Congress uses an annual appropriations process to provide discretionary spending for federal government agencies. The responsibility for drafting legislation to provide for such spending is currently divided among 12 appropriations subcommittees in each chamber, each of which is tasked with reporting a regular appropriations bill to cover all programs under its jurisdiction. (The titles of these 12 bills, which correspond to their respective subcommittees, are listed in Table 1 at the end of this section.) The timetable associated with the annual appropriations process requires the enactment of all regular appropriations bills prior to the beginning of the fiscal year (October 1). If regular appropriations are not enacted by that deadline, one or more continuing resolutions (CRs) may be enacted to provide interim funding authority until all regular appropriations bills are completed or the fiscal year ends. During the fiscal year, supplemental appropriations may also be enacted to provide funds in addition to those in regular appropriations acts or CRs. Amounts provided in appropriations acts are subject to limits, both procedural and statutory, which are enforced through mechanisms such as points of order and sequestration. Disagreement over the appropriate level of discretionary spending—as well as its distribution between defense and nondefense activities—significantly affected the focus of the FY2016 appropriations process. While the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 ( P.L. 113-67 ) revised the statutory discretionary spending limits to allow higher spending in FY2014 and FY2015, that agreement did not alter the calculation for the FY2016 limits. As a consequence, the FY2016 limits were generally less than 1% higher than both the FY2014 and FY2015 limits. In the FY2016 budget submission, the President proposed raising both the defense and nondefense limits. The congressional budget resolution ( S.Con.Res. 11 ) took a different approach in that it assumed FY2016 discretionary spending at the level allowed by the limits at that time but also allowed additional spending (largely in the defense category) that was effectively not subject to the statutory spending limits. This additional spending was proposed at a higher level than the amount requested by the President. This disagreement as to the level of discretionary spending was ultimately resolved through the enactment of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 on November 2, 2015 (BBA 2015; H.R. 1314 ; P.L. 114-74 ). The BBA 2015 raised both the defense and nondefense statutory discretionary spending limits for FY2016 and FY2017 and specified an expected level for the "Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism" (OCO/GWOT) spending adjustment for each of those fiscal years. The enactment of annual appropriations subject to those limits has yet to occur. Consideration of FY2016 regular appropriations bills in the House began on April 15, 2015, with subcommittee approval of the Energy-Water ( H.R. 2028 ) and Military Construction-VA ( H.R. 2029 ) appropriations bills. Since that time, all 12 regular appropriations bills have been reported from committee, and six of those have passed the House. About a month after committee action began in the House, the Senate began its consideration of FY2016 appropriations measures with the subcommittee approval of the Energy-Water and Military Construction-VA appropriations bills, on May 19. The Senate Appropriations Committee subsequently reported all 12 regular appropriations bills. On June 18, the Senate rejected a motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the Department of Defense appropriations bill ( H.R. 2685 ). Since that time, the Senate voted not to invoke cloture on motions to proceed to the Defense, Military Construction-VA, and Energy-Water appropriations bills. However, on November 5, the Senate agreed to proceed to consider the Military Construction-VA appropriations bill and passed that bill on November 10. The Senate proceeded to consider the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill ( H.R. 2577 ) on November 18 but has not completed that consideration as of the date of this report. Because none of the FY2016 regular appropriations bills became law by the start of the fiscal year, a CR was enacted to provide continuing appropriations until December 11 ( H.R. 719 ; P.L. 114-53 ). (Prior to the final consideration and enactment of H.R. 719 , Senate legislative action related to FY2016 continuing appropriations occurred on a different legislative vehicle, H.J.Res. 61 .) This report provides background and analysis of congressional action related to the FY2016 appropriations process. The first section discusses the status of discretionary budget enforcement for FY2016, including the statutory spending limits and allocations associated with the congressional budget resolution. The second section provides information on the consideration of regular appropriations bills. Further information with regard to the FY2016 regular appropriations bills is provided in the various CRS reports that analyze and compare the components of the President's budget submission and the relevant congressional appropriations proposals. This report will be updated periodically during the FY2016 appropriations process. For information on the current status of FY2016 appropriations measures, see the CRS Appropriations Status Table: FY2016, at http://www.crs.gov/Pages/AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx . The framework for budget enforcement of discretionary spending under the congressional budget process has both statutory and procedural elements. The statutory elements are the discretionary spending limits derived from the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. 112-25 ). The procedural elements are primarily associated with the budget resolution. It limits both the total spending under the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committee, as well as spending under the jurisdiction of each appropriations subcommittee. In addition, pursuant to Section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (BBEDCA), certain spending is effectively exempt from these statutory and procedural spending limits because the limits are adjusted upward to accommodate that spending. Such spending includes budget authority specifically designated as emergency requirements, OCO/GWOT, disaster relief, and particular amounts of budget authority for certain program integrity initiatives. Since the enactment of the BCA in 2011, the vast majority of adjustments pursuant to Section 251(b) have been for budget authority designated as OCO/GWOT. Such adjustments have allowed for additional budget authority (largely in the defense category) for expenses associated with overseas operations, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other related purposes. The FY2016 appropriations process, as noted earlier, has been affected by disagreement over the appropriate level of discretionary spending, as well as its distribution between defense and nondefense activities. The BCA established statutory spending limits for FY2016. However, the President proposed revisions to those limits in his FY2016 budget request. In addition, the FY2016 budget resolution establishes certain procedurally enforceable limits on discretionary spending that are related to the levels of the BCA limits. Table 2 displays the initial BCA limits, the revised BCA limits, and proposed limits for FY2016, compared to the limits that were in effect for FY2014 and FY2015. It also displays the current law defense and nondefense spending levels that were ultimately established through the enactment of the BBA 2015. The BCA imposes separate limits on defense and nondefense discretionary spending for each of the fiscal years from FY2012 through FY2021. The defense category includes all discretionary spending under budget function 050 (defense); the nondefense category includes discretionary spending in the other budget functions. In order to require additional budgetary savings, the BCA included procedures to lower the level of the initial spending limits for each fiscal year. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calculates the amount by which each initial limit for the upcoming fiscal year is to be lowered, and announces the amount of the lowered limits in a "preview report" at the same time that the President's budget is submitted. If discretionary spending is enacted in excess of a statutory limit, the BCA requires the level of spending to be brought into conformance through "sequestration," which involves largely across-the-board cuts to non-exempt spending in the category of the limit that was breached (i.e., defense or nondefense). Once discretionary spending is enacted, OMB evaluates that spending relative to the spending limits and determines whether sequestration is necessary. For FY2016 discretionary spending, the first such evaluation (and any necessary enforcement) is to occur within 15 calendar days after the 2015 congressional session adjourns sine die. For any FY2016 discretionary spending that becomes law after the session ends, the OMB evaluation and any enforcement of the limits would occur 15 days after enactment. The BBEDCA also provides specific preconditions for adjusting the statutory limits to accommodate OCO/GWOT-designated spending. Such spending must be designated by Congress on an account-by-account basis, and also be subsequently designated by the President, in order for the relevant statutory limit to be adjusted. If the President were not to designate such funds as OCO/GWOT, the limit would not be adjusted to accommodate that additional spending. This could cause enacted spending to be higher than the limit and trigger a sequestration to enforce it. In recent years, appropriations acts that carried OCO/GWOT spending have generally included a provision stipulating that each amount in that act designated by Congress for OCO/GWOT "shall be available only if the President subsequently so designates all such amounts.... " Table 2 displays the FY2014 and FY2015 limits and OCO/GWOT enacted spending, the FY2016 initial and revised levels for the limits, and various FY2016 proposed levels for the limits and OCO/GWOT spending. The total of the limits is also listed. Pursuant to Section 251A of the BBEDCA, the initial BCA limit on defense spending for FY2016 was reduced by $53.909 billion to the revised level of $523.091 billion.