 3. Status of CJS Appropriations, FY2002 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 protectsthem through its efforts for effective lawenforcement. It conducts all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States is concerned and represents thegovernment in legal matters generally,providing legal 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 theDepartment of Justice include: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigates violations of federal criminal law, protects the United States from hostile intelligenceefforts, provides assistance to other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, and has concurrentjurisdiction with Drug Enforcement Administration(DEA) over federal drug violations. 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 and maintaining drug intelligencesystems, regulating legitimate controlled substancesactivities, and undertaking coordination and intelligence-gathering activities with foreign governmentagencies. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is responsible for administering laws relating to the admission, exclusion, deportation, andnaturalization of aliens, including the oversight of the process involving the admission of aliens into the country andapplications to become citizens, theprevention of illegal entry into the United States, and the investigation, apprehension, and removal of aliens whoare in this country in violation of thelaw. Federal Prison System provides for the custody and care of the federal prison population, the maintenance of prison-related facilities, and theboarding of sentenced federal prisoners incarcerated in state and local institutions. Office of Justice Programs (OJP) carries out policy coordination and general management responsibilities for the Bureau of JusticeAssistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention, Community Oriented PolicingServices (COPS), and the Office of Victims of Crime, including administering programs, awarding grants, andevaluating activities. United States Attorneys prosecute criminal offenses against the United States, represent the government in civil actions in which the UnitedStates is concerned, and initiate proceedings for the collection of fines, penalties, and forfeitures owed to the UnitedStates. United States Marshals Service is primarily responsible for the protection of the federal judiciary, protection of witnesses, execution ofwarrants and court orders, management of seized assets, and custody and transportation of unsentencedprisoners. Interagency Law Enforcement consists of 13 regional task forces composed of federal agents working in cooperation with state and localinvestigators and prosecutors to target and destroy major narcotic trafficking and money launderingorganizations. The total appropriation for the Department of Justice in FY2000 was $18.6 billion and $21.1 billion in FY2001. (For more details on the funding of individualprograms, see the Appendix.) 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, establishing new penalties for crimes andproviding increased federal assistance for lawenforcement efforts by state and local governments. Federal justice-related expenditure is one of the few areas ofdiscretionary spending that has increased itsshare of total federal spending over the last two decades. FY2002 Budget Request. For DOJ for FY2002, President Bush's budget request was $21.11 billion compared toFY2001 enacted funding of $21.03 billion. FY2002 funding was to address major concerns such as gun violence,violence against women, drug crimes, workerexploitation, civil rights violations, the Voting Rights Act, redistricting provisions, racial profiling, cybercrime,terrorism, and restructuring the Immigration andNaturalization Service. The Administration's budget included a shift in spending from state and local lawenforcement to what it described as DOJ's core federallaw enforcement mission particularly in the areas of detention and incarceration, anti-terrorism, cybercrime andcounter-intelligence. In keeping with this funding approach, the FY2002 budget request for the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) was $3.67 billion, about a billion dollars less than thefunding level of $4.7 billion for FY2001. DOJ sought funding of $855 million for Community Oriented PolicingServices (COPS) compared to FY2001 fundingof $1.03 billion. The Administration stated that the budget proposal would not affect any pending COPS grants. Reportedly, nearly 74,000 officers were hiredunder COPS; President Clinton had pledged that 100,000 new officers would be hired. This request retargetedresources for hiring 1,500 additional officers forsecurity in public schools, for law enforcement technology and for reducing DNA backlogs. Specifically, for publicsafety and community policing grants thePresident requested $272 million in direct appropriations compared to FY2001 funding of $535 million. For crimeidentification technology, the Presidentrequested $255 million compared to FY2001 funding of $130 million. President Bush's budget proposed a decrease in funding for some programs: the FY2002 budget request for the state criminal alien assistance program was $265million compared to enacted funding of $400 million in FY2001; local law enforcement block grants request was$400 million for FY2002 compared to $523million in FY2001; and for state prison grants the FY2002 request was $35 million while funding in FY2001 was$687 million. The President's request for Byrneformula grants (block grants for which individual states apply) for FY2002 was $500 million; in FY2001, totalByrne grant funding was $569 million ($500million for formula grants and $69 million for discretionary grants). There was no request for funding fordiscretionary grants in FY2002, because the Presidentbelieved that the original purpose of discretionary grants, which was to fund anti-drug activities, has not beenpossible in recent years due to the level ofearmarking within the program. Drug Courts' budget request for FY2002 was $50 million, the same funding levelas in FY2001. Areas receiving increased focus by the Bush Administration was violence against women and victims of crime. President Bush proposed a slight increase inFY2002 funding for Violence Against Women Act grants (VAWA), $310 million compared to FY2001 fundingof $289 million. The FY2002 request for newprograms was: $10 million for Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus, $15 million for Safe Havens forChildren pilot program, $5 million for Protection forolder and disabled women, $7.5 million for education and training to end violence against and abuse of women withdisabilities, and $40 million for the legalassistance for victims program. Weed and Seed is an established program in which communities in partnership with federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies "weed" criminals out oftheir neighborhoods with speedy prosecutions, and then reclaim houses, schools, and recreational centers that makethe communities safe places to live. Viewingthe Weed and Seed program as a success, the Administration's budget request for FY2002 for Weed and Seed was$60 million, a $26 million dollar increase overFY2001 funding of $34 million. A major programmatic emphasis of the Bush Administration was reduction of gun crime. For FY2002, President Bush requested $3.46 billion for LegalActivities , compared to FY2001 funding of $3.15 billion. The request included $9 million forProject Sentry, a new federal-state law enforcement partnership toidentify and prosecute both juveniles who violate firearms laws and adults who supply them with guns. Thisfunding request was for 94 U.S. Attorneys' Officesto hire a prosecutor whose major attention would have been devoted to gun crimes involving juveniles. Fundingrequests for gun programs within OJP were: $49.78 million for Project Exile and Project Ceasefire, programs that seek to increase arrests and prosecutions ofgun criminals and increase public awareness todeter gun crime; and $75 million for Child Safe, a new program to provide child safety locks for every handgun inthe nation. Under this program, state and localgovernments on a dollar-for-dollar matching basis were to receive $65 million each year. Organizations that seekthrough private contributions to provide locksfor every handgun in the United States were also eligible for federal matching funds. The remaining $10 millionwere for administrative and advertising costs. The Counterterrorism Fund received $4.99 million for reimbursing a DOJ organization for the cost of reestablishingthe operational capability of an office orfacility that has been damaged or destroyed as a result of a terrorist act and to support efforts to counter, investigateor prosecute domestic or internationalterrorism, including paying rewards. In the area of civil rights, the President proposed several initiatives. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 would have expanded protection and servicesfor trafficking victims and would have created new crimes for which the Civil Rights Division would have beenresponsible. DOJ requested $2 million inFY2002 for the Civil Rights Division to hire additional prosecutors and to conduct a community outreach programin enforcing the Trafficking Victims ProtectionAct of 2000. The FY2002 budget requested $1.2 million for three studies by OJP to: research police initiated stopsof motorists for routine traffic violations;address deaths of persons while in law enforcement custody as required by the Deaths in Custody Act, and measurevictimization of persons with disabilities inthe United States. For FY2002, Congress provided funding to combat terrorism in both the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense (DOD). Funding to combatterrorism was provided in a number of DOJ accounts in FY2002. See discussion below on FY2002 appropriationsfor DOJ. (3) In the Department of DefenseAppropriations Act for FY2002 ( P.L. 107-117 ), Congress provided $5 million for transfer from DOD toDOJ's General Administration account for responses toterrorist attacks on the United States under "Patriot Act Activities" ( P.L. 107-38 ). Also to be transferred to DOJ'sAdministrative Review and Appeals accountwas $3.5 million for response to terrorist attacks on the United States. Following are funds to be transferred fromDOD to DOJ accounts for response to terroristattacks: $12.5 million for the Salaries and Expenses, General Legal Activities; $56.4 million for the Salaries andExpenses, the United States Attorneys; $745million for Salaries and Expenses, the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and $10.2 million for Salaries and Expenses,United States Marshals Service and $9.1million for Construction, U.S. Marshals Service. Congress, in FY2002, transferred $400 million from DOD to the Office of Justice Programs' Justice Assistance account for grants, cooperative agreements, andother assistance authorized by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 and the USA Patriot Act( P.L. 107-56 ). Of this funding, $9.8 millionwas for aircraft for counterterrorism and activities for the City of New York identified in the EmergencySupplemental Appropriations Act for FY2001 ( P.L.107-38 ). Another OJP account, State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance, received $251.1 million fordiscretionary grants, including equipment, under theEdward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program. The Crime Victims Fund had$68.1 million transferred to it for responses toterrorist attacks on the United States. Congress provided $21.7 billion for the Department of Justice for FY2002, an increase of $612 million above FY2001 funding. The Office of Justice Programs received $4.3 billion for FY2002. Under OJP's state and local law enforcement assistance account $2.4 billion wasdistributed as follows: $565 million for thestate criminal alien assistance program, $594 million for the Byrne grant programs ($500 million for formula grantsand $94 million for discretionary grants),$400 million for the local law enforcement block grant program, $70 million for state prison drug treatment, and$50 million for drug courts. Of $249.5 millionfor the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants program, $38 million was for the Project Child SafeInitiative. Also, the Violence Against Women grantprogram received $391 million. In FY2002, Congress provided funding for the following OJP accounts: $59 million for Weed and Seed; $306 million for Juvenile Justice Programs; and $28million for Public Safety Officers Benefits. Under the Justice Assistance account, Congress provided $251 millionfor the counterterrroism program whichincludes funding for equipment grants ($122.7 million); and training and technical assistance ($72 million). DOJ requested $20.7 million for Crime Identification Technology (CITA); $35 million to reduce the backlog of state convicted offender DNA and crime sceneDNA samples in the nation (CITA); $35 million to improve the forensic science capabilities of laboratories; and$35 million to upgrade the Criminal RecordsUpgrade Program to make criminal history, criminal justice, and identification record systems in the nation morecompatible; and $100 million for technologygrants under the COPS account. Congress appropriated $1.05 billion for the OJP's COPS account for FY2002, of which $496 million was for Public Safety and Community Policing Grants, $352million for crime technology, $100 million for prosecution assistance ($50 million for a national program to reducegun violence and $50 million for theSouthwest Border Prosecutor Initiative), and $70 million for grants, technical assistance and other expenses,including $15 million for Project Sentry and $23million for the Safe Schools Initiative. Under the COPS account for FY2002 the $352 million appropriated forcrime technology was for the followingdistribution: $154.3 for a law enforcement technology program; $35 million for grants to upgrade criminal records;$40 million for DNA analysis and backlogreduction; $87.33 million for grants, contracts and other assistance to states under provisions of CITA; $99.8 millionfor prosecution assistance and $70.2 millionfor grants, training, technical assistance, and other expenses to support community crime prevention efforts. For FY2002, Congress provided $3.47 billion for Legal Activities compared to FY2001 funding of $3.14 billion. Of this funding, $649 million was for the U.S.Marshals Service, of which $619 million was for salaries and expenses of the U.S. Marshals Service and $15 millionthe construction account. This was $8million more than the President's request and a $46 million increase over FY2001 enacted funding. Congressprovided $1.35 billion for U.S. Attorneys, $86million below the President's request. Congress provided $706.2 million for the Federal Prisoner Detention account,which allows U.S. Marshals to contract withstate and local jails, and private facilities to house unsentenced federal prisoners before and during trial and afterconviction until transference to federalinstitutions. To improve coordination between federal, state, tribal, and local law enforcement agencies in combating crime, law enforcement agencies must have accurate andtimely information. In its focus on systems integration, upgrades, network reliability, efficient processes, and thelatest technologies, DOJ request for FY2002 for Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was $3.51 billion, a $255 million increase overFY2001 funding of $3.25 billion. In addition, DOJ requested $31.6million both to improve FBI's assessment and to defeat foreign intelligence threats to national security and tocontinue the Criminal Division's assistance incounterintelligence, especially involving espionage and violations of laws on export of high technology. The budgetrequest included $67.7 million for the secondyear of FBI's 3-year information technology upgrade plan called Trilogy, and $6.5 million for communicationcircuits for quicker transmission of data andimproved network reliability. To continue integration of the INS's Automated Biometrics Identification System(IDENT) and FBI's Automated FingerprintIdentification System (IAFIS), the President requested $28 million -- $1 million in direct appropriations and $27million from the Working Capital Fund. In FY2002, Congress provided total funding of $3.5 billion for the FBI, an increase of $280 million over FY2001 funding. Congress appropriated $142.4 millionfor Trilogy in FY2002; $24 million for the counterterrorism initiative of which $12 million was for the FBI'sparticipation in the 2002 Salt Lake City WinterOlympics; and $31.3 million for the counterintelligence initiative to allow the agency to be more effective inaddressing foreign intelligence threats. Funding of$318.1 million was also provided for forensic, training, and investigative assistance and $247.1 million forinvestigative and information technology. Under theFBI Construction account Congress provided $33.8 million for an annex at the Engineering Research Facility tosupport consolidation of various high technologyprograms at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia. President Bush proposed more funding for the war on drugs for FY2002. For the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), he requested $1.48 billion comparedto $1.36 billion that was enacted in FY2001. Methamphetamine (meth) laboratories have been seized in all but 3states. Drug dealers and organizations havetargeted rural communities where the knowledge and resources of law enforcement agencies to combat the problemare lacking. The manufacturing process formeth produces material that is hazardous to the environment and to persons trying to remove it. President Bushproposed a continuation of the funding level, $48million for FY2002, to OJP to help state and local officials with meth enforcement and cleanup efforts. Congress for FY2002 provided $1.5 billion for the DEA, nearly $122 million above FY2001 funding. Funding included $33 million to combat methamphetamineand the abuse of other drugs such as heroin, Oxycontin, and Ecstasy. President Bush's budget request for the Federal Prison System was $4.67 billion; FY2001 funding was $4.32 billion. Although nearly $5 billion has been spenton prison construction in the past decade, the federal prison system is presently operating at 35% over its ratedcapacity. In light of this, the Administrationrequested $809.27 million for the Bureau of Prisons to address the current problem and accommodate future growth: $669.97 million for construction of 3 federalcorrections institutions and 4 penitentiaries; partial site and planning funds for 4 facilities (2 female and 2 male);$139.3 million to activate the Federal CorrectionsInstitute in Petersburg, Virginia and the U.S. Penitentiary and work camp in Lee County, Virginia; and contractconfinement costs associated with the anticipatedincrease in the prison population. Congress appropriated $4.63 billion for FY2002 for the Federal Prison System, of which $814 million was for building construction, modernization, andmaintenance and repair of housing for prisoners under the Buildings and Facilities account. Specifically, $72.8million in funding was for new prisons and $47million was for an additional 1,500 contract beds for the growing criminal alien prison population as well as for1,499 general contract inmate beds, of which 85are for juveniles. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is the principal federal agency charged with administering the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). FromFY1993 to FY2001, Congress had more than tripled the INS budget, from $1.5 to nearly $5.0 billion. During thesame years, the number of funded permanentpositions supported by the agency's budget has grown from 18,133 to 33,537, an increase of 85%. Regardingcounter-terrorism, the INS plays an integral role inthe Nation's efforts to ensure an adequate level of border security by excluding "undesirable" persons from theUnited States, including suspected internationalterrorists and their supporters. (4) For FY2002, the Administration requested $5.5 billion and 34,901 full time-funded positions for INS. This amount included $3.5 billion in direct funding and ananticipated $2 billion in offsetting receipts. It included budget enhancements of nearly $380 million and 1,364permanent positions over the agency's basebudget. (5) The requested budget enhancements included 1) $172 million for border management, 2) $89 million for detention and removal, 3) $45 million forbacklog reduction, and 4) nearly $75 million for construction. The Administration's request also included legislativeproposals to increase the airport inspectionfee to $7 (an increase of $1), and to levy a cruise ship fee of $3 for journeys that originate in Mexico, Canada, orthe United States, which were exempt from suchfees. For FY2002, Congress has provided funding for INS in two measures. Total funding for the agency is likely to exceed $6 billion. The CJS Appropriations Actfor FY2002 ( P.L. 107-77 ) includes $5.6 million in funding for INS. This amount includes $3.5 million in directfunding and $2.1 million in anticipated offsettingreceipts. This amount is $132 million more than the Administration's request. Conference report language includesearmarked budget enhancements of 1) $80million in base adjustments that were not requested by the Administration, 2) $178 million for border management,3) $81 million for detention and removal, 4)$51 million for pending caseload reduction, and 5) $128 million for new construction projects. In addition, the Department of Defense (DOD) Appropriations Act for FY2002 ( P.L. 107-117 ) includes another $549 million in emergency counter-terrorismsupplemental appropriations funding for INS. Among other things, this amount includes $56 million for additionalinspectors and support staff for the northernborder, $34 million to redeploy and hire additional Border Patrol agents, and $37 million to continue thedevelopment of a system to monitor nonimmigrantstudents and exchange visitors. The FY2002 CJS Appropriations Act also includes several substantive immigration provisions that: 1) raise existing and establish new inspection fees asrequested by the Administration, 2) provide posthumous citizenship to victims of the September 11thattacks, 3) authorize 90 additional accelerated inspectionprograms at land border ports, 4) authorize the INS Commissioner to waive the $30 thousand overtime cap forinspectors during immigration emergencies, and 5)require all air and sea carriers to provide electronic manifests. The conference agreement does not include aprovision to extend or make permanent ï¿½245(i) of theINA. (6) By comparison, the House-passed CJS appropriations bill would have provided $5.6 billion in funding for INS. This amount includes $3.5 billion in directfunding and $2.1 billion in anticipated offsetting receipts, and it was $130 million more than the Administration'srequest. House report language includedearmarked budget enhancements totaling 1) $136 million for border management, 2) $89 million for detention andremoval, 3) $65 million for backlog reduction,and 4) $75 million for new construction projects. The Senate-passed CJS appropriations bill would have provided$5.5 billion. This amount included $3.4 billionin direct funding and $2.1 billion in offsetting fee receipts, and was $4 million less than the Administration's request. Senate report language included earmarkedbudget enhancements totaling 1) $168 million for border management, 2) $10 million for legal services for INSdetainees, 3) $67 million to reduce pendingcaseloads, and 4) $139 million for new construction projects. Both the House and Senate measures includedprovisions to raise the airport inspection fee andestablish a cruise ship inspection fee. In addition, the Senate measure included provisions to authorize 90 additionalaccelerated inspection lanes at land borderports of entry and to make permanent ï¿½245(i). The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) requires the Department of Justice, along with other federal agencies, to prepare a 5-year strategic planwhich contains a mission statement, a statement of long-range goals in each of the Department's core functions anda description of information to be used toassess program performance. The DOJ submitted its Strategic Plan for 2000-2005 to Congress in September 2000. The DOJ FY2000 Performance Report and FY2002 Performance Plan combines the agency's report on past accomplishments with its plans for the upcoming yearto provide a complete and integrated picture of the Department's performance. The report describes what theDepartment of Justice plans to accomplish inFY2002, consistent with the long-term strategic goals, and complements the Department's budget request. Itprovides a summary statement of themes andpriorities of DOJ for seven core functional areas (investigation and prosecution of criminal offenses, assistance totribal, state, and local governments, legalrepresentation, enforcement of federal laws, and defense of U.S. interests; immigration; detention and incarceration;protection of the federal judiciary andimprovement of the justice system; and management). While it summarizes and synthesizes detailed performanceplans 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, it does not reflect every program or activity of the Department. That comprehensive and detailedinformation would be in the budget submissions ofthe individual component organizations. H.R. 45 (Biggert) Federal Telephone Abuse reduction Act of 2001. Would have amended title 18, United States Code concerningprison commissaries, among other purposes. Introduced January 3, 2001; referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 196 (Sweeney) Anti-Drug Legalization Act. Would have prohibited any federal department or agency from conducting orfinancing any study or research on the legalization ofany controlled substance. Introduced January 3, 2001; referred to the House Committee on Government Reform. H.R. 213 (Sweeney) Drug Importer Death Penalty Act of 2001. Would have amended the Controlled Substances Import and ExportAct to direct the court to sentence a person to lifeimprisonment without possibility of release or under certain conditions to death if the person is convicted ofbringing into the United States a proscribed quantityof a mixture or substance containing a controlled substance in a specified amount. Introduced January 3, 2001;referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 417 (Andrews) Open Air Drug Market Penalty Act of 2001. Would have amended the Controlled Substances Act to imposean additional 5 year's imprisonment for knowinglycommitting a federal offense which includes the distribution of a controlled substance for which the maximumprison term equals or exceeds 5 years, within 500feet of the place where such an offense occurred within the preceding 48 hours. Introduced February 6, 2001;referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 503 (Graham, L.) Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2001. Would have made it a federal crime to harm or kill an "unborn child"in utero during the commission of a violentcrime, and would have exempted those who perform an abortion with the consent of the pregnant woman andwomen whose own actions harmed their fetuses. Would have permitted federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty, but they could also have filed separate chargesfor the woman and the fetus. Introduced Feb.7, 2001; referred to Committees on the Judiciary and on Armed Services. Ordered to be reported by JudiciaryCommittee, March 28 (H.Rept. 207-42, Part 1 filedon April 20). Discharged by Armed Services Committee, April 24. Passed the House, April 26. Referred to Senate,April 24. Placed on Senate LegislativeCalendar Under General Orders on June 8, 2001. Calendar No. 72. H.R. 696 (Rangel) Second Chance for Ex-offenders Act of 2001. Would have permitted the expungement of records of certainnonviolent criminal offenders. Introduced February14, 2001; referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 863 (Smith, L.) Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001. Would have authorized the Juvenile Accountability BlockGrants program, would have provided anauthorization of $1.5 billion, $500 million each fiscal year, FY2002-FY2004. Introduced March 6, 2001; referredto the House Committee on the Judiciary. Reported, amended, by the House Judiciary Committee, April 20 ( H.Rept. 107-46 ). Passed House by voice vote,October 16. Received in Senate and referred toCommittee on the Judiciary, October 17, 2001. H.R. 1885 (Gekas) Section 245(i) Extension Act of 2001. Would have extended the date of enactment the filing deadline for animmigration provision (Section 245(i) of theImmigration and nationality Act) that allows aliens who are unauthorized to be in the United States to adjust status,provide they meet all other qualifications. Passed House on May 21, 2001. Passed the Senate amended on September 6, 2001. S. 16 (Daschle) 21st Century Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention, and Victims Assistance Act. Omnibus crimebill including provisions that: would have expanded thecommunity policing grant program by hiring more police and prosecutors; would have provided a $6.9 billionauthorization, $1.15 billion for each fiscal year,FY2002 through FY2007; would have strengthened the Violence Against Women Act, would have increasedfunding for shelters, and would have increasedfairness and respect with which crime victims are treated. Introduced January 22, 2001; referred to the SenateCommittee on the Judiciary. S. 146 (Lugar) Would have amended part S of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to allowcertain funds to assist jail-based substance treatmentprograms, among other purposes. Introduced January 23, 2001; referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. S. 184 (Dorgan) 100 Percent Truth-in-Sentencing Act. Would have amended title 18, United States Code, to eliminate good timecredits for prisoners serving a sentence for acrime of violence, among other purposes. Introduced January 25, 2001; referred to the Senate Committee on theJudiciary. S. 185 (Dorgan) Stop Allowing Felons Early Release (SAFER) Act. Would have provided incentives to encourage strongertruth-in-sentencing of violent offenders, among otherpurposes. Introduced January 25, 2001; referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. S. 194 (Biden) Offender Reentry and Community Safety Act of 2001. Would have required the Attorney General to establishthe Federal Reentry Center Demonstration projectto assist federal prisoners in preparing for and adjusting to reentry into the community after their release; would haveamended the Omnibus Crime Control andSafe Streets Act of 1968 to direct the Attorney General to make grants to states, territories, and Indian tribes toestablish adult reentry demonstration projects; stateand local courts to establish reentry courts, and states to establish juvenile offender reentry programs; and to conductstate reentry program research, development,and evaluation. Introduced January 29, 2001; referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. S. 317 (Schumer) Prosecution Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison Act of 2001. Would have established grants for state or localprosecutors to develop, implement, or expanddrug treatment alternatives to prison programs that meet specified requirements. Introduced February 13, 2001;referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. S. 715 (Baucus) Would have designated 7 counties in Montana as High Intensity Drug Trafficking areas and would authorizefunding for drug control activities in those areas. Introduced March 5, 2001; referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. CRS Report 97-196. Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Program: An Overview , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 97-265. Crime Control Assistance through the Byrne Programs , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20539. Federal Crime Control Assistance to State and Local Governments: Department of Justice , by [author name scrubbed] and David Teasley. CRS Issue Brief IB10071. Gun Control Legislation in the 107th Congress , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20908. Immigration and Naturalization Service's FY2002 Budget , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20279. Immigration and Naturalization Service Reorganization and Related Legislative Proposals , [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30852. Immigration of Agricultural Guest Workers: Policy, Trends, and Legislative Issues , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20627. Immigration: Integrated Entry and Exit Data System , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30780. Immigration Legalization and Status Adjustment Legislation , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 96-871. Inmate Privileges in State and Federal Prisons , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30741. Juvenile Justice Legislation: Overview and the Legislative Debate , by [author name scrubbed] and David Teasley. CRS Report RS20576. Juvenile Justice: Legislative Activity and Funding Trends for Selected Programs , by [author name scrubbed] and David Teasley. CRS Report 97-460. Police Officers' Bill of Rights , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 97-248. Prison Grant Programs , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30257. Proposals to Restructure the Immigration and Naturalization Service , by William Krouse. CRS Report RL30890. Sex Offender Registration: Issues and Legislation , by [author name scrubbed] and David L. Teasley. CRS Report RL31173. Terrorism Funding: Emergency Supplemental Appropriations-Distribution of Funds to Departments and Agencies , by James Riehl. CRS Report RL31187(pdf) . Terrorism Funding: Congressional Debate on Emergency Supplemental Allocations , by [author name scrubbed] and [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30871 . Violence Against Women Act: History, Federal Funding, and Reauthorizing Legislation, by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 97-621. Women in Prison , by [author name scrubbed]. Title II typically includes the appropriations for the Department of Commerce and related agencies. The Department was established on March 4, 1913 (37 Stat.7365; 15 U.S.C. 1501). The origins of the Department of Commerce date back to 1903 with the establishment ofthe Department of Commerce and Labor (32Stat. 825). In 1913, Congress designated a separate Department of Commerce. The Department's responsibilitiesare numerous and quite varied, but its activitiescenter around five basic missions: 1) promoting the development of American business and increasing foreign trade;2) improving the nation's technologicalcompetitiveness; 3) encouraging economic development; 4) fostering environmental stewardship and assessment;and 5) compiling, analyzing and disseminatingstatistical information on the U.S. economy and population. The following agencies within the Commerce Department carry out these missions: Economic Development Administration (EDA) provides grants for economic development projects in economically distressed communitiesand regions. Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) seeks to promote private and public sector investment in minority businesses. Bureau of the Census collects, compiles, and publishes a broad range of economic, demographic, and social data. Economic and Statistical Analysis Programs provide 1) timely information on the state of the economy through preparation, development,and interpretation of economic data; and 2) analytical support to department officials in meeting their policyresponsibilities. Much of the analysis is conducted bythe Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). International Trade Administration (ITA) seeks to develop the export potential of U.S. firms and to improve the trade performance of U.S.industry. Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) enforces U.S. export control laws consistent with national security, foreign policy, and short-supplyobjectives. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides scientific, technical, and management expertise to 1) promote safe andefficient marine and air navigation; 2) assess the health of coastal and marine resources; 3) monitor and predict thecoastal, ocean, and global environments(including weather forecasting); and 4) protect and manage the nation's coastal resources. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) examines and approves applications for patents for claimed inventions and registration oftrademarks. Technology Administration , through the Office of Technology Policy, 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 to improve product quality, modernizemanufacturing processes, ensure product reliability, and facilitate rapid commercialization of products based on newscientific discoveries. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) advises the President on domestic and international communicationspolicy, manages the federal government's use of the radio frequency spectrum, and performs research intelecommunications sciences. The total appropriation for the Department of Commerce in FY2001 was $5.2 billion, which was about $220 million below the President's request. The enactedamount was also about $950 million above the House-passed bill and about $400 million above the Senate-passedbill. (For more information on funding ofindividual agencies, see the appendix.) In his FY2002 budget request to Congress, the President requested $5.17 billion in total funding for Title II, which included the Department of Commerce andrelated agencies. This amount was approximately $60 million (1.5%) less than the $5.23 billion Congressappropriated in FY2001. The House approvedapproximately $5.19 billion for Title II, which is about $19 million more than the President's request. The Senateagreed to $5.68 billion for Title II, over $500million above the President's request and approximately $490 million above the House version. The Conferenceagreed upon a total of $5.11 billion, which ishigher than the Administration's request and the House figure, but lower than the Senate figure. For the Department of Commerce alone, the President requested $5.09 billion, which was about $63 million (1.2%) below the FY2001 appropriation of $5.15billion. Most of the agencies within the Department would have received a modest increase in funding. The overallrequest for the Department of Commerce wasbelow the FY2001 appropriation, however, because three agencies - the Economic Development Agency (EDA),National Telecommunications and InformationAdministration (NTIA), and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) - would have received lessfunding. For the Commerce Department alone,the House approved approximately $5.11 billion, which is about $19 million above the President's request. TheSenate agreed to $5.6 billion, which isapproximately $500 million above the President's request and the House version. The Conference agreed upon$5.43 billion for the Department of Commerce,which is higher than the request and the House figure, but lower than the Senate figure. The President's budget request called for $58.8 million for Departmental Management . This figure was almost $3 million (5.2%) more than the $55.8 millionappropriated for FY2001. The majority of Departmental Management funds go toward salaries and expenses. Thiscomponent included a request of $21.2 millionfor the Inspector General's office, which is about $1.2 million above the $20 million appropriated for FY2001. TheHouse approved $57 million for managementfunds for FY2002. The House's amount was decreased by $2 million in an amendment ( H.Amdt. 176 , Rep.Velazquez) aimed at providing morefunding to the Small Business Administration. The Senate agreed to $63.2 million for this account, which is $6.2million above the amount approved by theHouse. Both the full House and the Senate Appropriations Committees approved the Administration's request for$21.2 for the Inspector General's office. TheConference agreed upon $57.8 million for Departmental Management. In its accompanying report, the SenateAppropriations Committee had expressed concernover the Commerce Department's use of the "Working Capital Fund" for new department initiatives and the lackof congressional oversight of this practice. TheCommittee requested the Department to seek congressional approval before reprogramming funds. The Department's Economic and Statistical Analysis programs are conducted by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) and the Bureau of the Census. ThePresident requested $62.5 million for these programs, which was about $8.8 million (16.4%) above the $53.6million appropriated in FY2001. The Administrationbelieved that with the growth in electronic commerce and expanding use of stock options, Commerce's timely andaccurate statistical reports are essential forproviding reliable data to policymakers. Both the House and the Senate agreed with the President's request. TheConference also agreed with the amount of $62.5million. For the Bureau of the Census , the President requested a total of $543.4 million for FY2002, an amount $109.8 million higher than the $433.6 millionappropriated for FY2001. The total FY2002 request included $141 million for continuing decennial census (2000)activities; $65 million for Census 2010planning; and $27 million for continuous measurement operations, including further development of the AmericanCommunity Survey, which is intended toreplace the census long form in 2010. The House Committee reported, and the full House approved, $519.8 million in new FY2002 appropriations for the Bureau of the Census. In considering H.R. 2500 , the House agreed to an amendment offered by Representative Carolyn Maloney to designate $2.5million of the $519.8 million for a planto count private American citizens living overseas in the 2010 census. The $519.8 million was $23.6 million belowthe President's budget request, but anapproximately $25 million carryover of balances from previous years was to give the Bureau total FY2002 fundingof $544.8 million. All of the $25 million wasdesignated for activities related to the 2000 decennial census. The Senate Committee recommended $517.1 million in new FY2002 appropriations for the Census Bureau, an amount $2.7 million lower than the Houseapproved and $26.3 million lower than the President requested. The Committee also estimated, however, a $27million carryover of funds from prior years, for atotal of $544.1 million available to the Bureau in FY2002. The full Senate approved the Committee'srecommendation of $517.1 for the Bureau. House and Senate conferees agreed to a total spending level of $544.8 million for the Bureau in FY2002. Of this amount, $54 million was from prior yearunobligated balances. The conferees designated $139.2 million of the total amount for expenses related to the 2000census and $65 million for 2010 censusplanning, but without explicit reference to the Maloney amendment to H.R. 2500 . The President's FY2002 request for the International Trade Administration was $329.6 million. (The FY2001 enacted level was $336.7million-$333.7 millionin appropriations plus $3 million in fee collections.) The House approved $344.7 million in appropriations, a $15.1million increase over the FY2002 request. TheSenate passed $344.1 million in appropriations, $14.5 million more than the President's request. Both the Houseand the Senate Committees' bills restoredfunding in the Trade Development Unit to export promotion programs for textiles and apparel, an export database,and an international competitiveness program. The conference report approved $67.7 million for the Unit, $15.3 million over the President's request. The Housealso increased funding for the U.S. and ForeignCommercial Service (USFCS) by $3.0 million to restore funding for the Rural Export Initiative and the GlobalDiversity Initiative. The Senate Committee's billmaintained the President's request for USFCS and expressed concern with the pace of the Service's consolidationof Export Assistance Centers in certainmetropolitan areas. The conference report allotted $195.8 million, $1 million less than the House version, butretained the initiatives added by the House. Theconference report also provided $27.7 million for the Market Access and Compliance Unit and $43.3 million forthe Import Administration Unit. The FY2002 request for the Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) was $68.9 million. (Congress had enacted $64.7 million in FY2001.) The House andSenate approved the full amount of the President's request for FY2002, an amount reflected in the conference report.This figure includes $7.3 million forinspections under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) conducted in conjunction with the Department ofState. The Administration requested increases, inpart, to complete the redesign of the Export Control Automated Support System (ECASS) in order to provide licenseapplicants with more timely information ontheir applications. The Economic Development Administration (EDA) has experienced a tumultuous appropriations history over the past few years. (7) Its funding level was sharplyreduced by the 104th Congress, then partially restored by the 105th. In the first sessionof the 106th Congress, appropriators placed EDA programs in jeopardy untilthe last possible moment. Last year, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a total appropriation of$249.5 million for FY2001, or $187.5 millionless than the agency requested, and $138.9 million less than the total approved by the House. In the end, however,the conference agreement provided a totaladjusted appropriation of $439.8 million, about 3 million more than the agency requested. The FY2001 CJS appropriations bill included nearly $411.9 million for EDA's Economic Development Assistance Programs (EDAP) and slightly less than $28million for Salaries and Administration (S&E), giving the agency a total appropriation of $439.8 million. Thefunding for EDAP increased by more than $51million over the previous year's (FY2000) level. For FY2002, the Administration requested a substantial reduction in EDA's overall funding. While the request included a small increase for S&E, it called forsignificant reductions in EDAP. Specifically, EDA's request of $335 million for EDAP represented a $76 milliondecrease from the FY2001 EDAP adjustedappropriation of $411 million. The agency did not request any funding for the Defense EconomicAdjustment program which received $31.4 million in FY2001. The proposed elimination of funding for this program was consistent with the continued phase down of defenseadjustment activity, particularly base closures,according to EDA's budget submission. The requested funding level for the Public Works Program was $250million, which represented a program reduction of$36 million from the FY2001 appropriation. The amount requested for the Economic Adjustment Program was$40.9 million, or $8.6 million less than it receivedin FY2001. The agency's FY2002 request for funding its other programs reflected only minor changes. EDA requested $24 million for Planning, $9.1 million for TechnicalAssistance, $500,000 for Research and Evaluation, and $10.5 million for Trade Adjustment Assistance. The House set funding for FY2002 at the Administration's requested level, i.e., $30.6 million for S&E and $335 million for EDAP, for a total EDA appropriationof $365.6 million. The Senate-passed bill recommends slightly more -- $371.6 million. The conference agreement provides $30.6 million for S&E and $335 million for EDAP, for a total FY2002 appropriation of $365.6 million. For the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), the Bush Administration requested $28.4 million for FY2002. The request was about $1.1 million(4.0%) above the $27.3 million appropriated in FY2001. Both the House and the Senate agreed with the President'srequest. Congress concurred and passed$28.4 million. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is funded by user fees collected from customers. For FY2001, P.L. 106-533 provided the Office with thebudget authority to spend $1,038.7 million. According to the legislative language, included in this figure was$783.8 million from fees collected by the USPTO inFY2001 and $254.9 million in fees collected during prior fiscal years. The appropriation represented a 19% increaseover the FY2000 funding level. The Bush Administration's FY2002 budget requested $1139 million for the USPTO, an increase of almost 10% over FY2001. This included $856.7 millionderived from offsetting collections generated by fees in FY2002 and $282.3 million from fees collected in priorfiscal years. H.R. 2500 , as originallypassed by the House, would have provided the USPTO with a total funding level of $1129 million in FY2002;$846.7 million from FY2001 fees and $282.3million derived from fees generated in earlier fiscal years. The Committee report to accompany the bill also notedthat an additional $10 million in unobligatedbalances from FY2001 was expected to be available for use by the USPTO for a total spending level of $1139million. The version of H.R. 2500 firstpassed by the Senate provided budget authority for the USPTO to spend $1139 million including $856.7 millionfrom fees collected during FY2002 and $282.3million from fees paid in prior fiscal years. P.L. 107-77 provided a total funding level of $1,126 million, consistingof $843.7 million from FY2002 feecollections, and $282.3 million from carryover of prior year fees. According to the conference report, the FY2002level falls below the Administration's requestedlevel due to the decrease in the filing of trademark applications. Since 1990, appropriation measures have limited the Patent and Trademark Office's use of the full amount of fees collected in each fiscal year. This is an area ofcontroversy. Opponents argue that since agency operations are supported by payments for services, the total amountof these collections should be available toprovide for those services in the year the expenses are incurred. Proponents of the current approach maintain thatthe fees are necessary to balance the budget andthat the level of fees appropriated back to the USPTO are sufficient to cover operating expenses. (8) For FY2002, President Bush requested a total of $3.063 billion for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) . (9) This amount was about$22 million or 0.7% greater than FY2001 appropriations of $3.041 billion. Of that total, $2.180 billion wasrequested for Operations, Research and Facilities(ORF). Budget authority of $68 million would be derived from the Promote and Develop Fishery Products andResearch Pertaining to American Fisheries(PDAF) account, and $3 million in collected fees would be transferred to ORF from the Coastal Zone ManagementFund (CZMF). A total of $764.8 million wasrequested for the Procurement, Acquisitions and Construction (PAC) account. In addition, $118.4 million wasrequested for Other Accounts to be allotted asfollows: $90 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery (PCSR) program; $20 million for PCSR treatyobligations; and $1.4 million for U.S. fisheriesfinancing and liability obligations. Another $10.4 million pass-through was requested for the EnvironmentalImprovement and Restoration Fund (EIRF) for NOSand NMFS ($5.2 million each), which was included in the ORF request. The President did not request funding for"Coastal Impact Assistance" appropriated byCongress in FY2001. (10) President Bush requested funding for NOAA's ORF budget lines as follows: National Ocean Service (NOS) - $364.5 million; National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) - $598.0 million; Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) - $330.2 million; National Weather Service(NWS) - $658.5 million; NationalEnvironmental Satellite Data and Information Service (NESDIS) - $142.4 million; and Program Support - $182.5million. The President's request for Researchand Development (R&D) at NOAA for FY2002, was reported by NOAA's Office of Financial Administration(OFA) to be $762 million. This amountrepresented an increase of 8.4% above FY2001 funding for R&D of $703 million, and was 25% of the FY2002funding request for NOAA. Highlights of President Bush's FY2002 budget request for NOAA included: 1) funding for Stellar Sea Lion research ($29 million) - NMFS; 2) full funding for theNational Undersea Research Program (NURP) for FY2002 ($13.9 million) as the centerpiece for a 2002 OceanExploration initiative ($14 million requested) -OAR; 3) decreases in Great Lakes coastal community protection programs (-$30 million) - OAR; 4) restoration ofbase funding for Forecast & Warning Services($16.7 million) - NWS; 5) funding for the Cooperative Weather Observer Program ($2.3 million) - NWS; 6) transferof research data acquisition funding linesfrom NOS, OAR, and NMFS to Marine Services under Program Support ($62.0 million) - PS/OMAO; 7) fundingfor a Telecommunications Gateway Backup andother data communications improvements, under a Critical Infrastructure Protection initiative to provide backupfor critical weather data and information managedby the agency ($73.3 million) - NWS; 8) funding for a Comprehensive Large-Array [data] Stewardship System(CLASS) to expand, coordinate and centralizeclimate services data ($3.6 million) - OAR; and 9) funding increases for Satellite Programs (NPOESS and GOES),including backup hardware and new sensors($712.3 million) - NESDIS. The President proposed a 47% decrease for the National Estuarine Research ReserveSystem (NERRS), whose funding had doubledin FY2001. The House-passed version of H.R. 2500 appropriated a total of $3.093 billion for NOAA. This amount was 1.7% greater than FY2001appropriations of $3.041 billion, and 0.95% greater than President Bush's FY2002 request of $3.064 billion. Of thistotal, $2.2 billion was appropriated forOperations, Research and Facilities (ORF), about $20 million more than the request. In addition, $749 million wasappropriated for Procurement, Acquisitions,and Construction (PAC), 2% less than that requested by President Bush and 10% more than the FY2001appropriations. Another $143 million was appropriatedfor NOAA's Other Accounts, including PCSR, CZMF, and fishery-related obligations. The House approved $12 million more for NWS and $25 million more for PCSR than the President's request. The House also approved $20 million for Oceans,Coastal, and Great Lakes programs in OAR, less than that requested by the President. The House supported transferof data acquisitions funding (for ship time) toMarine Services under Program Support; it also transferred $10.8 million requested by the President's for NESDISPAC to NESDIS ORF. House appropriationsfor NOAA budget lines were as follows: NOS - $375.6 million; NMFS - $542.4 million; OAR - $317.5 million;NWS - $659.3 million; NESDIS - $149.6 million;and PS - $176.1 million. The PAC account was funded a total of $749.0 million; and Other Accounts would total$143.4 million including $135 million forPCSR, a transfer of $3 million to ORF, and $1.43 million for fishery funding, financing, and liability accounts. The Senate-passed version of H.R. 2500 appropriated a total of $3.363 billion for NOAA. Amendments resulted in an increase of $13 million aboveSenate Appropriation Committee recommendations for S. 1215 . Senate totals included $2.276 billionappropriated for ORF, $940.6 million for PAC,and $146.4 million for Other Accounts (fishery funding and financing), including $137.9 million for the PCSR fundand $10 million for EIRF. Highlights ofSenate amendments included $33.7 million appropriated instead of $30 million for conservation activities definedin ï¿½250(c)(4)(E) of the Balanced Budget andEmergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. The SAC managers' amendment approved $23.9 million, rather than $54.3million for NOAA Executive Direction andAdministration, the same as the President's request. The Senate authorized $22.0 million in budget authority fromFY2001 deobligations, from which $5.0million was intended for establishment of a NOAA "Business Management Fund" for operating expenses. TheSenate also directed that no NOAA funding beprovided for DOC's Commerce Administrative Management System (CAMS). Directions were also given toobligate $0.5 million dollars of NWS PAC fundingto the International Trade Administration processing center in OK. Of PCSR funding, $3 million was earmarkedfor disaster assistance, "for ground fishfishermen suffering economic hardship." Another $1.5 million in budget authority was targeted to NOAA to occupya coastal and fishery research facility inLafayette, LA (at the discretion of the Secretary of Commerce). In addition, $29 million was appropriated forAlaskan Stellar seal lion research, same as thePresident's request. Conferees approved a total of $3.26 billion for NOAA. The conference report ( H.Rept. 107-278 ) was adopted by the House on November 14, and by the Senateon November 15, 2001, and H.R. 2500 was signed into law by President Bush as P.L. 107-77 , on November28, 2001. Total appropriations forNOAA were 6.5% greater than the President's request of $3.06 billion, 5.5% greater than the House-passed totalof $3.09 billion, and 10% less than the Senateapproved levels of $3.36 billion. Of total appropriations, $2.25 billion was provided for ORF; $836.6 million forthe PAC account; $157.4 million for PacificCoastal Salmon Recovery (PCSR); and $8.3 million for NOAA's Other Accounts, including a pass through of $10million to NOS for EIRF, and a $3.0 milliontransfer to NOS from the Coastal Zone Management Fund. The balance of $1.43 million was appropriated foradministrative fishery-related funds. Of the NOAAtotal, $439.2 million was provided for conservation activities, including $223.3 million under ORF for CoastalAssistance programs; $58.5 million under PAC fora new Coastal and Estuarine Lands Conservation Program (CELCP); and $157.4 million under Other Accounts forPCSR obligations. NOAA line offices were funded as follows: NOS - $413.9 million; NMFS - $579.2 million; OAR - $366.1 million; NWS - $672.4 million; NESDIS - $139.6million; and Program Support - $180.5 million, including $71.8 million for Corporate Services, $89.6 million forOMAO, and $19.1 million for Facilities. WithinNOAA's PAC account, $87.8 million was appropriated for NOS, $37.2 million for NMFS, $19.7 million for OAR,$70.7 million for NWS, $561.9 million forNESDIS, and $62.4 million for Program Support. Mandatory funding of $7 million is also included in the ORF totalfor agency overhead and operating expenses. Highlights of the committee's agreement included $58.5 million provided to establish CELCP, "[F]or the purpose of protecting important coastal and estuarineareas that have significant conservation, recreation, ecological, historical, or aesthetic values, or that are threatenedby conversion from their natural or recreationalstate to other uses," and to fund the promulgation of regulations for this program in accordance with the CoastalZone Management Act. The conferenceagreement adopted Senate report language about NOAA's FY2003 budget structure, and House report languagerequiring the agency to report quarterly on thestatus of obligations vis a vis the new budget structure. In addition, House report language wasadopted that required NOAA's budget lines totals be reportedunder the section on ORF appropriations. The conference committee did not approve the "Business Management Fund" approved by the Senate, but did direct NOAA to report what management servicesmight be improved at the agency if they were to be centralized. The conference agreement also funded NOAA'sportion of expenses for CAMS at $17.1 million. The committee directed NOAA to design and implement performance measures for the Coastal Zone Managementprogram; and directed the Office of Marine andAviation Operations to provide detailed quarterly reports on its operations. Funding was not included for theproposed for GOES-R satellite which, the committeereported, had experienced scheduling delays. In addition, Conferees approved $15 million for Minority ServingInstitutions. For more detailed information onNOAA Appropriations for FY2002, see CRS Report RL31117(pdf) : National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration: Review of FY2002 Budget Request andAppropriations . The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) received an appropriation of $598.3 million in FY2001. The total included $312.6 million for theScientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) account (with $5.9 million for the Baldrige QualityProgram); $250.9 million for Industrial TechnologyServices (ITS), consisting of $145.7 million for the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and $105.1 million forthe Manufacturing Extension Partnership(MEP); and $34.9 million for construction. While this was a 6% decrease in overall funding for NIST, primarilydue to a smaller construction budget, support forthe laboratory's internal research and development activities increased by 11% over the previous fiscal year. In his FY2002 budget proposal, President Bush requested $487.5 million in funding for NIST, 19% less than the FY2001 appropriation. Support for the STRSaccount would have been $347.3 million, including $5.4 million for the Quality Program. This represented an 11%increase over FY2001. The ManufacturingExtension Program would have been financed at $106.3 million, while the Advanced Technology Program was tobe suspended pending an evaluation, although$13 million would have been available to support on-going project commitments. Construction efforts would havebeen funded at $20.9 million. The FY2002 appropriations bill, H.R. 2500 , as originally passed by the House, would have provided $490 million for NIST, an 18% decrease insupport due primarily to an absence of funding for the Advanced Technology Program. The STRS account wouldhave received $348.6 million while funding forITS would total $119.5 million, with the major portion going to the Manufacturing Extension Program. Theconstruction budget would have been $20.9 million. H.R. 2500 , as initially passed by the Senate, would have funded NIST at $696.5 million, 42% above the figurecontained in the House bill and 16%more than FY2001. Internal R&D under the STRS account would have received $343.3 million while ITSwould have been financed at $309.3 million, including$105.1 million for MEP and $204.2 million for ATP. The Committee report to accompany the bill stated that theATP activity should be continued contrary to thePresident's budget proposal. Funding for construction at NIST would total $43.9 million, more than double thatcontained in the House bill and theAdministration request. The final legislation, P.L. 107-77 , funds NIST at $674.5 million, an increase of 13% over FY2001. Included in this is $321.1 million for the STRS account (3%above the previous fiscal year) and $291million for ITS. Of this latter amount, MEP is financed at $106.5 millionand ATP receives $184.5 million, a 27%increase. Construction is funded at $62.4 million, triple the figure in the budget request and the House bill andalmost twice that of FY2001. (11) 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 government laboratories) for development of generictechnologies that have broad applications acrossindustries. Opponents of the program cite it as a prime example of "corporate welfare," whereby the federalgovernment invests in applied research activitiesthat, they maintain, should be conducted by the private sector. The Clinton Administration defended ATP, arguingit assisted businesses (and smallmanufacturers) develop technologies that, while crucial to industrial competitiveness, would not or could not bedeveloped by the private sector alone. For theprevious two fiscal years (FY2000 and FY2001), the initial appropriation bills passed by the House, contained nofunding for ATP, although the program didreceive support in the final legislation. Similarly, the FY2002 appropriation bill originally passed by the House alsosuspended financing for the program. However, ATP was ultimately funded at a figure that represented a 27% increase over the previous fiscal year. The Office of the Undersecretary for Technology and the Office of Technology Policy (OTP) was funded at $8.1 million for FY2001, an increase of less than3% over the previous fiscal year. The Bush Administration requested $8.2 million for FY2002. H.R. 2500 ,as initially passed by the House, wouldhave funded the Office at $8.1 million. The first version of H.R. 2500 as passed by the Senate included $8.2million for OTP. The conferenceagreement settled on the Administration-requested and Senate-passed level of $8.2 million. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) provides guidelines and recommendations for domestic and global communicationspolicy, manages the use of the electromagnetic spectrum for public broadcast, and awards grants to industry-publicsector partnerships for research on newtelecommunications applications and development of information infrastructure. The TOP grants provides matchingmerit-based grants to areas eitherunderserved or not served at all by the Internet. The NTIA budget also includes the continued development andconstruction of public broadcast facilities,including funding for transition of broadcasting facilities to digital transmissions. Some policymakers support astronger role for NTIA to close the dividebetween the nation's digital "haves" and "have-nots." They contend that NTIA's TOP grants and public facilitiesprograms would be appropriate avenues forhelping bridge this divide. For FY2001, the Congress provided $100.4 million for the entire NTIA budget. Of this amount, $11.4 million is for salaries and expenses; $45.5 million for theTechnology Opportunities Program (TOP) grants; and $43.5 million for public telecommunications facilities,planning and construction. Both the TOP and publictelecommunications facilities, planning, and construction programs received substantial increases over their FY2000appropriations of $15.5 million and $26million, respectively. For FY2002, the Bush Administration proposed: $73 million for the overall NTIA budget; $15.5 million for TOP; $43.5 million for public telecommunicationsfacilities, planning and construction; and $14 million for salaries. The Bush Administration contends that the TOPprogram should be funded closer to levels itwas at before FY2001, and that the public facilities planning and construction budget should continue to supportconversion of broadcast transmissions to digitaltechnologies. The House-passed appropriations bill approved the following: $72 million for the NTIA budget; $13million for salaries and expenses; $15.5 millionfor TOP grants; and $43.5 million for public telecommunications facilities, planning, and construction. TheSenate-passed appropriation approves an NTIA budgetof $73 million, with $15.5 million for TOP, $43.5 million for public telecommunications facilities, and $14 millionfor salaries. Conference Report 107-278included the Senate-approved marks for the overall budget, TOP, public telecommunications facilities, and salaries. The conference agreement provided $73million - the Administration request - for the overall NTIA FY2002 budget. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) enacted by Congress in 1993 ( P.L. 103-62 ; 107 Stat 285) requires that agencies develop strategic plansthat contain goals, objectives, and performance measures for all major programs. The latest Strategic Plan issuedby the Department of Commerce for yearsFY2000- FY2005 enunciates three strategic goals: Strategic Goal l. Provide the information and the framework to enable the economy to operate efficiently andequitably. Strategic Goal 2. Provide infrastructure for innovation to enhance American competitiveness. Strategic Goal 3. Observe and manage the Earth's environment to promote sustainable growth. As mandated by GPRA, DOC's FY2000 Annual Program Performance Report and FY2002 Annual PerformancePlan were released with the FY2002 budgetproposal. Both the program plan and report are available at: http://www.doc.gov/bmi/budget/ . S. 149 (Enzi et al.); H.R. 2557 (Menendez et al.); H.R. 2568 (Dreier, et al.) Export Administration Act of 2001. A bill to provide authority for national security and foreign policy exportcontrols. S. 149 introduced January 23,2001; reported from the Senate Banking Committee with amendments, March 22, 2001; pass the Senate on Sept.6, 2001; H.R. 2557 introduced July18, 2001, and H.R. 2568 introduced July 19, 2001; referred to House International Relations Committee,House Armed Services Committee. CRS Report 95-36 . The Advanced Technology Program , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 97-104 . Manufacturing Extension Partnership: An Overview , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report 95-30 . The National Institute of Standards and Technology: An Overview , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL31117(pdf) . National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): Review of FY2002 Budget Request and Appropriations , by Wayne A.Morrissey. CRS Report RL30169. Reauthorization of the Export Administration Act , coordinated by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20906(pdf) . U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appropriations Process: A Brief Explanation , by [author name scrubbed]. Typically, Title III of the CJS appropriation covers funding for the Judiciary. By statute (31 U.S.C. 1105 (b)) the judicial branch's budget is accorded protectionfrom presidential alteration. Thus, when the President transmits a proposed federal budget to Congress, he mustforward the judicial branch's proposed budget toCongress unchanged. That process has been in operation since 1939. The total appropriation for the Judiciary inFY2001 was $4.25 billion. The Judiciary budget consists of more than 10 separate accounts. Two of these accounts fund the Supreme Court of the United States - one covering the Court'ssalary and operational expenses and the other covering expenditures for the care of its building and grounds. Traditionally, in a practice dating back to the 1920s,one or more of the Court's Justices appear before either a House or Senate appropriations subcommittee to addressthe budget requirements of the Supreme Courtfor the upcoming fiscal year, focusing primarily on the Court's salary and operational expenses. Subsequent to theirtestimony, the Architect of the Capitolsubmits a request for the Court's building and grounds account. (12) Although it is at the apex of the federal judicial system, the Supreme Court represents only avery small share of the Judiciary's overall funding. The CJS appropriations act for FY2001 ( P.L.106-553 ), forinstance, provided a total of $45.1 million for theSupreme Court's two accounts, which was less than 1.1% of the Judiciary's overall appropriation of $4.26 billion. The rest of the Judiciary's budget provides funding for the "lower" federal courts and for related judicial services. Among the lower court accounts, one dwarfs allothers -- the Salaries and Expenses account for the U.S. Courts of Appeals and District Courts. The account,however, covers not only the salaries of circuit anddistrict judges (including judges of the territorial courts of the United States), but also those of retired justices andjudges, U.S. Court of Federal Claims,bankruptcy and magistrate judges, and all other officers and employees of the federal Judiciary not specificallyprovided for by other accounts. Other accounts for the lower courts include Defender Services (for compensation and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed to represent criminaldefendants), Fees of Jurors, the U.S. Court of International Trade, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, theFederal Judicial Center (charged withfurthering the development of improved judicial administration), and the U.S. Sentencing Commission (anindependent commission in the judicial branch, whichestablishes sentencing policies and practices for the courts). The annual Judiciary budget request for the courts is presented to the House and Senate appropriations subcommittees after being reviewed and cleared by theJudicial Conference, the federal court system's governing body. These presentations, typically made by the chairmanof the Conference's budget committee, areseparate from subcommittee appearances a Justice 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 of Appeals for the Armed Forces (funded inthe Department of Defense appropriations bill), the U.S. Tax Court (funded in the Treasury, Postal Serviceappropriations bill), and the U.S. Court of Appeals forVeterans Claims (funded in the Department of Veteran Affairs and Housing and Urban Development appropriationsbill). Construction of federal courthousesalso is not funded within the Judiciary's budget. The usual legislative vehicle for funding federal courthouseconstruction is the Treasury, Postal Serviceappropriations bill. (For more details on individual appropriations for Judiciary functions, see the appendix.) The Judiciary's Response to the Terrorist Attacks. Apart from its FY2002 budget request, the Judiciary wrote lettersto the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on September 13, 2001, identifying the immediate security needsof the federal courts in light of the September11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. (13) The letters were sent to OMB at the same time that emergency supplemental appropriations legislation, H.R. 2888 , was being considered by Congress. That bill, creating an Emergency Response Fund totaling $40billion, was subsequently passed byboth the House and Senate on September 14, 2001, and signed into law as P.L. 107-38 . In a letter on behalf of the Supreme Court, the Court's director of budget and personnel listed "four security items that address preparedness and mitigation of riskof terrorist incidents," totaling $47 million. These items specifically included: perimeter security improvements, $10million; visitor screening, $3 million;construction of police facilities, $20 million; and window protection, $14 million. A separate letter on behalf ofthe rest of the lower federal courts requested$20.7 million annually for an additional 414 courts security officers to enhance perimeter security at federalcourthouses; $10.6 million annually for an additional106 deputy U.S. Marshals, who would have full-time supervisory responsibility for court security; and $62.1 millionin one-time costs for purchase of"state-of-the-art" X-Ray machines for use in courthouse mail rooms and loading docks. Subsequently, pursuant to P.L. 107-38 , the President took three actions in response to the Judiciary requests for emergency funding: On September 21, 2001, he authorized the transfer from the Emergency Response Fund of $1.25 million to the Supreme Court's Buildingand Grounds budget account, to be used to install protective window film for the Supreme Court building. On September 28, 2001, he authorized the transfer of $19.7 million in emergency funds to the Judiciary's Court Security budget account). These funds would be used for heightened security in courthouses, including converting part-time court securityofficers to full-time as well as covering the costsrequired to maintain enhanced perimeter patrols and visual inspection of vehicles that enter courthousefacilities. On October 17, 2001, he submitted to Congress legislation to allocate $20 billion for various disaster recovery and security needs, $31.5million of which would go to the federal government's judicial branch. Of the $31.5 million, $17.5 would coverthe costs of additional court security officerhours, $10.0 million would be used to enhance the security posture of the Supreme Court building, and $4.0 millionwould support a supervisory deputy marshalresponsible for coordinating security in each judicial district and circuit. The President's September 21 and 28 funding transfers to the Judiciary were made pursuant to his authority, under P.L. 107-38 , to spend the first $20 billion of the$40 billion Emergency Response Fund total without additional congressional action. By contrast, the President'sallocation of the second $20 billion, includingthe $31.5 million designated for the Judiciary, was in the form of a supplemental appropriation measure requiringcongressional passage. That measure wasattached, as Division B, to the FY2002 Department of Defense appropriations bill ( H.R. 3338 ), which wassigned into law as P.L. 107-117 onJanuary 10, 2002. The funding transfers approved by Congress in Division B of P.L. 107-117 included significantly more funding for the Judiciary than proposed by the President. Specifically, the anti-terrorism funding approved by Congress in this law included: $30.0 million for the Supreme Court's Building and Grounds budget account, for security enhancements (instead of $10.0 million proposedby the President and provided for in the House-passed version of H.R. 3338 ); $57.5 million for the Judiciary's Court Security account, to address security requirements of the lower courts, including not less than $4.0million to reimburse the U.S. Marshals Service for a supervisory deputy marshal responsible for coordinatingsecurity in each judicial district. (The President hadproposed, and the House-passed version of H.R. 3338 had provided, that a total of $21.5 million of theanti-terrorism funding be transferred to thelower courts.) $5.0 million for emergency communications equipment in the Salaries and Expenses account of the courts of appeals and district courts,plus $2.9 million for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, to enhance security at the Thurgood MarshallFederal Judiciary Building in Washington, D.C. (Neither of these funding amounts was included in the President's proposal or in the House-passed version of H.R. 3338 .) The Judiciary's Budget Request for FY2002. Congress approved $4.61 billion in total FY2002 budgetappropriations for the Judiciary, an 8.4% increase over FY2001 funding of $4.25 billion. The enacted FY2002 levelis $69.4 million less than what the Houseapproved earlier and $111.5 million more than the Senate-passed amount. At the start of the appropriations process,the Judiciary had requested $4.87 billion, a14.5% increase over FY2001 funding. For the Judiciary's largest account, Salaries and Expenses for the Courts of Appeals, District Courts and Other Judicial Services , (14) Congress approved $3.59billion, a 7.1% increase over $3.35 billion enacted for FY2001. The enacted FY2002 level is $40.8 million less thanwhat the House approved earlier and $32.1million more than the Senate-passed amount. The Judiciary had requested $3.74 billion, an 11.4% increase overFY2001 funding. For this account,House-Senate conferees adopted by reference House report language regarding non-appropriated funds andworkload. (15) The conference agreement alsoadoptedby reference Senate report language requesting that the Judiciary conduct a study for the Appropriations Committeeson whether changes in the jury system maybe necessary. (16) For the Judiciary's Defender Services account, Congress approved the House-passed amount of $500.7 million, a 15.3% increase over FY2001 funding of $434.0million. Earlier the Senate had approved $463.8 million, a 6.8% increase, while the Judiciary had requested $521.5million, a 20.1% increase. The DefenderServices account funds the operations of the federal public defender and community defender organizations, andthe compensation, reimbursement and expensesof "panel attorneys." The latter are private practice attorneys appointed by the courts under the Criminal JusticeAct (CJA) to serve as defense counsel toindigent individuals accused of federal crimes. While most of the Defender Services increase requested by the Judiciary consisted of mandatory adjustments to base, (17) $35.1 million was sought to fund anincrease in the rate of pay for panel attorneys to $113 an hour. For FY2001 Congress had funded hourly pay ratesfor panel attorneys of $75 in-court and $55out-of-court in most locations, which the Judiciary said were well below the amounts the attorneys need just to covertheir overhead costs. In response,House-Senate conferees, following the recommendation of both Appropriations Committees, agreed on an FY2002increase in panel attorney pay to $90 per hourboth in and out of court, effective no later than May 1, 2002. The budget request of the Supreme Court for FY2002, as customary, was in two parts. For its first account, Salaries and Expenses, Congress, as provided in theSenate bill, approved $40.0 million, a 6.6% increase over budget authority of $37.5 million for FY2001. Earlier,the Court had requested, and the Houseapproved, $42.1 million. (18) In their report, House-Senate conferees directed that the Court continue to provide the Appropriations Committees with information regarding the Court's hiringpractices in selecting law clerks and to "make efforts to expand its pool of applicants in a manner to ensure fairnessin hiring." The conference report, however,said it did not adopt language in the Senate report "regarding the containment of mandatory costs and additionalpersonnel." (19) For the Court's second account, Care of the Building and Grounds, Congress approved $37.5 million, instead of $70.0 million as provided in the House bill and$7.5 million in the Senate bill. (20) At thebeginning of the appropriations process, the Court had requested $117.7 million for this account, $110.2 millionoverFY2001 funding of $7.5 million. The purpose of this extraordinary increase, as requested, was to modernize theCourt's building by upgrading its basic lifesafety, security and utility systems. This would be the first major renovation of the Court building since its openingin 1935. (21) The conference agreement, while reducing the earlier-approved House amount by almost 50%, adopted by reference language in the House report related to thesecurity and renovation needs of the Court building. (22) The conferees noted that their agreement did not include language in the Senate report regardingbuildingrenovations. (23) The conference report also notedthat the entire amount of $37.5 million shall remain available until expended. (24) Congress also approved $220.7 million in funding for the Judiciary's Court Security account, a 10.8% increase over FY2001 budget authority of $199.1million. (25) The House and Senate bills respectivelyhad provided $224.4 million and $209.8 million, while the Judiciary had requested $228.4 million. (26) TheHouse-Senate conference report said that it adopted language in the House bill and report clarifying theresponsibilities of the Court Security Program. (27) Congress also authorized, as requested by the Judiciary, a cost-of-living increase in judges' and justices's salaries and appropriated $8.6 million for thatpurpose. While the House bill declined to authorize a judicial pay adjustment, (28) such a provision in the Senate-passed bill (29) was approved in conference,paving the way for a judicial pay increase, based on the Employment Cost Index (ECI), of 3.4%, effective January2002. (30) The Judiciary had called for a payadjustment for judges in its FY2002 budget submission to Congress. Judiciary compensation, it was argued, lagged far behind both inflation and the increasingsalaries of private attorneys, with judges' purchasing power having declined by over 13% over the past eight years. (31) The CJS conference agreement on a pay adjustment for federal judges and justices was reached against the backdrop of an imminent 2002 calendar yearcost-of-living pay increase for Members of Congress and executive branch officials. Annual cost-of-livingadjustments for the latter are automatic, effectiveJanuary of each year (as provided by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989), unless Congress adopts language barring aparticular annual adjustment from taking effect. By January 1, 2002, no legislation had been enacted to withhold the pay adjustment. (32) In contrast to automatic cost-of-living pay adjustments for Members ofCongress and executive branch officials, an annual pay increase for judges must be specifically authorized byCongress, and the legislative vehicle for thatauthorization in recent years has been the CJS-Judiciary appropriations bill At no time since judicial payadjustments have required statutory authorization havejudges received lower pay adjustments than Members of Congress and executive branch officials. Hence, in keepingwith that custom, the conferees' action onthe FY2002 CJS appropriations bill as enacted allowed cost-of-living pay increases for justices and judges to keepapace with those for Members of Congress andexecutive branch officials. (33) Also, without requesting FY2002 funding for this purpose, the Judiciary called for the creation of 54 "Article III" judgeships--judgeships created under Article IIIof the Constitution and having lifetime, as opposed to fixed-term, appointments. (34) The Judiciary noted that since Congress last enacted a major judgeship billin1990, (35) increases in federal jurisdiction and lawenforcement resources had contributed to a more than 25% increase in the workload of the federal courts. However, increased judgeships ultimately were not provided for by Congress in H.R. 2500 as enacted, norwas provision for them included earlier ineither the House or Senate CJS appropriations bill. 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 thatagencies develop strategic plans that contain goals, objectives, and performance measures for all major programs. However, as noted earlier, the judicial branch isnot subject to the requirements of this Act. S. 147 (Feinstein) Southwest Border Judgeship Act of 20001. Creates, in federal judicial districts in four southwest border States,nine permanent district judgeships and ninetemporary district judgeships. Introduced, and referred to Judiciary Committee, January 23, 2001. S. 1162 (Feinstein) Companion bill to H.R. 570 (below). Introduced, and referred to Judiciary Committee, July 11, 2001. H.R. 272 (Gonzalez) Companion bill to S. 147 . Introduced and referred to Judiciary Committee, January 30, 2001; referredto Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, andIntellectual Property, February 12, 2001. H.R. 570 (Biggert) Federal Judicial Fairness Act of 2001. Repeals Federal statute limiting salary increases for Federal judges orSupreme Court Justices to those specificallyauthorized by Act of Congress, increases judicial pay immediately by 9.6%, and provides for automatic annualcost-of-living increases in judicial salaries. Introduced, and referred to Judiciary Committee, February 13, 2001; referred to Subcommittee on Courts, theInternet and Intellectual Property, February 23,2001. H.R. 2522 (Coble) Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2001. Sets forth or modifies various provisions regarding judicial process(including bankruptcy administrator authority toappoint trustees) and judicial personnel administration, benefits, and protections, (including provisions concerningdisability retirement and cost-of-livingadjustments of annuities for territorial judges, compensation for Federal Judicial Center employees; annual leavelimit for judicial branch executives; andsupplemental benefits for judicial branch employees). Introduced, and jointly referred to Judiciary Committee andCommittee on Education and the Workforce,July 17, 2001. Referred to Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property, July 20, 2001;subcommittee hearings held, July 26, 2001. Jointly referred to Education and Workforce Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations and Subcommitteeon 21st Century Competitiveness, October 9,2001. CRS Report 98-527 . Federal Courthouse Construction, by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20278. Judicial Salary-Setting Policy , by [author name scrubbed]. Groner, Jonathan, "Budget Bill Bolsters Courts, DOJ," Legal Times, vol.24, Nov. 26, 2001, pp. 1,10. -- . "Lobbying for the Third Branch; Federal Judges Seeking Raises, Resources Turn to AO Advocates for Help on the Hill," Legal Times , vol. 24, June 4, 2001,p. 18. U.S. Administrative Office of the United States Courts. "Appropriations Committees Act on Courthouse Funding, The Third Branch , vol. 33, August 2001, vol33, August 2001, at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/august01ttb/august01.html . --. "House Appropriations Committee Approves Judiciary's FY02 Spending Bill," The Third Branch , vol. 33, July 2001, pp. 1 & 3; also at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/july01ttb/julyapp2.html . -- . "Judiciary's Slice of Budget Good News for FY02," The Third Branch , vol. 33, December 2001, at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/dec01ttb/december01.html . --. "Senate Appropriations Committee Leaves Judiciary Looking to Basic Services," The Third Branch, vol. 33, August 2001, pp. 1 & 6; also at http://www.uscourts.gov/ttb/august01ttb/senate.html . U.S. Supreme Court. "Chief Justice's 2001 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary," Jan. 1, 2002, at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2001year-endreport.html The State Department, established July 27, 1789 (1 Stat.28; 22 U.S.C. 2651), has a mission to advance and protect the worldwide interests of the United Statesand its citizens. Currently, the State Department represents the activities of more than 50 U.S. agencies andorganizations operating at 257 posts in 180 countries. As covered in Title IV, the State Department funding categories include administration of foreignaffairs , international operations , international commissions ,and related appropriations . The total FY2001 State Departmentappropriation was $6.6 billion. Typically, more than half of State's budget (about 72% allocatedfor FY2001) is for Administration of Foreign Affairs, which consists of salaries and expenses, diplomatic security,diplomatic and consular programs, andsecurity/maintenance of overseas buildings. The Foreign Relations Authorization within P.L. 105-277 provided for the consolidation of the foreign policy agencies. As of the end of FY1999, the ArmsControl and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) and the United States Information Agency (USIA) were abolished andtheir budgets and functions were merged intothe Department of State. International broadcasting , which had been a primary function of the USIA prior to 1999, remains as an independent agency referred to as the BroadcastingBoard of Governors (BBG). The BBG includes the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty(RFE/RL), Cuba Broadcasting, Radio Free Asia(RFA), Radio Free Iraq and Radio Free Iran. The BBG's FY2001 appropriation was $441.4 million with just under2,700 positions. Security issues have remained a top priority since the August 7, 1998 terrorist attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa. An immediate response was a $1.56billion supplemental enacted by the end of that year. In November 1999, the Overseas Presence Advisory Panelreported its findings on embassy security needsand recommendations. Also in November 1999, Congress authorized ( P.L. 106-113 ) $900 million annually forFY2000 through FY2004 for embassy securityspending within the embassy security, construction and maintenance (ESCM) account, in addition to worldwide security funds in the diplomatic and consularprograms (D&CP) account. The State Department's Response to the Terrorist Attacks. Immediately after the September 11, 2001 terroristattacks on the United States, the Department of State announced that 50 of its 260 embassies and consulatesworldwide temporarily closed. Three U.S.embassies--in Pakistan, Yemen, and Turkmenistan--were evacuated. Reportedly since then, State recommendedembassies stock up on antibiotics, and mayclose facilities on a case-by-case basis if the local population gets out of control and dangerous to U.S. personnel. The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act ( P.L. 107-38 ) provided State with $390,000 for Diplomatic and Consular Programs for added security salariesand expenses, $7.5 million for Capital Investment Fund for improved communications at domestic and overseasfacilities, and $41 million for Emergencies in theDiplomatic and Consular Service account for reward money and evacuation of personnel at high threat embassies,should it be necessary. The supplemental alsoprovided $12.25 million to the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) for expanded broadcasting to Muslimaudiences in and around Afghanistan. The Administration's FY2002 budget request for the Department of State and international broadcasting totaled nearly $8 billion, more than 13% above theFY2001 enacted level of $6.6 billion. The request was comparable to the FY1999 enacted level which had includedthe $1.56 billion emergency supplementalappropriation for overseas security and Y2K computer compliance. Secretary of State Colin Powell testified beforethe House Appropriations Committee on April26, 2001 that the Administration's State Department budget request for FY2002 had 3 top priorities: 1) embassyconstruction and security; 2) informationtechnology; and 3) hiring additional Foreign and Civil Service staff. The House Appropriations Committeerecommended $7.88 billion, slightly less than theAdministration request, for State and international broadcasting for FY2002. The House-passed funding level wasreduced by $15 million to $7.867 billion. TheSenate agreed to $7.63 billion, about $236 million below the House level. The final enacted FY2002 appropriationfor both State and international broadcasting is$7.84 billion-about 11% higher than the FY2001 funding level. The President's FY2002 request of $5,665.8 million for State's administration of foreign affairs was nearly 20% above the FY2001 enacted level. The administration of foreign affairs request included: $3.705 billion for D&CP , $210 million for the capital investment fund(CIF) ; $242 million for the educationand cultural exchanges account ; nearly $1.3 billion for ESCM ; and $15.5 million for emergencies in thediplomatic and consular services account. TheHouse Appropriations Committee set funding for State's administration of foreign affairs at $5,595.7 million. Housefloor action reduced this amount by $15million to $5,580.7 million, transferring the funds to the Small Business Administration. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $5,224.1 million for Administration of Foreign Affairs, nearly $357 million below the House level and $442million less than the President's request. The full Senate reduced this amount to $5,196.9 million. The entirereduction was from the Diplomatic and ConsularPrograms account. Congress passed an FY2002 budget of $5,549.2 million for State's administration offoreign affairs account. Continuing an emphasis on overseas security even before the September 11th attacks, the Administration requested a total of $1.3 billion for worldwide securityupgrades. Of this total, $487.7 million was requested within D&CP , primarily for ongoing expenses of past actions such assalaries of increased guards andmaintenance of security technology. In addition, the Administration requested $816 million within ESCM , largely for upgrading overseas facilities, improvingperimeter security, and relocating highest risk posts. The ESCM account requestrepresented an increase of nearly 20% over the FY2001 enacted funding for bothconstruction-related, as well as security-related activities. The House agreed with these funding levels andrecommended nearly the same amount. The Senaterecommended less for security-$409.4 million within D&CP and $661.6 millionwithin ESCM . Congress enacted the House and White House-requested levels. The nonsecurity-related funding request within D&CP was primarily for salaries and expenses of personnel. Secretary Powell testified in early 2001 beforecongressional committees that the Department has ignored warning signs in staffing gaps, both in the Foreign andCivil Service. In addition, near term problemsmay include anticipated retirements, difficulty in attracting applicants, and the need for float staff to fill in whenpersonnel attend training classes. TheAdministration hoped to hire approximately 600 new employees in FY2002, including 360 general staff, 186security professionals, and technical experts. The House-passed bill would provide $3,645.7 million for D&CP -- reducing the full Committee-recommended level by $8million and transferring that amountto the Small Business Administration. In addition, the House expressed concerns about management problems atState, as well as interest in right-sizing overseasposts. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $3,498.4 million for D&CP , offering less than the House or the FY2002 requestedamount for worldwidesecurity. The Senate Appropriations Committee had stated that $50 million of unobligated funds would be addedto worldwide security funds. The Committeealso noted that it would not recommend funds for hiring 186 Diplomatic Security (DS) agents, contending that adisproportionate number of rookies-to-seasonedagents could hamper DS effectiveness. The Senate reduced its D&CP funding to $3,471.2 million. Congressional action resultedin a total funding for DC&P FY2002 budget at $3,630 million, including the full request for new hires. The capital investment fund (CIF) , which was established in 1994, provides for purchasing information technology and capital equipment to ensure efficientmanagement, coordination, operation, and utilization of State's resources. For many years, State Departmentofficials have testified that the Department'stechnology problems -- ranging from archaic telephones and copy machines to lack of computers and Internet access-- have received inadequate funding. TheFY2001 request was $97 million -- $17 million above the previous year's level. The Bush Administration requested$210 million for State's CIF account inFY2002. This represented a 117% increase over the FY2001 level. Secretary Powell's goal was to put full Internetcapability on every desktop and improvecommunication equipment in all State Department offices around the world. The House Appropriations Committeeagreed with the Administration request for$210 million; however, the funding was reduced by a floor amendment, transferring $7 million from CIF to theSmall Business Administration. Both the SenateAppropriations Committee and the full Senate agreed with the House level and Administration request of $210million for CIF . Congress enacted $203 millionnoting that additional funds were provided to CIF in the emergencysupplemental. Education and cultural exchange programs include programs such as the Fulbright, Muskie, and Humphrey academic exchanges, as well as the internationalvisitor exchanges and some Freedom Support Act programs. Secretary of State Powell testified on Capitol Hill thathe believes exchange programs are critical topromoting American ideals and democracy abroad. Therefore, the Bush Administration requested $242 million forthe exchange account, an increase of morethan $10 million (4.5%) over the FY2001 level. This amount would be the highest level for exchanges since themid-1990s when the Freedom Support and SEEDprograms were first funded. The FY2002 request is 21% higher than funding in the late 1990s when the educationand cultural exchange programs wereadministered through the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) at funding levels hovering around $200 million. TheHouse bill set funding at $237 million, $5 millionless than the request. The Senate passed the requested level of $242 million. The enacted FY2002 funding levelis the House-passed level of $237 millionincluding $118 million for the Fulbright programs. The United States contributes in two ways to the United Nations and other international organizations: (1) voluntary payments funded in the Foreign OperationsAppropriations bill and (2) assessed contributions included in the Commerce, Justice, and State Appropriationsmeasure. Assessed contributions are provided intwo accounts, international peacekeeping and contributions to international organizations (CIO) . Following a periodof dramatic growth in the number andcosts of U.N. peacekeeping missions during the early 1990s, a trend that peaked in FY1994 with a $1.1 billionappropriation, funding requirements have declinedin recent years. The FY2000 enacted appropriation for CIO was $885 million, $500 million for internationalpeacekeeping, and $351 million for U.S. arrearagepayments to the U.N. if certain reform criteria are met by the United Nations. Only $100 million of the appropriatedarrearage payments have been releasedbecause of a lack of U.N. reform. After the United States was voted off the U.N. Human Rights Commission earlierthis year, the Foreign Relations Authorizationbill added a provision (Sec. 601, H.R. 1646 ) that would restrict payment of $244 million of U.S. arrearagepayments to the U.N. After the September11th attacks, Congress passed S. 248 / P.L. 107-46 which authorized arrearage payments to theU.N. (For more detail, see CRS Issue Brief IB86116, U.N. System Funding: Congressional Issues , by [author name scrubbed]). The Bush Administration requested $878.8 million for CIO which represents full funding of U.S. assessed contributions to 44 U.N. organizations. The FY2002request of $844.1 million for international peacekeeping would providefunding for ongoing peacekeeping activities in Kosovo, East Timor, and Sierra Leone, toname a few. The Administration had asked that 15% of these funds be two-year funding because of theunpredictability of money for this account fromyear-to-year. The House-passed bill provided $850 million for CIO and $844.1 million for peacekeeping . The Senate passed $1,091.3 million for CIO ; the $241 milliondifference is largely for accounting issues. For internationalpeacekeeping , the Senate approved $773.2 million, $71 million less than the Houselevel. Congressenacted the House levels of $850 million for CIO and $844.1 millionfor international peacekeeping . The international broadcasting operations account, established after consolidation under the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) in FY1995, includes Voiceof America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Cuba Broadcasting, and newer surrogate facilities: Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Iraq andRadio Free Iran. When USIA integrated into the Department of State at the end of FY1999, the BBG became anindependent agency. The Administration's FY2002 request totaled $470 million for broadcasting, including $24.9 million for Cuba Broadcasting and $16.9 million for capitalimprovements. The request included funding for a "wholesale revamping" of VOA's current Arabic service, as wellas actions to counter massive broadcastjamming, particularly of RFA by China and of Cuba Broadcasting by Cuba. The capitalimprovements funding request provided for technical improvements andmaintenance of existing facilities, as well as new medium wave transmission capability in the Middle East. TheHouse-passed bill provided $9 million more thanrequested for international broadcasting-a total of $479 million. The Senate passed a total of $456.5 million. Theenacted FY2002 appropriation set funding atthe House level of $479 million. The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) enacted in 1993 ( P.L. 103-62 ; 107 stat 285) required that agencies develop strategic plans that containgoals, objectives, and performance measures for all major programs. The subsequently published reports: U.S.Department of State FY1999-2000 Performance Plan released February 1, 1999, and the United States Department of State Performance Report, FiscalYear 1999 established target goals and measured howsuccessful the State Department was in attaining those goals. With most of the 27 specified goals, State was closeto, or completely successful in, meeting itsstated goals. The Department of State Performance Plan, Fiscal Year FY2001 was released March2000. In 2001, the Bush Administration released U.S.Department of State Performance Plan, Fiscal Years 2001-2002. H.R. 1646 (Hyde)/ S. 1401 (Biden) The Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. Would authorize State Departmentspending of appropriations and other foreign relationsactivities. Introduced April 27, 2001. Committee reported bill to House ( H.Rept. 107-57 ). Passed by the House(352-73) May 16, 2001. Referred to SenateForeign Relations Committee May 17, 2001. Senate Foreign Relations Committee markup held July 26. Committeereported bill to the Senate ( S.Rept. 107-60 )on September 4th. State Department Issues CRS Report RL30662 . Embassy Security: Background, Funding, and the Budget , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RS20855 . Foreign Policy Budget for FY2002 , by Susan Epstein and [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL31046 . Foreign Relations Authorization, FY2002/2003: An Overview , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Report RL30926 . State Department and Related Agencies FY2002 Appropriations , by [author name scrubbed]. CRS Issue Brief IB86116. U.N. System Funding: Congressional Issues , by [author name scrubbed]. Other CRS Report RL31011 . Appropriations for FY2002: Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs , by [author name scrubbed]. This section includes all other related agencies covered by title V of the CJS appropriations bill whose FY2001 appropriations exceeded $1.8 million. (36) The CJSappropriations also cover funding for several relatively small governmental functions, including several specialgovernment commissions. (For additionalinformation on the funding of other related agencies covered by this legislation, see: Budget of the UnitedStates Government, Fiscal Year 2001-Appendix (106thCong., 2nd sess.)) Maritime Administration (MARAD). MARAD administers programs that aid in the development, promotion,and operation of the Nation's merchant marine (including programs that benefit vessel owners, shipyards, and shipcrews). The Administration requested $103million for MARAD for FY2002, $116.5 million less than Congress appropriated in FY2001. MARAD's proposedbudget for FY2002 is less than half of itsenacted FY2001 budget because the Administration's budget calls for the Department of Transportation (DOT) toshift $98 million to the Department of Defense(DOD) for the Maritime Security Program (MSP). MSP consists of privately-owned, U.S. flag, and U.S. crewedliner fleet in international trade that are availableto support DOD sustainment in a contingency. Zero funding for FY2002 was recommended for the Title XIGuaranteed Loan Program which insures financingfor construction of U.S. built ships and U.S. shipyard modernization and improvement. No new commitments forloan guarantees are projected for the FederalShip Financing Fund as this Fund is used only to underwrite guarantees made under the Title XI loan guaranteeprogram prior to 1992. The Administrationrecommended $89.1 million for operating MARAD and training ship crews for FY2002, which is $2.3 million morethan Congress appropriated in FY2001. TheAdministration proposed $10 million for a new category - Ship Disposal, which is intended to dispose of at leastthree obsolete vessels in the National DefenseReserve Fleet. The House Appropriations Committee recommended $231.7 million for MARAD for FY 2002, $12.6 million more than was appropriated in FY 2001. TheHouse's funding level was $128.7 million more than the Administration's request because the House budgetmaintains the MSP program ($98.7 million) underDOT and includes $30 million for the Title XI Guaranteed Loan Program (versus the Administration's zero funding). The House Committee's recommendationalso included $89.1 million for operations and training, and $10 million for ship disposal, both equal to thePresident's request. The House-passed bill approvedthe Committee's recommendations. The Senate Committee recommended $291.7 million for MARAD for FY 2002, which was $72.6 million more than was appropriated in FY 2001, $60 millionmore than the House's recommendation and $188.7 more than the President requested. The Senate recommended $100 million for the Title XI Guaranteed LoanProgram, $70 million more than the House recommended and $100 million more than the President's request. TheSenate recommended zero funding for the ShipDisposal Program versus the House and President's recommendation of $10 million. The Senate recommended$98.7 million for the MSP program and that theprogram remain under DOT rather than be shifted to the DOD as the Administration requested. The Senaterecommended $89.1 million for operations andtraining, equal to the House and Administration's request. The Senate-passed bill approved the Committee'srecommendations. The conference agreement included $98.7 million for MSP, $89.1 million for operations and training, and $33 million for the Title XI Guaranteed Loan Program. The conference agreement provided no funding for ship disposal. The Small Business Administration (SBA). The SBA is an independent federal agency created by the SmallBusiness Act of 1953. While the agency administers a number of programs intended to assist small firms, arguablyits three most important functions are toguarantee -- principally through the agency's 7(a) general business loan program -- business loans made by banksand other financial institutions; to makelong-term, low-interest loans to victims of hurricanes, earthquakes, other physical disasters, and acts of terrorism;and to serve as an advocate for small businesswithin the federal government. (37) For FY2001, the Administration had requested a total appropriation of $1,057.8 million -- a figure which included $50.5 million in an emergency supplementalappropriation to support the agency's disaster loan program. This compared to a $847 million CJS appropriationfor SBA for FY2000. More specifically, theFY2001 request included $419 million for Salaries & Expenses (S&E), an increase of $96.3 million overthe FY2000 appropriation. (38) For FY2001, the House CJS bill followed the recommendation of the Appropriations Committee. An amendment, however, added $4.5 million for the Women'sBusiness Centers program. The result: a total FY2001 appropriation for SBA of $860.7 million, including $304.1million for S&E. For its part, the SenateAppropriation Committee recommended a total FY2001 appropriation for SBA of $887.5 million, including $143.5for S&E. The conference agreement did notsplit funding for non-credit business assistance programs into a separate account, as proposed in the budget requestand the Senate-reported amendment, but ratherincluded funding for such programs under this account. For FY2002, the Administration requested a total appropriation for SBA of $539 million (and an additional carryover balance of $37.9 million in the agency'sDisaster Loan Programs account). In December 2000, Congress approved a total FY2001 appropriation for SBAof $899.5 million. Thus, the FY2002 requestrepresented a decrease of $360.5 million from the previous year. SBA's FY2002 budget request, however, assertedthat the agency would be able to maintain orincrease its assistance to small business with reduced resources, mainly by increasing user fees and restructuringdisaster relief funding. The House Appropriations Committee recommended a $727.9 million CJS appropriation for the SBA for FY2002, which included $303.6 million for S&E. Notably, the recommendation included $77 million for the guaranteed loan subsidy for the 7(a) program, whereas-- as noted above -- the Administration soughtto offset the subsidy cost by increasing user fees. The full House increased SBA's funding to $744.9 million withtransfers from the Department of State and theDepartment of Commerce. The Senate-passed bill recommended $773.5 million, $28.6 million more than theHouse-passed level and $231.5 million more thanwas requested. The conference agreement provided the SBA with a total appropriation of $768.5 million for FY2002, including $308.5 million for S&E. SBA's Response to the Terrorist Attacks. Following the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the SBAdispatched employees to New York City. The SBA worked in partnership with the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency (FEMA), the American Red Crossand other federal, state and local agencies in support of the New York City Mayor's Office of EmergencyManagement (NYOEM) to assist the residents of NewYork City who were stricken by the terrorist attacks. SBA loan officers were available in Disaster Recovery Centers located throughout the disaster area to assist business owners and individuals. SBA disasterassistance was available not only to small firms; the agency made loans to businesses of all sizes, nonprofitorganizations, homeowners and renters. In addition toPhysical Disaster Loans to repair or replace disaster damage to property and Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL)to cover operating expenses businesses couldhave afforded to pay if the disaster had not occurred, the agency also administered a Military Reservists EIDLprogram. (39) The purpose of the MREIDL programwas to provide funds to eligible small businesses to meet their ordinary and necessary operating expenses they couldhave met, but were unable to meet, becauseof essential employees being "called-up" to active duty in their role as military reservists. (40) Details on SBA's response to the September 11 terrorist attacks canbe accessed from the agency's home page at http://www.sba.gov/ . These programs fell within the funding purposesenumerated in the emergency supplementappropriations bill ( H.R. 2888 ) passed by Congress in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 Legal Services Corporation. LSC is a private, non-profit, federally-funded corporation that provides grants tolocal offices that, in turn, provide legal assistance to low-income people in civil (non-criminal) cases. The LSC hasbeen controversial since its inception in theearly 1970s, and has been operating without authorizing legislation since 1980. There have been ongoing debatesover the adequacy of funding for the agency,and the extent to which certain types of activities are appropriate for federally funded legal aid attorneys toundertake. In annual appropriations laws, Congresstraditionally has included legislative provisions restricting the activities of LSC-funded grantees, such as prohibitingrepresentation in certain types of cases orconducting any lobbying activities. P.L. 106-553 included $330 million for LSC for FY2001. This is $25 million higher than the FY2000 LSC appropriation and $10 million lower thanthe Clinton Administration's FY2001 budget request. The LSC appropriation includes $310 million for basic fieldprograms and independent audits, $10.8million for management and administration, $2.2 million for the inspector general, and $7 million for clientself-help and information technology. It should benoted that P.L. 106-554 mandated a 0.22 percent government-wide rescission of discretionary budget authority forFY2001 for almost all government agencies. Thus, the $330 million appropriation for LSC for FY2001 was reduced to $329.3 million. For FY2002, the Bush Administration requested $329.3 million for the LSC, which included $310 million for basic field programs, $12.4 million formanagement and administration, $4.4 million for client self-help and information technology, and $2.5 million forthe inspector general. The budget request alsocontinued all restrictions on LSC-funded activities currently in effect. The Administration's FY2002 request forLSC ($329.3 million) was the same as theamount currently obligated for the program for FY2001. Historically, the Corporation's highest level of fundingwas $400 million in FY1994 and FY1995. For FY2002, the House and Senate also recommended a total of $329.3 for LSC and included existing provisions restricting the activities of LSC grantees. Incarrying out LSC's vision of an effective and efficient statewide system of delivering legal services to the poor,grantees have been merging and reconfiguringtheir legal services programs to better use every federal dollar allocated to them. The House Committee reportindicated concern about the LSC overruling,without appeal, certain configurations implemented by grantees via the state planning process. The HouseCommittee report directed the LSC to review the stateplanning process and the concerns raised and report back to the Committee by September 4, 2001, with a proposal(that includes input from the stakeholders) thatoutlines the reconfiguration standards and the process for states to appeal LSC's decisions. (41) P.L. 107-77 included $329.3 million for LSC for FY2002. This is identical to the FY2001 appropriation for LSC (after the rescission) and the BushAdministration's FY2002 budget request for LSC. The LSC appropriation for FY2002 included $310 million forbasic field programs, $12.4 million formanagement and administration, $4.4 million for client self-help and information technology, and $2.5 million forthe inspector general. P.L. 107-77 alsoincluded existing provisions restricting the activities of LSC grantees. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The Commission enforces laws banning employmentdiscrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. The EEOC's workload has increaseddramatically since the agency first was createdunder Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and theCivil Rights Act of 1991, as well as employees'growing awareness of their rights, have made it difficult for the agency's budget and staffing resources to keep pacewith its heightened caseload. Congress approved $279 million for the agency's FY1999 budget, an increase of $37 million. The following year the appropriation rose minimally to $282million. Although the Commission received $21 million more for FY2001 ($303 million), the increase was abouthalf of that requested by the ClintonAdministration. Nonetheless, the funding increases of the last few years enabled the EEOC to cut by 69% thebacklog of private sector charges from a high of111,000 in mid-1995 and reduce the average processing time for private sector charges to 216 days. (The latter waslargely due to the Commission's expandeduse of alternative dispute resolution procedures, e.g. mediation). President Bush requested $310.4 million for FY2002 - an increase of $7.2 million - to allow the agency to further enhance its record in its private sector programand make improvements in its federal sector program, among other things. The House approved the President'srequest for $310.4 million to fund the EEOC. The House Committee directed the Commission to continue reducing the backlog of private sector discriminationcharges and continue at least its currentspending level ($1.8 million) on contract mediation, which is in addition to the mediation performed by EEOC staff. It expressed concern about the still high levelof these charges and expects the agency to exceed the small (6%) backlog reduction that was assumed in theAdministration's budget request. The Senate versionof CJS provided the same level of funding-$310.4 million-as requested by the Administration and passed by theHouse for the EEOC. Congress enacted thatlevel for EEOC in FY2002. Commission on Civil Rights. The Commission collects and studies information on discrimination or denials ofequal protection of the laws. It received an appropriation of $8.9 million in FY2001 and FY2000. The President's request for FY2002 called for a slight increaseto $9.1 million. The House and the Senate agreed to provide the Administration's request which Congress enacted. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC is an independent agency charged with regulation ofinterstate and foreign communication by means of radio, television, wire, cable and satellite. For FY2002 Congressapproved total funding for the FCC of $245.1million, a 6.8% increase over FY2001 resources of $229.5 million. The amount enacted was $6.5 million more thanthe $238.6 million approved by the Houseand $7.5 million less than the Senate bill amount of $252.5 million. (42) Of the $245.1 million total, $218.8 million is to be derived from offsettingfee collections,as provided in both the House and Senate bills, resulting in a net direct appropriation of $26.3 million. TheCommission had requested $248.5 million in totalfunding, an 8.3% increase over FY2001 resources. (43) In their report, House-Senate conferees reiterated concerns, expressed earlier by both Appropriations Committees, about "the declining standards of broadcasttelevison and the impact of this decline on Americas's children." (44) The conferees added that they expected the FCC to "continue in its efforts to address theseconcerns." The conference agreement said that it did not include Senate report language which had recommended $4 million for the Commission's Excellence in Engineering program. Instead, the conferees recommended that the FCC pursue a "modified approach to an 'Excellence inEngineering' effort." (45) In keeping with the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act, the FCC, as part of its FY2002 budget request, set forth its overall mission andgeneral and specific goals for a five-year time frame. Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). The FMC regulates a large part of the waterborne foreign commerce ofthe United States. The Administration requested $16.5 million for the FMC for FY2002, $1 million more thanCongress appropriated in FY 2001. The HouseAppropriations Committee recommended $15.5 million, which was equal to the amount enacted for FY 2001 and$1 million less than the President's request. TheHouse-passed bill approved the Committee's recommendations. The Senate Committee on Appropriationsrecommended $17.5 million, which was about $2million more than Congress appropriated in FY 2001 and $1 million more than the President's request. TheSenate-passed bill approved the Committee'srecommendations. The conference agreement provided $16.5 million for the FMC, equal to the Administration'srequest. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC, an independent agency, is responsible for enforcing anumber of federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. In recent years the FTC has used pre-merger filing feescollected under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act toentirely fund its operations; Zero ($0) direct appropriations have been required. For FY2001, the Administration requested an increase in the FTC's program level from $125 million to $164.6 million. The FY2001 request included $7 millionderived from estimated FY2000 carryover fee balances and an anticipated $157.6 million from pre-merger filingfees; therefore, as was the case the previous year,for FY2001 the FTC requested no net direct appropriation. The House Appropriations Committee recommendeda CJS appropriation of $134.8 million for theagency for FY2001. That request included $13.7 million derived from estimated FY2000 carryover fee balancesand an anticipated $121.1 million for pre-mergerfiling fees. The House bill mirrored the committee's recommendation. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended a program level for the agency for FY2001 of $159.5 million, to be derived exclusively from the collectionof pre-merger filing fees. The conference agreement approved by Congress in December 2000 included a total operating level of $147.2 million for the FTC for FY2001. The conferenceagreement assumed that, of the amount provided, $145.3 million would be derived from fees collected in FY2001and $1.9 million would be derived fromestimated unobligated fee collections available from FY2000. These actions resulted in a final direct appropriationof zero ($0). For FY2002 the Administration requested a program level of $156.3 million for the FTC, an increase of $9.1 million over the current year appropriation. All ofthe funding would come from offsetting collections derived from fees collected for pre-merger filings duringFY2002, so as to result in a final direct appropriationof zero ($0). The House approved a slightly smaller funding level: $156 million. The Senate-passed billrecommended $156.3 million. This amount, too, wouldbe entirely derived from fees collected by the agency. Congress provided the FTC with $156 million for FY2002. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC administers and enforces federal securities laws inorder to protect investors and to maintain fair and orderly stock and bond markets. The SEC collects fees on varioussecurities market transactions. In recentyears, these collections have exceeded the agency's budget by a wide margin. Legislation before the107th Congress ( S. 143 and H.R. 1088 ) proposed reducing these fees. In 2000, Congress approved a total operating level of $422.8 million for the SEC for FY2001, an increase of $55.0 million over FY2000. The figure wascomprised of $127.8 million in offsetting fee collections for FY2001 and $295 million in FY1999 collections. Theresult: no direct appropriations were requiredfor the agency for FY2001. For FY2002, the Administration requested a total operating level of $437.9 million for the SEC, an increase of $15.1 million over FY2001. As was the case inFY2001, no direct appropriations would be needed - instead, the SEC would be funded entirely by current and prioryear fee collections. The House approved SEC spending at the level of the Administration's request: $437.9 million, of which $109.5 million would come from fees collected inFY2002 and the remaining $324.4 million from prior-year fees. The Senate approved a higher amount - $514.0million ($109.5 million from current year fees and$404.5 million from FY2000 fees). The conference agreement adopted the House proposal. No directappropriations would be needed. The State Justice Institute (SJI). The Institute is a private, non-profit corporation that makes grants andconducts other activities to further the development of judicial administration in State courts throughout the UnitedStates. Under the terms of its enablinglegislation, SJI is authorized to present its request directly to Congress, apart from the President's budget. TheInstitute requested $15.0 million for FY2002,more than double its FY2001 funding amount of $6.835 million. (46) Congress, however, scaled back the SJI appropriation for FY2002 significantly, approving$3.0 million, instead of $6.835 million and $6.2 million approved by the House and Senate respectively. (Separatefrom the Institute's request, the President hadrequested the same funding amount for SJI as appropriated for FY2001--$6.835 million. (47) ) The conference report stated that the $3.0 million appropriated for the SJI is "available for fiscal year 2002 only" and that the conferees did not recommendcontinued federal support for the Institute beyond FY2002. "The termination of funding for this program," the reportexplained, "does not necessarily mean thedissolution of the Institute. The conferees encourage the Institute to solicit private donations and resources fromState and local agencies." Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). USTR is located in the Executive Office of the President.USTR is the chief trade negotiator for the United States and is responsible for developing and coordinating U.S.international trade and direct investment policies. The President's FY2002 request was $30.1 million, just slightly above the amount ($29.5 million) approved byCongress for FY2001. The House and Senateapproved funding the President's full FY2002 request, which was enacted by Congress. U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). ITC is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that advises thePresident and Congress on the impact of U.S. foreign economic policies on U.S. industries and is charged withimplementing various U.S. trade remedy laws. Itssix commissioners are appointed by the President for 9-year terms. Its budget request was submitted to Congressby the President without revision. For FY2002, ITC requested $51.4 million, a $3.4 million increase over the FY2001 level ($48.1 million). The House and Senateapproved funding the full FY2002 request,and Congress passed that amount. U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. The Commission, established in P.L. 105-292 , is anindependent agency charged with the annual and ongoing review and reporting of the facts and circumstances ofviolations of religious freedom. Theappropriation for FY1999 was $3 million. No additional funds were appropriated for FY2000 or FY2001. The BushAdministration requested $3 million for thisCommission for FY2002 with which the House agreed. The Senate bill provided no funding. Congress passed therequested amount of $3 million. H.R. 518 (Regula et al.) Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to revise the injury threshold the International Trade Commission must considerto determine the risk of increased imports to adomestic industry producing like or directly competitive articles in escape clause (Sec.201) actions. IntroducedFebruary 7, 2001; referred to House Ways andMeans Committee. H.R. 1988 (English et al.); S. 979 (Durbin et al.) Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to revise the injury threshold the International Trade Commission must considerto determine the risk of increased imports to adomestic industry producing like or directly competitive articles in escape clause (Sec.201) actions. Amends theTariff Act of 1930 to revise various factors thatthe Commission must consider in making material injury determinations in countervailing duty and antidumpingduty proceedings. H.R. 1988 introduced May 24, 2001; referred to House Ways and Means Committee. S. 979 introduced May 26, 2001;referred to Senate Finance Committee. S. 422 (Wellstone); H.R. 837 (Oberstar et al.) Directs the International Trade Commission to consider U.S. produced taconite pellets to be like or directlycompetitive with semifinished steel slab for purposesof: (1) Section 201 injury determinations, and (2) antidumping or countervailing duty determinations. S. 422 introduced March 1, 2001; referred toSenate Finance Committee. H.R. 837 introduced March 7, 2001; referred to House Ways and MeansCommittee. S. 187 (Snowe et al.); H.R. 1782 (Manzullo et al.) Small Business Export Enhancement Act of 2001 - Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to establish in the Office ofthe United States Trade Representative (USTR) theposition of Assistant USTR for Small Business to promote the trade interests of small businesses, remove foreigntrade barriers that impede small businessexporters, and enforce existing trade agreements beneficial to small businesses. S. 187 introduced January25, 2001; referred to the Senate Budgetand Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. H.R. 1782 introduced May 9, 2001; referred to HouseCommittee on Ways and Means. S. 714 (Snowe et al.) Expresses the sense of Congress that the U.S. Trade Representative should pursue the establishment of a smallbusiness advocate at the World Trade Organization(WTO) to safeguard the interests of small firms and represent those interests in trade negotiations involving theWTO. Introduced April 5, 2001; referred to theSenate Finance Committee. S. 19 (Daschle et al.) Protecting Civil Rights for All Americans Act. Would authorize $400 million for the Legal ServicesCorporation for FY2002. Introduced January 22, 2001;referred to S. Judiciary Committee. CRS Report 95-178. Legal Services Corporation; Basic Facts and Current Status , by [author name scrubbed]. Title I. Department of Justice Title II. Department of Commerce and Related Agencies Title III. Judiciary Title IV. Department of State and International Broadcasting Title V. Other Related Agencies Title VI. General Provisions Title VII. Rescissions Title IX. Total Appropriation Funding, Titles I-IX, FY2001 and FY2002 Sources: U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on Appropriation. Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Figures are for direct appropriations only; in some cases, agencies supplement these amount with offsettingfee collections, including collections carried over from previous years. These agencies include: Immigration andNaturalization Service, Patent and TrademarkOffice, Small Business Administration, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, and theSecurities and Exchange Commission. Information on such fees are contained in the background and issues sections of this report. a The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees. The fees collected, but not obligated during the current year, are available for obligation inthe following fiscal year. b As of October 1, 1999 both USIA and ACDA were consolidated into the Department of State. International Broadcasting remains an independent agency. c In addition to appropriations, State has authority to spend certain collected fees from machine readable visas, expedited export fees, etc. For FY2000 this amountequals $322.1 million; the estimated amount for such fees for FY2001 is $390.9 million. The President's FY2002request includes use of $414.2 million incollected fees. d For FY2001, Congress approved $229.5 million in overall funding resources for the FCC, consisting of a direct appropriation of $29.3 million and $200.1million in offsetting regulatory fee collections. The President requested $248.5 million in overall FY2002 fundingresources, consisting of a direct appropriationof $29.8 million and $218.8 million in offsetting fee collections. The House approved $238.6 million in overallFY2002 funding resources, consisting of a directappropriation of $19.8 million and $218.8 million in offsetting collections. The Senate approved $252.5 millionin overall FY2002 funding resources, consistingof a direct appropriation of $33.8 million and $218.8 million in offsetting collections. Congress enacted $245.1million for FY2002, consisting of a directappropriation of $26.3 million and $218.8 million in offsetting collections. e The FTC is fully funded by the collection of pre-merger filing fees. f The SEC is fully funded by transaction fees and securities registration fees. g Under the terms of its enabling legislation, the State Justice Institute is authorized to present its budget request directly to Congress. For FY2002, the Instituterequested $15 million--as distinguished from the President's request, which called for $6.8 million. h Other includes agencies receiving appropriations of less than $1.8 million in FY1999 and FY2000. These agencies include Commission for the Preservation ofAmerican Heritage Abroad; Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; Commission on ElectronicCommerce; the Marine Mammal Commission, theCommission on Ocean Policy, and the Congressional/Executive Commission on China.

Summary: This report tracks action by the 107th Congress on FY2002 appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and other relatedagencies (often referred to as CJS appropriations). President Bush's FY2002 budget request totals $40.81 billion,about one billion dollars (2.6%) above theFY2001 total. The House agreed to $41.46 billion, the committee total, and passed the bill ( H.R. 2500 ) onJuly 18th. The Senate AppropriationsCommittee recommended a total of $41.53 billion ( S. 1215 ). The Senate passed its version of H.R. 2500 , as amended, on September 13,2001. Conferees met on November 8th and agreed to a total funding level of $39.3 billion. Confereesalso agreed to file the conference report on the followingday. Continuing resolutions have kept the government running into the new fiscal year: H.J.Res. 65 ( P.L.107-44 ) expired October 16th, H.J.Res. 68 ( P.L. 107-48 ) expired October 23rd, H.J.Res. 69 ( P.L. 107-53 ) expiredOctober 31st, H.J.Res. 70 ( P.L. 107-58 )expired November 16th, and H.J.Res. 74 expired December 7, 2001. The bill was signed into law ( P.L.107-77 ) on November 28th, prior to the expiration of thecontinuing resolution. Department of Justice. The FY2002 request was $21.11 billion, less than 1% above the FY2001 enacted level. Key issues included: addressing terrorism,reducing gun crimes through enforcement of existing laws; combating drug abuse; funding for community policingprograms under the Office of JusticePrograms; restructuring the Immigration and Naturalization Service, reducing pending immigration andnaturalization caseloads, and increasing borderenforcement. Congress passed $21.7 billion for this agency. Department of Commerce. The FY2002 request was $5.1 billion, 2% below the FY2001 funding level. Congress debated such issues as funding for: NOAA'snext-generation weather satellites, local economic development activities, and the Technology OpportunitiesProgram (TOP) grants. The enacted FY2002 budgetfor Commerce totals $5.4 billion. Department of State . The FY2002 request was $7.5 billion, nearly 14% above the FY2001 enacted level. The Department had three top priorities in its FY2002budget: hiring about 600 new staff in Foreign and Civil Service, as well as security professionals; continuingincreases in embassy security; and more thandoubling its current funds for information technology improvements worldwide. Congress passed $7.4 billion. The Judiciary . The FY2002 request was $4.9 billion, 14.5% above the FY2001 funding level. The Judiciary request included funds for cost-of-living salaryincreases for federal judges and justices, as well as $117 million for the first major renovation of the Supreme Courtbuilding since its opening in 1935. Congressapproved $4.61 billion, an 8.4% increase over FY2001, including $37.5 million for the Supreme Court building and$8.6 million for a cost-of-living payadjustment for judges and justices.