APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY2001: TREASURY, POSTAL SERVICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT

CRS Report for Congress
Appropriations for FY2001: Treasury, Postal
Service, Executive Office of the President, and
General Government
Updated January 29, 2001
Sharon S. Gressle, Coordinator
Government and Finance Division


Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Appropriations are one part of a complex federal budget process that includes budget
resolutions, appropriations (regular, supplemental, and continuing) bills, rescissions,
and budget reconciliation bills. The process begins with the President’s budget
request and is bounded by the rules of the House and Senate, the Congressional
Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (as amended), the Budget
Enforcement Act of 1990, and current program authorizations.
This report is a guide to one of the 13 regular appropriations bills that Congress
passes each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House
and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Treasury, Postal Service, and General
Government. It summarizes the current legislative status of the bill, its scope, major
issues, funding levels, and related legislative activity. The report lists the key CRS
staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products.
This report is updated as soon as possible after major legislative developments,
especially following legislative action in the committees and on the floor of the House
and Senate.
NOTE: A Web version of this document with
active links is available to congressional staff at
[http://www.loc.gov/crs/products/apppage.html]



Appropriations for FY2001: Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General
Government
Summary
FY2001 Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the president, and General
Government funding was enacted through P.L. 106-554, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act for FY2001, December 21, 2001. Partial funding for a select few
of the accounts and some general provisions of the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government FY2001 Appropriations
are included in the Department of Transportation FY2001 Appropriation (P.L. 106-

346, Title V, October 23, 2000) and the continuing funding resolution (P.L. 106-275,


as amended). Twenty-one continuing resolutions provided stopgap funding during
the period October 1 through December 21, 2000. There were four appropriations
bills which would have funded all or some of the accounts usually funded through the
Treasury, Postal Service and General Government FY2001 appropriations acts. The
House had passed, on July 20, H.R. 4871. The Senate had reported, on July 20, S.

2900 and, on July 26, had voted to invoke cloture to proceed with debate on H.R.


4871. The third version, H.R. 4985, was introduced on July 26 as a new bill and
reported from the Legislative Branch (H.R. 4516) appropriations conference
committee as section 1001, Division B of that conference. This bill was vetoed
October 30, 2000.The House agreed to the conference report on H.R. 4516
September 14. On October 6, the House and Senate approved and sent to the
President, a conference agreement for Department of Transportation appropriations
(H.R. 4475). Title V partially funds ($348.4 million) several of the accounts.
P.L. 106-554 funds the accounts at $30.4 billion ($14.7 in mandatory funding
and $15.6 in discretionary accounts). The FY2001 budget, submitted to Congress on
February 7, 2000, requested $31.2 billion. The FY2000 funding totals $28.3 billion,
including mandatory funding (reflecting scorekeeping by the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO)). Incorporating the CBO scorekeeping for FY2001, the budget would
have mandatory accounts funded at $14.7 billion and discretionary funding set at
$16.5 billion. The House and Senate Appropriations Committees approved
allocations to the various appropriations: House—discretionary budget authority at
$14.402 billion with outlays at $14.751 billion; and Senate—$14.3 billion for budget
authority and $14.566 billion for outlays. While the congressional allocations were
in disagreement with one another, they were consistently lower than the requested
funding. P.L. 106-346 (H.R. 4475) adds $348 million.
The Budget and Key Policy Issues section of the report discusses both the
funding provisions and policy initiatives in the funding statutes. The funding
provisions in Title V of the Department of Transportation appropriations act were
critical to the success of passage of the main funding provisions in that compromises
were reached on the main bill based on commitments to funding for the Department
of the Treasury, principally the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) STABLE program
and for IRS information technology. Table 4 details the funding, in the various
versions of the FY2001 appropriations proposals, by account.



Area of ExpertiseNameCRS DivisionTel.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and FirearmsWilliam KrouseDSP7-2225
Council of Economic AdvisersEdward KnightG&F7-7785
Customs ServiceWilliam KrouseDSP7-2225
Debt ManagementJames BickleyG&F7-7794
Executive Office of the PresidentRogelio GarciaG&F7-8687
Federal Child CareMelinda GishDSP7-4618
Federal Election CommissionJoseph CantorG&F7-7876
Federal Employee Health Care PolicyCarolyn MerckDSP7-7320
Federal Employee Pension PolicyPatrick PurcellDSP7-7571
General Services AdministrationStephanie SmithG&F7-8674
Independent AgenciesSharon GressleG&F7-8677
Internal Revenue ServiceSylvia MorrisonG&F7-7755
National ArchivesHarold RelyeaG&F7-8679
Office of Government EthicsMildred AmerG&F7-8304
Office of Personnel ManagementBarbara SchwemleG&F7-8655
Postal ServiceBernevia McCalipG&F7-7781
Presidential SalarySharon GressleG&F7-8677
Procurement ReformStephanie SmithG&F7-8674
Secret ServiceStephanie SmithG&F7-8674
Division abbreviations: G&F = Government and Finance; DSP = Domestic Social Policy; RSI=Resources,
Science, and Industry.



Contents
Most Recent Developments........................................1
Note to Reader:.................................................1
Introduction ................................................... 2
Rescissions ................................................ 3
Status and Legislative History......................................5
The House Bill..........................................6
The Senate Bill..........................................6
Legislative Branch Appropriation............................7
FY2001 Continuing Funding Resolution.......................8
Transportation Appropriations..............................8
The Act...............................................8
Treasury and General Government Appropriations, 2001
(Public Law 106-554).......................................10
Budget and Key Policy Issues.................................10
Department of the Treasury...................................10
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF)..............11
Customs Service.......................................13
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)............................16
Secret Service.........................................17
U.S. Postal Service.........................................18
Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated
to the President........................................19
Compensation of the President.............................19
White House Office.....................................19
Executive Residence (White House).........................20
Special Assistance to the President (Office of the Vice President) and
Official Residence of the Vice President..................21
Council of Economic Advisers.............................21
Office of Policy Development..............................21
National Security Council.................................21
Office of Administration..................................21
Office of Management and Budget..........................21
Office of National Drug Control Policy......................22
Federal Drug Control Programs............................22
Unanticipated Needs....................................23
Independent Agencies.......................................24
Federal Election Commission (FEC).........................24
Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA)...................25
General Services Administration (GSA)......................25
Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).....................27
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)..........28
Office of Government Ethics (OGE).........................29
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).....................30
Office of Special Counsel (OSC)...........................32



Title V ..............................................33
Title VI..............................................34
Department of Transportation Appropriations, 2001 — P.L. 106-346.......36
Privacy Provisions..........................................37
Continuing Resolution...........................................38
Legislative Branch Conference Report...............................39
Treasury and General Government Provisions.....................39
Data Quality...........................................40
Excise Tax............................................41
Veto and Subsequent Action..................................41
Federal Personnel Issues.........................................42
Pay ..................................................... 42
General .............................................. 42
Federal Wage System....................................42
Members of Congress, Judges, and Other Officials.............42
President ............................................. 43
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program......................43
Federal Retirement..........................................43
Repeal of Temporary Increase in Retirement Contributions.......43
Law Enforcement —Washington Area Airport Authority.........44
Increase in maximum allowable contributions to the
Thrift Savings Plan..................................44
Federal Child Care..........................................45
Major Funding Trends...........................................45
Glossary of Budget Process Terms.................................70
For Additional Reading..........................................72
CRS Issue Briefs...........................................72
CRS Info Packs............................................72
CRS Reports..............................................72
Other Readings............................................75
Selected World Wide Web Sites................................76
List of Tables
Table 1. Status of FY2001 Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government............9
Table 2. Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the
President, and General Government, FY1996 to FY2000.............46
Table 3. Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President, and General
Government Appropriations, FY2001, by Title.....................47
Table 4. Department of the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the
President, and General Government Appropriations ................48



Appropriations for FY2001: Treasury, Postal
Service, Executive Office of the President,
and General Government
Most Recent Developments
P.L. 106-554, signed December 21, 2000, is the law through which, H.R. 5658,
the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President, and General
Government Appropriations, 2001 was enacted.
P.L. 106-275, the FY2001 continuing funding resolution, as amended by 20
further continuing funding resolutions, provided funding for most Treasury and
General Government accounts at the FY2000 level. However, there was funding
provided to the General Services Administration to administer the transition and to
the Executive Residence for the purpose of preparing for the transfer of families in
the White House.
On October 23, the President signed P.L. 106-346 (H.R. 4475), the
Transportation appropriations bill, Title V of which partially funds a select group
of accounts from the Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government primary
funding measure.
Note to Reader:
Prior to enactment of P.L. 106-554, through which the FY2001 Treasury and
General Government appropriations were enacted, there were several measures which
either would have, or actually did, fund affected accounts. Because the discussions
in this report will refer to various measures, the following key is provided as a guide.
House bill or H.R. 4871 (Reported by House Committee on Appropriations and
passed the House)
Senate bill or S. 2900 (Reported by Senate Committee on Appropriations)
Legislative Branch Appropriation—conference report or H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985
(Vetoed October 30)
Transportation Appropriations or P.L. 106-346 (H.R. 4475) (Title V, partial
funding and some general provisions)
FY2001Continuing Funding Resolution or P.L. 106-275, as amended. (P.L. 106-
426, provides funding for the presidential transition and P.L. 106-520 authorizes
use of White House funds for transition moving expenses)
The Act or P. L. 106-554 (Enacts H.R. 5658, Treasury and General Government)



Introduction
The bulk of the accounts within the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office
of the President, and General Government FY2001 are funded through P.L. 106-554
(H.R. 4577/H.R. 5658). However, P.L. 106-346, signed by the President October 23,
provides supplemental funding for certain of those accounts (Title V).
The President, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required
to submit to Congress, annually, the Budget of the United States Government. On
February 7, 2000, the budget for FY2001 was submitted.1
Congress has established a procedure by which it passes a concurrent resolution
establishing the congressional budget for the government and setting forth budgetary
levels for several years in the future.2 The House and Senate Appropriations
Committees then allocate the discretionary funding levels (302(b)) allocations to each
of the subcommittees. See the section of this report entitled “Major Funding Trends”
for a discussion of the FY2001 allocations for Treasury and General Government
appropriations.
Appropriations for the Department of the Treasury, in addition to funding the
operations of the department, fund the work of a group of law enforcement
organizations, which include the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; the
Customs Service; the Secret Service; the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; and
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Treasury appropriations also cover
the Internal Revenue Service, the Financial Management Service, and the Bureau of
the Public Debt.
For the most part, the U. S. Postal Service has become self-supporting. Federal
contributions are limited to payments to the Postal Service Fund to compensate for
revenues foregone (e.g., free postal service for the blind.)
Appropriations for the Executive Office of the President provide salaries and
expenses for the White House Office, operations of the residences of the President
and Vice President, and most other agencies within the Executive Office of the
President (EOP). Organizations such as the Council of Economic Advisers, the
National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of
National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) are funded through these provisions.
Specific funding for drug control initiatives is appropriated for distribution to other
entities by the ONDCP.
Among the independent agencies financed through this appropriation are the
Federal Election Commission, the General Services Administration, the National


1U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the
United States Government, Fiscal Year 2001 (Washington: GPO, 2000). Hereafter referred
to as Budget, with specific budget document cited.
2H. Con. Res.290, 106th Cong., 2nd sess. versions, which differed, agreed to by the House Mar.
24, 2000 and by the Senate Apr. 7, 2000. A conference report (H.Rept. 106-577) was agreed
to by both chambers Apr. 13, 2000.

Archives and Records Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, the
Office of Special Counsel, and the United States Tax Court.
The Treasury and General Government appropriation always has at least two
titles in addition to the four covering the funding for specific agencies. These general
titles apply restrictions or “rules of the road” governmentwide and, quite often,
contain authority for defined actions. For example, each year, there is standard
language which prohibits the use of any appropriated funds for the purpose of
employing individuals who are not U.S. citizens or citizens of nations either specified
in that section of the act or on the State Department list of nations covered by
treaties; which requires that all agencies maintain drug-free workplaces; and which
authorizes the expenditure of funds appropriated under any act to be used to pay the
travel expenses of immediate family members if a federal employee serving overseas
has died or has a life-threatening illness. See below for a presentation of new
provisions in titles V and VI.
Rescissions
As part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2001, P.L. 106-554, there will
be a .22% across-the-board rescission of FY2001 discretionary budget authority and
obligation limitations funds (section 1403, H.R. 4577/H.R. 5666).3 All accounts in
the Treasury and General Government appropriations will be affected. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) is required to report on the implementation of the
rescission when the FY2002 budget is submitted.
On January 5, 2001, the Office of Management Budget issued guidelines to the4
agencies.
The rescission applies to all net positive discretionary budget authority and
obligation limitations. Advance appropriations for FY 2001 provided in FY 2000
or earlier years are subject to the rescission. Advance appropriations provided in
FY 2001 appropriations acts for FY 2002 and future years are not subject to the
rescission. Discretionary emergency appropriations are subject to the rescission.
The Act requires that the 0.22 percent reduction be applied equally to each
program, project, and activity subject to the rescission. "Programs, projects, and
activities" (PPA) are defined as that level of appropriations detail specified in the
appropriations act or accompanying report for the relevant fiscal year covering
each account, including earmarks and directives, or, for accounts and items not
included in appropriations acts, as specified in the program and financing
schedules in the FY 2001 President's budget.


3See: CRS reports, The .22 Percent Across-the-Board Cut in FY2001 Appropriations
(RS20758) and FY2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act: Reference Guide (RS20756), both
by Robert Keith.
4U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Rescission of FY2001 Discretionary Budget
Authority, Bulletin No. 01-03 to the heads of executive departments and agencies, Jan. 5,
2001. http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/bulletins/b01-03.html

There is no discretion to change the allocation of the rescission among
discretionary PPA; each must be reduced by 0.22 percent. The rescission cannot
be applied to mandatory PPA, or transfers of mandatory funds to discretionary
PPA.
...Required actions. Agencies will be separately provided with their rescission
amounts by account by their OMB representative. Agencies must allocate the
reduction on a pro-rata basis to every program, project, and activity subject to the
rescission, without exception.
Please note that the Act requires that all reductions be made from discretionary
budget authority and obligation limitations only.
Subsequent to passage of FY2000 Treasury and General Government
appropriations,5 the FY2000 Consolidated Appropriations Act6 provided for a so-
called across-the-board rescission of 0.38%. As part of the FY2001 budget
submission, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reported specific7
reductions in the accounts. OMB issued a fact sheet (2000-01-10 OMB Fact Sheet,
January 10, 2000) in which the administration stated that the law stipulated that
0.38% in savings was to be realized by each and every department. However, within
each department, it provided latitude to protect high-priority programs as long as the
dollar figure amounting to 0.38% was achieved and certain other conditions were
met. The FY2001 rescission provisions specifically exempts certain programs, none
in the accounts discussed in this report, but otherwise is to be universally applied.
The FY2001 Military Construction Appropriations Act is the vehicle for the
FY2000 Supplemental funding provisions.8 Some of the accounts covered by the
Treasury/Postal Service measure are affected by that language. For example, section
6 provides that the pay date for federal civilian personnel which had been pushed into
FY2001, will revert to the original scheduled date in FY2000. That will alter the
“enacted” funding level for FY2000. When the term “net,” is used in this report, it
means the FY2000 appropriated levels reduced by the rescinded amount as reported
by OMB and the supplemental.
Table 4 is designed to provide summary information for FY2000 enacted
funding, for House and Senate reported or passed funding, and for FY2001 enacted,
as appropriate. Although not all accounts are represented, those with significant
funding levels or subject to critical discussion can be found in the table. The FY2000
enacted levels reflect the application of the rescissions and the supplemental.


5P.L. 106-58; Sept. 29, 1999; 113 Stat. 430.
6P.L. 106-113, section 1000(a)(5), section 301; Nov. 29, 1999. For a guide to that statute,
see CRS Report RS20403, FY2000 Consolidated Appropriations Act: Reference Guide, by
Robert Keith.
7Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 393.
8P.L. 106-246; July 13, 2000; H.R. 4425/S. 2521.

The funding levels in the tables in this report are provided by the House
Appropriations Committee. The funding levels in the text are, unless otherwise
noted, also provided by the House committee. The Senate documentation is
noted if there are differences between the two versions. Also, in some instances,
the account totals may differ between the budget, as submitted by the President,
and the requested funding levels calculated by the House and Senate
committees. Any significant differences will be discussed in the text. The
committee data are more current, and represent the amounts used by Members
in considering various funding alternatives.
The Budget documents provided by the Office of Management and Budget
and the appropriations bills do not necessarily follow the same organization of
accounts. For example, not all of the agencies which are organizationally within
the Executive Office of the President, as found in the budget, are funded
through the Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government appropriations
legislation. Also, the FY2001 and FY2000 individual account data in this report
do not reflect scorekeeping by the Congressional Budget Office.
See the glossary for definitions of discretionary and mandatory spending.
In some instances, the mandatory levels drive up the percent of increase
represented in the appropriation. The appropriators are bound by those
entitlements under permanent law and control only the discretionary spending
levels. The data in the tables and the funding levels provided in the text, unless
otherwise noted, reflect the mandatory and discretionary funding combined.
FTE, or full-time equivalent, is a budgetary term and does not represent
the number of personnel employed by, or the number of actual positions allowed
in, a department or agency. The FTE number is calculated by dividing the total
number of staff hours worked in a given 12-month period (usually the fiscal
year) by the total number of hours in a workyear (2087). The number of on-
board personnel at any given time and the total number of people working in the
organization during the course of the year are two entirely different statistical
results. Seasonal employment and part-time employment are two factors which
serve to make the FTE and actual employment figures differ.
Status and Legislative History
In addition to the 21 FY2001 continuing funding resolutions,9 there were four
legislative measures designed to provide appropriations for all the Treasury and
General Government accounts and one to provide partial funding for selected
accounts.
In summary, H. R. 4871 passed the House and the Senate had begun debate; S.
2900 was reported by the Senate Committee on Appropriations; H.R. 4985 was
included as a section in Division B of the Legislative Branch appropriations (H.R.


9P.L. 106-275 (Sept. 29, 2000; 114 Stat. 808), as amended.

4516) conference agreement, which was vetoed (October 30); P.L. 106-346 (H.R.


4475), Title V of which partially funds selected Treasury and General Government
accounts and includes some of the general provisions from other versions; and P.L.
106-554 (H.R. 4577) through which FY2001 Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act (H.R. 5658) is enacted.
The House Bill. The House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on
Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government held 10 days of hearings during
March and April 2000. The Subcommittee markup was July 11, with the full
Appropriations Committee reporting H.R. 4871 on July 18, H.Rept. 106-756.10 The
bill was approved in committee through a voice vote.
The House passed H.R. 4871, amended, July 20, 2000, by a vote of 216-202.11
H.R. 4871 was considered under an open rule, H. Res. 560.12
The Senate Bill. The Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on
Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government held five days of hearings during
February, March, and April. The subcommittee sent the bill to the full Appropriations
Committee on July 19. The full committee ordered S. 2900 to be reported on July13
20. On July 24, 2000, the Senate Majority Leader requested that a cloture motion
be filed against H.R. 4871, Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government
appropriations bill.14 On July 26, cloture was invoked by a vote of 97-0 (Rollcall
Vote No. 277) and the Senate began consideration of the measure.15 Debate on H.R.
4871 was pending at the time the Senate adjourned, July 27, for the August
recess/work period.


10U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Treasury, Postal Service, and General
Government Appropriations Bill, 2001, report to accompany H.R. 4871, 106th Cong., 2nd
sess., H.Rept. 106-756 (Washington: GPO, 2000), p. 75. (Hereafter referred to as H.Rept.

106-756.)


11Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol.

146, July 20, 2000, p. H6622-6710.


12Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4871, Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, July 20, 2000, p. H6618-6622.
See also: U.S. Congress, House Committee on Rules, Providing for the Consideration of
H.R. 4871, The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001, report tothnd
accompany H. Res. 560, 106 Cong., 2 sess., H.Rept. 106-767 (Washington: GPO, 2000).
13Until Oct. 12, there was no written report on S. 2900. See: U.S. Congress, Senate
Committee on Appropriations, Treasury and General Government Appropriation Bill, 2001,thnd
report to accompany S. 2900, 106 Cong., 2 sess., S.Rept. 106-500 (Washington: GPO,

2000)


14Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001—Motion to Proceed,
Congressional Record, vol. 146, July 24, 2000, p. S7468-69.
15Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001—Motion to
Proceed—Resumed, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 26, 2000, p. S7590-

7619, S7624-29.



Legislative Branch Appropriation. On July 26, 2000, Treasury
Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman, Jim Kolbe, introduced H.R. 4985, “Making
appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United States Postal Service, the
Executive Office of the President, and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes.”16 That same day, the
conference report to accompany the Legislative Branch FY2001 appropriations bill
(H.R. 4516, H.Rept. 106-796) was filed.17 On July 27, 2000, H.Rept. 106-797 was
filed, to accompany H. Res. 565, waiving points of order against the conference
report to accompany H.R. 4516.18 The House agreed to the rule, subsequent to
debate, by a recorded vote of 214 ayes to 210 noes, with one voting “present” (Roll
No. 448).19 Prior to adjourning, for the August recess/work period, there was no
further debate on the issue.
On September 14, 2000, the House agreed to the conference report for H.R.
4516 (FY2001 legislative branch funding), which included funding for the Treasury
and General Government accounts.20 The House vote (Roll No. 476) was 212 yeas
to 209 nays, with 13 not voting.21 On September 20, the Senate rejected the
conference report, by a vote of 28 to 69 (Vote No. 253).22 On October 12, the
Senate agreed to the conference report by a vote of 58 to 37 (Vote No. 273)23 The
bill was presented to the President October 18 and subsequently vetoed by him on
October 30. The House agreed, by voice vote, to recommit the bill and veto message
to the House Committee on Appropriations October 31.24


16Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 26, 2000, p. H7128.
17Conference Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001,
Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 26, 2000, pp. H7095-H7126. The
conference report (H.Rept. 106-796) is divided into two parts. Division A is the text of the
Legislative Branch bill, as reported out of conference, and the accompanying explanations
(pp. H7095-H7107). Division B, Section 1001 is the text of the Treasury bill, H.R. 4985, as
introduced, and the accompanying explanations (H7107-H7126). Section 1003 of Division
B is the repeal of the telephone excise tax.
18Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 27, 2000, p. H7131.
19Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 27, 2000, pp.
H7143-H7152.
20Conference Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001,
Congressional Record, vol. 146, Jan. 14, 2000, p. H7608-7626. Chart showing Treasury and
General Government accounts in detail appears on H7609-7611.
21Note: The Daily Digest shows the vote as Roll No. 477, however the body of the
Congressional Record (p. H7626) shows it as Roll No. 476.
22Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001—Conference Report, Congressional Record,
vol. 146, Jan. 20, 2000, p. S8788-8800.
23Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001—Conference Report, Congressional Record,
vol. 146, Oct. 12, 2000, p. S10333.
24 Legislative Branch Appropriations, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, Oct. 31, 2000,
consideration: pp. H1165-H11681; text of veto message: p. H11675.

FY2001 Continuing Funding Resolution. Most of the accounts were
being funded, at FY2000 levels, through the series of continuing funding resolutions.25
Those accounts which are new for FY2001 had no funding during the period October
1 through December 21, 2000. The exception is the General Services Administration
account through which the presidential transition is administered. It was funded
through a further continuing resolution (P.L. 106-426, November 3, 2000). Although
no additional funding was involved, the White House was authorized to use funds for
the preparations involved in the transfer of families during the transition. That
authorization came through the 16th continuing funding resolution, P.L. 106-520
(November 15, 2000).
Transportation Appropriations. On October 5, the conference committee
for the Transportation FY2001 appropriation, H.R. 4475 came to agreement and filed
a report.26 Title V of the conference agreement contains partial funding provisions
for some of the accounts usually funded within the Treasury and General Government
appropriation, as well as some related general provisions. On October 6, both the
House and Senate agreed to the conference language.27 P.L. 106-346 was signed by
the President October 23, 2000.
The Act. P.L. 106-55428 enacts, through reference, H.R. 5658, the Treasury
and General Government Appropriations, FY 2001. P.L. 106-554 is a two-page
statute which acts as a Consolidated Appropriation and enacts several funding and
legislative bills through reference. H.R. 5658 was introduced December 14, 2000 as
a new bill, with funding levels identical to those in H.R. 4985. The conference report
for H.R. 4577 contains the legislative text and explanatory remarks for H.R. 5658.29
Table 1 shows the status of each of the bills which would affect the accounts.


25P.L. 106-275, as amended and extended, by Public Laws 106-282, -306, -344, -358, -359,
-381, -388, -389, - 401, -403, -416, -426, -427, -428, -520, -537, -540, -542, and -543.
26Conference Report on H.R. 4475, Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, [text of H.. Rept. 106-940], Oct.
5, 2000, p. H8922-H9004. See pp. H8934-H8937 for Title V (Treasury/General Government
provisions) text and pp. H8978-H8980 for corresponding explanatory remarks.
27Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on H.R. 4475, Department of
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol.

146, [Consideration and vote on H.Res. 612, the rule on H.R. 4475],Oct. 6, 2000, p. H9014-


H9018. Conference Report on H.R. 4475, Department of Transportation and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146 [Consideration and vote
in the House], Oct. 6, 2000, pp. H9018-H9028. Department of Transportation and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001—Conference Report, Congressional Record, vol. 146,
[Consideration and vote in the Senate],Oct. 6, 2000, pp. S10052-S10059.
28P.L. 106-554, section 1(a)(3) ( H.R. 4577); Dec. 21, 2000; 114 Stat. 2763.
29Conference Report on H.R. 4577, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146,
Dec. 15, 2000, p. H12100, see pp. H12230-H12258 for Treasury and General Government..

Table 1. Status of FY2001 Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government
(See Table 4 for breakdown of accounts within bills.)
Conference Report
Subcommittee MarkupHouseHouseSenateSenateConf. Approval
ReportPassage ReportPassageReportPublic LawHouseSenateHouseSenate
H.R. 4871, Treasury and General Government FY2001 Appropriation
July 18July 20
H.R. 4871H.R. 4871
H.Rept. vote:
July 11July 19106-756216-202------------
S. 2900, Treasury and General Government FY2001 Appropriation
July 19
S.Rept.106-
500
--------Oct. 12----------
H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch FY2001 Appropriation; Division B, section 1002:
H.R. 4985, Treasury and General Government FY2001 Appropriation
Rejected
Sept. 20
69-28
Adopted Adopted
July 26Sept. 14Oct. 12
H.Rept. vote: vote: Vetoed
------------106-796212-20958-37October 30
H.R. 4475, Department of Transportation FY2001 Appropriation,
Title V: selected Treasury and General Government accounts and provisions
Adopted Adopted
Oct. 5Oct. 6Oct. 6
H.Rept.vote:vote:P.L. 106-346
------------106-940344-5078-10Oct. 23
H.R. 4577, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001
Section 1(a)(3), by reference: H.R. 5658, Making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United States Postal
Service, the Executive Office of the President, and certain Independent Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2001, and for other purposes.
Adopted
Dec. 15Adopted
H.Rept.vote:Dec. 15P. L. 106-554
106-1033292-60voice/UCDec. 21



Treasury and General Government Appropriations,
2001 (Public Law 106-554)
Budget and Key Policy Issues
Department of the Treasury
The Department of the Treasury has both financial and law enforcement
functions. The financial functions are carried out by the Financial Management
Service; the Mint; and the Bureau of Public Debt. The law enforcement functions are
carried out by the Customs Service; the Secret Service; the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (ATF); the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; and the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The Internal Revenue Service has both
a financial function—to determine and audit tax obligations—and a law enforcement
function—to enforce collection of tax revenue.
The single largest account within the Department of Treasury appropriation is
that for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The department’s FY2000 net funding
was $12.352 billion, with the IRS funded at $8.217 billion, or 66.7% of the total.
P.L. 106-554 funds the department at $13.598 billion. The IRS is funded at $8.639
billion, or 63% of the departmental total. Combined with the funding in P.L. 106-
346, the total Department of Treasury enacted FY2001 funding is $13.89 billion, with
$8.86 billion for the IRS. If the .22% rescission is applied to all accounts, the
departmental reduction will equal approximately $30 million.
The FY2001 budget request is $14.520 for the department. The request would
more than double the account for department-wide systems and capital investments,
add funding for the Money Laundering Strategy; increase interagency crime and drug
enforcement by 40%; eliminate funding for the Violent Crime Reduction Program as
previously defined; and increase Secret Service, ATF, and Customs Service funding.
The increase for the IRS would be just under 10%.
Five FY2001 key priorities are identified in the department’s budget justification:
!Support continued IRS reform;
!Strengthen the department’s ability to fight drugs and crime;
!Enhance financial reporting and resource accountability;
!Invest in community development and economic growth; and
!Maintain support for management operations.
The House Appropriations committee reported H.R. 4871, providing $13.225
billion for the department. As passed by the House, H.R. 4871 would reduce the
Office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration by $950,000 in order
to fund a pilot project to check for radioactive materials in scrap metal imported into
the United States. It also would offset an additional $25 million for the High Intensity
Drug Trafficking Areas program by reducing the IRS Processing Assistance and
Management Account. S. 2900, as reported by the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, would have provided a total of $13.161 billion for the department.
Under the vetoed Legislative Branch conference agreement, H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985



would have funded the Department at $13.598 billion. The IRS would be funded at
$8.639 billion, or 63% of the departmental total.
Several Department of Treasury accounts have been provided with additional
funding through the Department of Transportation funding bill (P.L. 106-346). Those
accounts include:
!Departmental Offices, $6.4 million to establish a new interagency National
Terrorist Asset Tracking Center, to fund detailees to the Center, and to
increase staff in the Office of Foreign Assets Control. The Department is
directed take action toward establishing a centralized vehicle acquisition
program before further funding is provided.
!Department-wide systems and capital investments programs, an additional $15
million for the Integrated Treasury (Wireless Network).
!Expanded Access to Financial Services, an additional $8 million.
!Federal Law Enforcement, Salaries and Expenses, an additional $5 million to
establish and operate a metropolitan area law enforcement training center to
be accessible by the Treasury Department, other federal agencies, the United
States Capitol Police, and the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police
Department.
!Federal Law Enforcement, Acquisition, Construction, Improvements and
Related Expenses, $25 million for the design and construction of a
metropolitan area law enforcement training center.
!Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, see discussion below.
!U.S. Customs Service (salaries and expenses), see discussion below.
! Internal Revenue Service (three accounts—tax law enforcement, information
technology investments, and staffing tax administration for balance and equity),
see discussion below.
!U.S. Secret Service (salaries and expenses), see discussion below.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). The ATF is a law
enforcement agency that regulates the manufacture, importation, and distribution of
alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. The ATF also enforces federal laws
related to arson. ATF’s mission is focused on three goals: 1) reducing crime, 2)
collecting revenue, and 3) protecting the public. In FY1999, ATF collected
$12,135,929,000 in taxes, penalties, fines, and other related revenues. From FY1992
to FY2000, Congress increased ATF’s direct appropriations from $336,040,000 to
$604,573,000,30 an 80% increase.
For FY2001, Congress has appropriated $772,843,000 in direct funding for
ATF, a 28% increase over the agency’s FY2000 appropriation and $12,792,000 more
than the administration’s FY2001 request. For the salaries and expenses account,
Congress provided $768,695,000 in P.L. 106-554. For counter-terrorism, Congress
also provided ATF with $4,148,000 in P.L. 106-346. With the exception of
$5,521,000 for the tobacco compliance initiative, Congress fully funded the
administration’s FY2001 request for ATF.


30In the FY2000 Treasury-Postal appropriations act (P.L. 106-58), Congress provided ATF
with $604,573,000 (this amount includes a transfer from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust
Fund of $40,920,000 and reflects a recission of $2,306,000).

Like the enacted FY2001 measure, the vetoed Legislative Branch conference
agreement (H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985), would have provided the ATF with $768,695,000.
By comparison, the House bill (H.R. 4871) would have provided ATF with
$731,325,000, while the Senate version (S. 2900) would have provided
$724,937,000.
The administration’s FY2001 request included $105,298,000 in program budget
increases to expand ongoing initiatives, such as the Integrated Violence Reduction
Strategy ($41,322,000), the Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative ($19,078,000),
expanded gun tracing ($9,990,000), enhanced ballistic imaging ($23,361,000),
tobacco compliance ($5,521,000), and the national laboratory center transition
($6,026,000). In addition, the administration also requested funding to relocate the
ATF headquarters ($7,290,000).
To expand the Integrated Violence Reduction Strategy (IVRS) in FY2001,
Congress provided an additional $41,322,000 to fund 224 agents, 112 inspectors, and

59 support staff. This increase will bring total funding for IVRS to $62,200,000.


With these additional resources, ATF reported in its FY2001 budget submission that
the agency would:
!intensify local firearm initiatives, like Boston’s Ceasefire and Richmond’s
Project Exile;
!review all Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) referrals where Brady law
background checks indicate that a prohibited person received firearms as result
of a delayed denial;
!investigate cases where intelligence data indicate that prohibited persons are
engaging in multiple attempts to purchase firearms from different federal
firearm licensees;
!investigate cases where prohibited persons with a history of violent crime are
known to have acquired firearms through legitimate or illegal markets; and
!review the records of federal firearm licensees to ensure that instant checks are
being performed on all firearm transfers and that required records are being
maintained.
To expand the Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative (YCGII) to 12 additional
cities in FY2001, Congress has provided ATF with $19,078,000 to hire 72 agents and
98 inspectors. This increase will bring total funding for this program to $76,400,000
and expand its presence to 50 cities. The objective of the YCGII is to reduce youth
firearm violence and firearms trafficking among youth by making federal resources
like ATF’s firearms tracing and ballistics technology available to state and local law
enforcement agencies, and by providing coordination of these efforts. In addition,
Congress also provided $16 million for the Gang Resistance Education and Training
(GREAT) program, under which ATF agents and uniformed policy officers teach an
anti-violence curriculum to fourth and seventh graders.
To continue the Comprehensive Crime Gun Tracing Initiative in FY2001,
Congress provided ATF with $9,990,000 and 20 additional positions. This increase
brings total funding for this initiative to $25,000,0000. This initiative provides
nationwide, comprehensive tracing capability for state and local law enforcement.



The added resources will provide for faster trace results and indexing of gun
identification information from business records.
For the Expanded Ballistics Identification Initiative, Congress has provided
$23,361,000 and 20 additional positions. This increase will bring total funding for
this initiative to $26,400,000. On December 2, 1999, the ATF and FBI signed a
memorandum of understanding that will provide for the further development of the
Integrated Ballistics Identification System (IBIS) as the federal system that will
compare images of ballistic evidence (projectiles and cartridge casings). From 1993
to 1997, the ATF and FBI operated two parallel, but incompatible, systems.
Congress also provided funding for the national laboratory transition and the
relocation of the ATF headquarters, but it did not fund the Administration’s request
for the Tobacco Compliance/Diversion initiative of $5,521,000 and 88 additional
positions. According to ATF, this increase was needed to monitor new permit and
revenue requirements for importers of tobacco products that were enacted as part of
the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
Among ATF’s activities, the regulation and enforcement of laws related to
firearms commerce and possession have been the most controversial. Both the House
and the Senate bills included language that would prohibit the Department of the
Treasury from giving preferences regarding the acquisition of firearms to any
manufacturer or vendor that enters into agreements with any federal department or
agency that set out codes of conduct, operating practices, product design
specifications, and other requirements related to the importation, manufacture, or
dealing in firearms that are greater than what is currently required under federal
statute. The Smith & Wesson Corporation entered into such an agreement with the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Shortly thereafter, HUD
announced that 411 governments around the nation had joined the Communities for
Safer Guns Coalition, and had pledged to give preferences to manufacturers who
enter into agreements similar to the one with Smith & Wesson. This language,
however, was dropped from the Legislative Branch conference agreement, nor was
it included in the enacted Labor-HHS appropriations act. (For further information on
gun control-related legislation and issues, see CRS Issue Brief IB10014, Gun Control
Legislation in the 106th Congress.)
Customs Service. The U.S. Customs Service, the federal government’s
oldest revenue collecting agency, is responsible for regulating the movement of
persons, carriers, merchandise, and commodities between the United States and other
countries. In FY1999, Customs collected $22,405,800,000 in trade-related duties,
taxes, and fees. From FY1992 to FY2000, Congress has increased direct
appropriations for the U.S. Customs Service from $1,454,337,000 to
$1,935,915,00031, a 33% increase. In addition to appropriated funding, the Customs


31In the FY2000 Treasury-Postal appropriations act (P.L. 106-58), Congress provided the
Customs Service with $1,759,227,000 (this amount includes a transfer of $61,000,000 for the
Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund and reflects a rescission of $7,137,000). For the air and
marine interdiction account, Congress provided $108,688,000. Furthermore, the FY2000
(continued...)

Service collects COBRA fee receipts that are available to the agency for expenditure
($299,000,000 in FY2000).
For FY2001, Congress has appropriated $2,281,327,000 in direct funding for
Customs. This amount represents an 18% increase over the agency’s FY2000
appropriation. For the salaries and expenses account, Congress provided
$1,863,765,000 P.L. 106-554. For counter-terrorism in FY2001, Congress provided
an additional $18,934,000 in P.L. 106-346. These amounts togther are $5,167,000
less than the Administration’s request. Also, included in the FY2001 Customs
appropriation are monies provided in other accounts and a line item in P.L. 106-554.
For the air and marine interdiction account for FY2001, Congress provided
$133,228,000. Under another line item, Congress provided an additional $7,000,000
for the air and marine interdiction account. These amounts together are $16,647,000
less than the Administration’s request. In lieu of a new fee proposed by the
Administration, Congress provided $258,400,000 for the modernization of Customs’
automated systems. This amount is nearly $80,000,000 less than the offsetting fee
receipts projected by the Administration. Also appropriated for obligation, but not
included in the total appropriation cited above, are $3,000,000 in offsetting fee
receipts in the harbor maintenance fee account.
Like P.L. 106-554, the vetoed Legislative Branch appropriations (H.R.
4516/H.R. 4985) conference agreement would have provided Customs with
$1,863,725,000. The House bill (H.R. 4871) would have provided Customs with
$1,822,365,000, while the Senate bill (S. 2900) would have provided $1,804,687,000.
For the air and marine interdiction account, the Legislative Branch measure would
have provided Customs with $133,228,000. The House bill would have provided
$125,778,000, while the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended
$128,228,000.
The Administration’s FY2001 budget request for Customs’ salaries and expenses
account included $41,517,000 in program budget enhancements. These
enhancements included: (1) $25,000,000 for the drug investigations initiative, (2)
$10,000,000 for the narcotics illicit proceeds strategy initiative, (3) $5,000,000 for
the forced child labor initiative, and (4) $1,517,000 for Customs’ airborne support for
the United States Secret Service. The remaining $119,188,000 in increased funding
for the salaries and expenses account was requested for various budget adjustments
that, according to the Administration, would allow Customs to maintain current levels
of service associated with various FY1999 and FY2000 budget increases.
Regarding these initiatives, the vetoed conference agreement included earmarks
in report language (H.Rept. 106-796) of $13,700,000 for the Southwest border
initiative, $10,000,000 for security enhancement on the northern border, $11,000,000
for vehicle replacement, $3,700,000 for money laundering, $9,500,000 for drug
investigations, and an additional $5,000,000 for the forced child labor initiative. By
comparison, report language accompanying the House bill (H.R. 4871) earmarked


31 (...continued)
supplemental appropriations act (P.L. 106-246) provided an additional $68,000,000 to
upgrade P-3 aircraft radar systems to enhance the agency’s drug interdiction efforts.

increases of $9,500,000 for the drug investigations initiative and $2,000,000 for the
forced child labor initiative.
In recent years, Customs’ Automated Commercial System (ACS), the system
Customs uses to track, control, and process all commercial goods imported into the
United States, has proven inadequate and has suffered from “brownouts” that inhibit
international commerce. Earlier in the year, GAO testified that the current import
processes handled by ACS are “paper-intensive, error-prone, and transaction based,
and out of step with just-in-time inventory practices of the trade community.”32 Since
1994, Congress appropriated large infusions of funding for Customs to upgrade ACS
and continue development of its replacement, the Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE), but Customs has struggled with the upkeep of ACS and the
development of ACE. In the FY2000 conference report, Congress directed Customs
to provide a revised blueprint, schedule, and budget for ACE. This report was
delivered to the Appropriations committees, but late in the fiscal year.
For FY2001, the Administration’s request included a new Customs budget
account for automation modernization, for which the administration requested $338
million. To offset the ACE developmental costs, the Administration requested
authorization for a new user fee that was similar to a fee proposal rejected by
Congress in the FY2000 appropriations cycle. Of this amount, $123 million was
requested for the continued operation and maintenance of ACS, $5 million for the
International Trade Data System (ITDS), and $210 million for the development of
ACE. Once again, Congress rejected the fee proposal. Instead, Congress provided
over $258 million in a direct appropriation, which includes $5 million to continue the
development of the ITDS and at least $130 million to continue the development of
ACE. It was reported in Government Executive magazine that the development,
operation, and maintenance of ACE over 7 years will cost between $1.4 and $1.8
billion, and that Customs would begin taking bids to develop the new system in
FY2001. 33
GAO has also testified that Customs had taken deliberate steps to implement
recommendations made in previous audits by reducing duplication of effort,
developing an enterprise systems architecture, and improving acquisition and
investment management. GAO cautioned, however, that the development of ACE is
a complex and high-risk endeavor that supports the agency’s ability to collect billions
of dollars in revenue generated by imports.
In addition to appropriated funding, Customs generates offsetting receipts from
two user fee programs. The first fee program consists of seven conveyance- and
passenger-related user fees established by the 1985 Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act (COBRA) and the user fee for processing bulk cargo from Mexico


32U.S. General Accounting Office, Testimony before the House Committee on Government
Reform Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology, U.S.
Customs Service: Observations on Selected Operations and Program Issues, T-
GGD/AIMD-00-150 (Washington, Apr. 20, 2000), p. 7.
33Joshua Dean, “Funding Battles Delay Customs Modernization Project,” Government
Executive Daily Briefing, (Washington, Dec. 1, 2000), at [http://www.govexec.com/].

and Canada established by the 1986 Tax Reform Act. The second fee program
consists of the commerce-related merchandise processing fee (MPF) established by
the 1986 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA). Customs generally has no
control over the allocation of MPF fee receipts. COBRA fee receipts, on the other
hand, are not appropriated for obligation by Congress, and they account for a
substantial portion of funding available to Customs for expenditure each year. From
FY1992 to FY2000, COBRA fee receipts have increased from about $176,000,000
to $299,000,000.
There are codified limitations on the use of COBRA fee receipts, and initially
they were used principally to pay overtime costs for inspectors and canine
enforcement officers. Surplus revenues could be and were carried over from one year
to the next. Such carryover could be, and is, used to fund recurring costs in positions
and equipment from previous years. As a result, COBRA fee receipts have funded
an increasing share of permanent inspector positions and information technology
costs. In recent months, however, there have been reports of a drop-off in air
passenger processing fee receipts. Consequently, the growing reliance on COBRA
fee receipts to fund base positions in conjunction with a drop-off in receipts may
prove problematic in the coming year, as Customs may not have allocated enough to
pay overtime for Customs officers. It is also notable that the authorization for the
COBRA fees expires at the end of FY2003.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The FY2001 request for IRS was
$8,986,084,000. The request represented a 9.36% increase over the net funding for
FY2000 of $8,216,489,000. The net funding takes into account the 0.38% rescission
in the IRS Processing, Assistance, and Management account required by Congress in
the consolidated funding act. The request for that account was 12.78% higher than
the net funding for FY2000. The IRS budget increases focus on maintaining current
operations and modernization. IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti has testified
that the maintenance of operations will require additional staffing for enforcement and
customer service. He has explained that refers particularly to the need for a state-of-
the-art computer system to replace 1960s era computers.
As passed by the House, H.R. 4871 would have funded the IRS programs at
$8.453 billion. This would represent a net increase of $236.5 million. There would
be $140 million which would continue to be available for organizational
modernization. Prior to passage, amendments were adopted which would reduce
funding for the IRS Processing Assistance and Management account by $25 million
(to offset $25 for the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) program) and
funding for the Office of Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration by
$950,000 ( to create a pilot project to check for radioactive materials in scrap metal
imported into the United States.)
As reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee (S. 2900), IRS funding
would total $8.535 billion. With the exception of the Earned Income Tax Credit
Compliance Initiative account ($145 million in all versions), the Senate would fund
the IRS accounts at levels higher than passed by the House.
P.L. 106-554 funds, with that same exception, the IRS accounts at levels higher
than both the House or Senate versions, at a total of $8.639 million. Processing,



Assistance and Management received $3,567.0 million. Tax Law Enforcement is
funded at $3,382.4 million and Information Systems at $1,545 million. The vetoed
conference agreement (H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985), was the same as the final version.
FY2001 IRS funding was a major point of objection as the conference report for
the Legislative Branch Appropriations (H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985) was considered in both
the House and Senate. Although the White House did not issue a Statement of
Policy, there were remarks by executive branch staff and congressional minority
leaders that there would be a veto if those accounts, and others, were not funded at
a higher level. On October 23, the President signed P.L. 106-346 which contains
partial funding for selected accounts in the Treasury/General Government bill. In spite
of that accommodation, the President subsequently vetoed the Legislative Branch
Appropriations on October 30. The IRS supplemental provisions are as follows:
!Processing, Assistance and Management—IRS is instructed to delay
implementing no-cost Internet tax filing service until a report addressing
concerns has been submitted to Congress.
!Tax Law Enforcement—$7.974 million, including $3.135 for support of the
money laundering strategy, and an additional $4.839 million for 35 agents to
participate in Joint Terrorism Task Forces.
!Information Technology Investments—$71.751 million, subject to conditions.
!Staff Tax Administration for Balance and Equity—$141million in a new
account, subject to approval of a staffing plan by the Department, Office of
Management and Budget, and the Committees on Appropriations.
IRS had earlier proposed the establishment of a Staffing Tax Administration for
Balance and Equity (STABLE) initiative. The STABLE initiative, which is a
collective effort within IRS to improve service to the taxpayers while carrying out
statutory mandates, would include staff increases throughout IRS. One of the most
significant increases requested is in the Tax Law Enforcement account, an increase
of full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing by 158 (41.6%) over the FY1999 actual level.
IRS staff have described the initiative as being an organizing plan to ensure that
additional staff (new hires) would be placed in IRS where they are most needed—in
auditing, enforcement, and customer relations. H.R. 4985 would provide no funding
for the STABLE initiative. However, the conferees agreed to fully fund the Tax Law
Enforcement account with respect to adjustments required to maintain current levels
of service and operational contract support. While higher than both the House and
Senate versions, the conference version is lower than the President’s request.
Secret Service. For FY2001, the President requested $829.5 million for the
Secret Service. Of this total, $824.5 is for salaries and expenses related to protective
functions, research and development, and the purchase of vehicles; and $5 million for
acquisition and construction costs. FY2000 net funding for the Secret Service was
$691.5 million. The rescission was $738,000 from the acquisition and construction
account.
P.L. 106-554 funds the Secret Service salaries and expenses account at $823.8
million. The acquisitions, construction, improvement, and related expenses account
is funded at $8.941 million. That includes $3.920 million for security enhancement
a the Vice President’s residence.



P.L. 106-346 provides supplemental funding of $2.9 million for the salaries and
expenses account. These funds are for 21 agents to participated in Joint Terrorism
Task Forces. Section 506 stipulates that $2 million of the FY2001 Secret Service
funding be available, until September 30, 2001, for forensic and related support of
investigations of missing and exploited children.
H.R. 4871, as reported by the House Appropriations Committee and as passed
by the House, would have funded the agency’s salaries and expenses account at
$823.8 million. This total is $156.5 million above the amount appropriated in
FY2000, and $700,000. below the President’s budget request. Of this amount,
$36,266,000 would fund activities previously funded elsewhere. Included would be
$1,767,000 for support of the National Threat Assessment Center, that was not
requested in the President’s budget request. Also included in H.R. 4871, as passed,
was $24.2 million for additional protective requirements of the Secret Service during
the Presidential election and transition period. S. 2900, as reported, would fund the
salaries and expenses account at $778.3 million. The vetoed conference agreement
(H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985) on would have funded the account at the same level as H.R.

4871, as passed.


Both the President’s request and H.R. 4871 would have funded the Acquisition,
Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses account at $5 million. The
Senate-reported version would have funded it at $4.3 million. However, H.R.
4516/H.R. 4985 would have funded it at $8.9 million, providing the requested $5
million and adding $3.9 million for security enhancements at the Vice President’s
residence.
U.S. Postal Service
The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) generates most of the funding through the sale
of products and services. It also receives an appropriation from the federal
government to pay for revenue foregone on free and reduced rate mail (for the blind
and visually impaired and overseas voting). To fund payment to the Postal Service
Fund for revenue foregone during FY2001, the President requested $96.1 million, of
which $67.1 million would not be available until October 1, 2001. P. L. 106-58
provided funding for revenue foregone at $93.4 million for FY2000, with only $29
million to be available during FY2000. The FY2000 appropriation, however, was
subsequently reduced by .38% ($380,000) due to the across-the-board cut mandated
by the Consolidated Appropriations Act of FY2000. Accordingly, the appropriation
for the fiscal year was $93.1 million
P.L. 106-554 provides FY2001 funding at $29 million with an advance
appropriation of $67.1 million for FY2002. The rescission of .22% applies only to
FY2001 funding. Therefore, funds appropriated in FY2000 for use in FY2001 would
be affected. However, the FY2002 advance appropriation in this legislation would
be exempt.
H.R. 4871, as reported and passed, would have been in accord with the request,
holding $67.1 million for FY2002. S. 2900, as reported, however, would have funded
the Postal Service at a total of $67.1 million. The vetoed measure would have
provided $96.1 million, as proposed by the House. Of this amount, $67.1 million



would have been held as an advance appropriations for free and reduced-rate mail
and $29 million would be for reimbursement in FY2001 to the Postal Service for prior
year losses.
All versions would continue the general provision requiring the Postal Service
to use appropriated funds to make available sufficient funds to cover the employment
of guards for all properties and areas owned, occupied, controlled, or in charge of by
the agency. The guards would be granted the same powers as those granted special
policemen by the Act of June 1, 1948, amended (62. Stat. 281; 20 U.S.C. 318a and
318b), attaching thereto penal consequences under that authority and within the limits
provided in the act.
Executive Office of the President and Funds Appropriated to
the President
The Treasury and General Government appropriations act funds all but three
offices in the Executive Office of the President (EOP). Of the three exceptions, the
Council on Environmental Quality (including Office of Environmental Quality) and
the Office of Science and Technology are funded under the Veterans Affairs, Housing
and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies appropriations act; and the Office
of the United States Trade Representative is funded under the Commerce, Justice,
State, and the Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations act.
The President’s FY2001 budget proposed an appropriation of $702,245,000 for
the EOP, an 7.3% increase over the $654,422,000 appropriated in FY2000. Almost
70 % of these appropriations would be for accounts in the Office of National Drug
Control Policy, and for Federal Drug Control Programs, and unanticipated needs, and
would be transferred to agencies outside of the EOP, and to state and local entities.
The FY2001 appropriation request for these “transfer accounts” amounts to
$474,900,000 (67.6%); for FY2000 it amounted to $441,250,000 (68%).
The specific accounts are discussed below. In those cases in which there are no
differences among the proposed and enacted funding levels, the enacted level is given.
The .22% rescission is not factored into the funding data provided below. However,
it will likely be applied to each account.
Compensation of the President. P.L. 106-554 provides an appropriation
of $390,000 for compensation of the President, including an expense allowance of
$50,000. This amount is a 56% increase over the $250,000 appropriated in FY2000.
The increase is due to the raise in presidential salary from $200,000 to $400,000 per
year, effective January 20, 2001.
White House Office. P.L. 106-554 was in accord with the FY2001 budget
proposal of an appropriation of $53,288,000 for salaries and expenses in the White
House Office, an increase of 2% over the $52,443,000 appropriated in FY2000, of
which $201,000 was subsequently rescinded. H.R. 4871 would have provided
$52,135,000, which is $1,153,000 below the President’s request. The House denied
the requests to restore the $201,000 rescinded in FY 2000, $450,000 for anticipated
severance payments, $500,000 for costs associated with replacing equipment during



the transition, and $2,000 in unspecified increases for other services. The House also
assumed a transfer of $500,000 to the Office of Administration for costs associated
with upgrading the web page of the Executive Office of the President. S. 2900, as
reported, and H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as vetoed, would fund the White House Office
at the requested level.
Executive Residence (White House). The Act provided the requested
appropriation of $10,900,000 for operating expenses, an 17.7% increase over the
$9,258,000 appropriated in FY2000, from which $33,000 was subsequently
rescinded. While the appropriation for repairs and restoration is $968,000, the
request had been $5,510,000, an 581.2% increase over the $808,000 appropriated in
FY2000. H.R. 4871 would have appropriated $10,286,470 for operating expenses,
and would have denied several requests, including $300,050 for an additional 4 FTEs;
and $658,000 for repairs and restoration. The House Appropriation Committee
recommended denying $4,542,000 for renovation and replacement of the concrete
raceway containing communication lines, while expressing concerning over the total
estimated costs of the project. S. 2900, as reported, and H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as
vetoed, would have funded the accounts at the requested level, but the latter would
limit the repairs and restoration account to $968,000.
The repairs and restoration funding includes $458,000 for design and
replacement of the existing the concrete raceway containing voice and
communications lines serving the East Wing and the Executive Residence. A
completed design, including an estimate of total construction costs associated with the
project, must be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations.
The FY2001 continuing funding resolution (P.L. 106-275, as amended by P.L.
106-520) the Executive Residence at the White House “is authorized to make
expenditures to provide for the orderly transition and moving expenses following the
election on November 7, 2000.” House Appropriations Committee Chairman C.W.
Bill Young stated that this would provide “approximately $200,000...that were
contained in the vetoed Treasury, Postal Service, General Government appropriations
act.” 34
Maintenance and repair costs for the White House are also funded by the
National Park Service as part of that agency’s responsibility for national monuments.
Entertainment costs for state functions are funded by the Department of State.
Reimbursable political events in the Executive Residence are to be paid for in advance
by the sponsor, and all such advance payments are to be credited to a Reimbursable
Expenses account. The political party of the President is to deposit $25,000 to be
available for expenses relating to reimbursable political events during the fiscal year.
The Act requires those reimbursements be separately accounted for and the
sponsoring organizations be billed, and charged interested, as appropriate. The staff
of the Executive Residence is to report to the Committees on Appropriations, after
the close of each fiscal year and maintain a tracking system related to the reimbursable
expenses.


34Further Continuing Appropriations, Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional Record, daily edition,
vol. 146, Nov. 13, 2000, p. H11850.

Special Assistance to the President (Office of the Vice President)
and Official Residence of the Vice President. The Act, as proposed in the
budget, appropriates $3,673,000 for salaries and expenses, an increase of 1.5% over
the $3,609,000 appropriated in FY2000, and $354,000 for the Official Residence of
the Vice President, a 2.6% increase over the $345,000 appropriated in FY2000, from
which $15,000 was rescinded. The House would have appropriated $3,664,000 for
salaries and expenses, and $354,000 for operating expenses. S. 2900, as reported,
would have funded the accounts at the requested level, and H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as
vetoed, would have funded the salaries and expenses and the operating expenses
accounts at the requested level.
Council of Economic Advisers. P.L. 106-554 appropriates $4,110,000,
an increase of 7% over the $3,840,000 appropriated in FY2000; of which $15,000
was subsequently rescinded. The House approved an appropriation of $3,997,000,
denying the request of $106,000 for two additional FTE and $7,000 for increased
travel expenses. Both S. 2900, as reported, and H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as vetoed,
would have funded the account at the requested level.
Office of Policy Development. As the FY2001 budget proposed, P.L. 106-
554 appropriates $4,032,000, the same as appropriated in FY2000; $15,000 was
rescinded from the FY2000 appropriation. The House approved an appropriation of
$4,030,000, denying the request of $2,000 for increased travel expenses. Both S.
2900, as reported, and H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as vetoed, would have funded the
account at the requested level.
National Security Council. The FY2001 budget proposed and P.L. 106-554
appropriated, $7,165,000, an increase of 2.4% over the $6,997,000 appropriated in
FY2000, of which $27,000 was rescinded. The House approved an appropriation of
$7,148,000, denying the request of $17,000 to partially restore the $27,000 rescinded
in FY2000. Both S. 2900, as reported, and H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as vetoed, would
have funded the account at the requested level.
Office of Administration. The FY2001 budget proposed and the Act
appropriated $43,737,000, an increase of 11.6% over the $39,198,000 appropriated
in FY2000, of which $148,000 was rescinded. The House approved an appropriation
of $41,185,000, denying several funding requests, including $406,000 and five FTE
for additional information technology staff, $360,000 in new money for upgrading the
EOP web page, $660,000 and five FTE for implementation of the Chief Financial
Officers Act. While the House also would have delayed the implementation of the
Chief Financial Officers Act from January 20, 2001 to May 1, 2001, the Act dropped
that proposal. Both S. 2900, as reported, and the H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as vetoed,
would fund the account at the requested level.
Office of Management and Budget. The Act fully funded the FY2001
budget request at $68,786,000, an increase of 8.3% over the $63,495,000
appropriated in FY2000, of which $239,000 was rescinded. The House approved an
appropriation of $67,143,000, denying the request of $613,000 for an additional nine
FTE as well as the request of $1,030,000 for information technology enhancements.
S. 2900, as reported, would have funded OMB at $67,935,000, and H.R. 4516/H.R.

4985, as vetoed, would have funded the account at the requested level. Section 624



of the Act makes permanent the provision directing OMB to provide a yearly
accounting statement and report on the costs and benefits of Federal regulatory
programs.
Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Act appropriates
$24,759,000 for the salaries and expenses account. The FY2001 budget requested
an appropriation of $25,400,000, a 10.7% increase over the $22,951,000
appropriated in FY2000, of which $128,000 was rescinded. The House had, in H.R.
4871, approved an appropriation of $24,759,000, denying the request of $641,000
for communications, equipment, and other services. S. 2900, as reported, would have
funded the account at $24,312,000. The vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 would have
funded the account at $24,759,000. P.L. 106-346 provides an additional $7,000,000,
of which $5,000,000 is for continued operation of the technology transfer program,
and $2,000,000 is for a counternarcotics research and development project in
Colorado.
For the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, the Act provides
$29,053,000, while the FY2001 budget had proposed $20,400,000, a 37.6% decrease
from the $32,052,000 appropriated in FY2000, of which $198,000 was rescinded.
The House approved an appropriation of $29,750,000. S. 2900, as reported, would
fund the account at $29,052,000. The vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 would have
funded the account at $29,053,000. The appropriation includes $15,803,000, for the
counterdrug research and development projects and which must be available for
transfer to other federal departments and agencies, and $13,250,000 for the continued
operation of the counterdrug technology transfer program.
The Act maintains the current level of funding for the counterdrug technology
transfer program, and includes funding to support CTAC’s core research programs
and to continue support for the U.S. Olympic Committee’s anti-doping program.
Federal Drug Control Programs. For the High Intensity Drug Trafficking
Areas Program, the Act provides $206,500,000, while the FY2001 budget proposed
$192,000,000, the same amount as appropriated for FY2000, from which $730,000
was rescinded. The House Appropriations Committee stated that given F2001
resource constraints, it would be best not to earmark the funds and expects that
ONDCP will make its designation and funding decisions based on performance
measures of effectiveness. The House bill would have appropriated $217,000,000,
and the Senate, in reporting S.2900, would have funded the account at $196,000,000.
The vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 would have funded the account at $206,500,000,
of which 51% would be for transfer to state and local entities and 49% for federal
agencies and departments.
In the conference report for P.L. 106-554, the conferees stated that they were
fully funding the Administration’s request and providing an additional $14,500,000
to increase funding or expand existing HIDTAs, or to fund newly designated
HIDTAs. If existing HIDTAs are funded at levels other than those established for the
FY2000 programs, justification must be sent to Congress. Likewise, no funds may
be obligated for new programs until a justification is sent to Congress. The conferees
restated the congressional interest in the work of the HIDTA Performance
Management Working Group. The conferees directed ONDCP to review several



specific geographic areas to be considered for new funding, others to receive
increases, and full minimum funding for three named areas. The conferees urged
ONDCP to consider using funds provided above the budget request for designating
new HIDTAs from areas which had previously submitted requests.
For the Special Forfeiture Fund, the Act provides $233,600,000 rather than the
FY2001 budget proposal of $259,000,000, which was a 19.9% increase over the
$216,000,000 appropriated for FY2000, of which $703,000 was rescinded. The
House bill would have provided an appropriation of $219,000,000, which would
include $185,000,000 for the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign;
$30,000,000 to carry out the Drug Free Communities Act (DCFA); $1,000,000 for
the National Drug Court Institute; and $3,000,000 for the costs of space and
operations of the counter drug intelligence executive secretariat established as part of
the General Counterdrug Intelligence Plan. The House Appropriations Committee,
in reporting H.R. 4871, recommended denying $10,000,000 for increased funding for
the Youth Media Campaign, $5,000,000 for the DCFA, and $25,000,000 for
additional funding for a national criminal justice treatment demonstration project. S.
2900, as reported, would have funded the account at $144,300,000, of which
$90,700,000 would be for the anti-drug media campaign, and $40,000,000 would be
for the DCFA. The vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 would have funded the account at
$233,600,000.
The funding measure provides that $185,000,000 is for the anti-drug media
campaign, $40,000,000 to carry out the DCFA, $3,000,000 for the counter drug
intelligence executive secretariat, $3,300,000 for the U.S. Olympic Committee’s anti-
doping efforts, $1,300,000 for the Metro Intelligence Support and Technical
Investigative Center, and $1,000,000 for the National Drug Court Institute. With
regard to the administration of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, the
conferees provide direction to the ONDCP.
Unanticipated Needs. Although the Act provided no funding for this
account, P.L. 106-346 appropriated $1,000,000 for the unanticipated needs. The
FY2001 budget proposed $1,000,000, the same as was appropriated for FY2000, of
which $4,000 was rescinded, for expenses necessary to enable the President to meet
unanticipated needs, in furtherance of the national interest, security, or defense, which
might arise at home or abroad. The FY2001 budget also proposed $2,500,000 to be
provided to the Elections Commission of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as a
transfer to be used for citizens’ education and a choice by voters regarding the
island’s future status.
P.L. 106-346 appropriates $2,500,000 to be provided to the Elections
Commission. None of the funds may be obligated until 45 days after the Elections
Commission submits to the Committees on Appropriations for approval an
expenditure plan developed jointly by the Popular Democratic Party, the New
Progressive Party, and the Puerto Rican Independence Party. The expenditures plan
is to include additional views from any party that does not agree with the plan. (No
funding of the Unanticipated Needs account had been provided by the earlier
appropriations bills.)



Independent Agencies
Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FEC administers federal
campaign finance law; oversees disclosure requirements, limits on contributions and
expenditures, and the presidential election public funding system; and retains civil
enforcement authority. P.L. 106-554 provides $40,500,000, of which no less than
$4,689, 500 shall be available for internal automated data processing systems and no
more than $5,000 may be used for reception and representation expenses.
The FY2000 appropriation of $38,152,000 for the FEC was subject to an
across-the-board .38% government rescission under the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, reducing the appropriation by $144,000, to $38,008,000.
For FY2001, the President’s budget requested an appropriation of $40,500,000,
allowing for 352 full-time equivalents (FTEs). This reflected a 6.6% increase, or
$2,492,000, above the FY2000 level. As a concurrent submission agency, the FEC
submitted its own request to Congress, calling for a funding level of $40,960,000 and
for 356 FTEs.
The House adopted its Appropriations Committee’s recommendation for an
appropriation of $40,240,000, a reduction of $260,000 from the Administration’s
request and $720,000 from the FEC’s request. Specifically, the committee refused
the agency’s requests of $100,000 for legal document imaging, $100,000 for
completion of Voting Systems Standards, $60,000 for a national conference on the
standards, and $460,000 for an additional 4 FTEs within the Commissioners’ offices.
The committee stipulated that no less than $4,689,500 be used for internal automated
data processing systems and no more than $5,000 be used for reception and
representation expenses.
The House bill (H.R. 4871, section 637), as passed, included certain
clarifications of federal election law, largely based on FEC recommendations:
requiring election cycle-based reporting of certain expenditures; allowing 24-hour
notices of large contributions or independent expenditures in the last 20 days of an
election to be filed by FAX or electronic mail; allowing candidates to use lines of
credit for campaign funds if made under commercially reasonable terms by lenders in
the normal course of business; changing the deadline for submitting notices of large
contributions in the last 20 days of an election from 48 to 24 hours after receipt, and
requiring the receipt, rather than the filing, of late independent expenditure notices
within 24 hours of being made. Finally, the House bill included a committee
amendment requiring House and Senate candidates who use federal aircraft to travel
to a campaign event to report to the FEC the type of aircraft used, the number of
individuals who used the aircraft, and the amount the candidate paid to reimburse the
federal government for the aircraft’s use (together with the methodology used to
determine such amount). These provisions would take effect in 2001.
The Senate accepted its Appropriations Committee’s recommendation for an
FEC appropriation of $39,755,000 , $745,000, or 1.8%, less than the Administration
proposed and $485,000, or 1.2%, less than the House approved. The Senate bill
included the same stipulations as the House bill regarding internal automated data



processing systems and reception and representation expenses. No legislative
provisions concerning FEC operations were contained in the Senate measure.
The vetoed conference agreement would have appropriated $40,500,000 for the
FEC, the same figure as recommended by the Administration and more than in either
the House or Senate bills. It would have included the stipulation that no less than
$4,689,500 be used for internal automated data processing systems and no more than
$5,000 be used for reception and representation expenses. No legislative provisions
concerning FEC operations or candidate use of government aircraft were contained
in the vetoed measure.
Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). P.L. 106-554 provides
funding of $25,058,000 for FLRA. This matches the amount recommended by the
House Appropriations Committee, passed by the House, recommended by the Senate
Appropriations Committee, and requested by the President in his FY 2001 budget.
The law also provides for a 0.22% or $55,127 across-the-board cut in the FY 2001
funding. After this reduction, the FY 2001 funding is $25,002,873. The agency
serves as a neutral party in the settlement of disputes that arise between unions,
employees, and agencies on matters outlined in the Federal Service Labor
Management Relations Statute; decides major policy issues; prescribes regulations;
and disseminates information appropriate to the needs of agencies, labor
organizations, and the public. The agency’s FY 2000 appropriation was $23,828,000.
P.L. 106-113 mandated a 0.38% or $91,000 rescission in the FY 2000 funding.35
According to the FLRA, the cut was to be absorbed by postponing an office move
and managing positions that are vacant by filling them more slowly and at lower grade
levels. After the reduction, the FY 2000 funding was $23,737,000. The FY 2001
appropriation, after the rescission, is 5.3% above this amount.
General Services Administration (GSA). P.L. 106-554 provides
$632,211,000 for GSA. Of this total, $464,154,000 is appropriated for the Federal
Buildings Fund; $123,920,000 for policy and operations; $34,520,000 for the Office
of Inspector General; $2,517,000 for benefits to former Presidents; and $7,100,000
for the presidential transition. An additional $2,070,000 is to be deposited into the
Federal Buildings Fund. An advance FY2002 appropriation of $276,400,000 is also
provided for the Federal Buildings Fund. There is also a .22% rescission of FY2001
Federal Buildings funds.
Federal Buildings Fund. P.L. 106-346 appropriated $11,350,000 to the
Federal Buildings Fund. Of this total, $3,000,000 was to be provided for non-
prospectus construction projects; and $8,345,000 for repair of a courthouse annex
located in Columbia, SC.
On July 20, 2000, the House passed H.R. 4871, which largely reflected the July 18,

2000 recommendations of the Appropriations Committee. H.R. 4871, as passed,


would have appropriated $152,471,000 to the GSA accounts. The Senate-reported
version (S. 2900) totaled $167,557. The vetoed H.R. 4516 (H.R. 4985) would have


35Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 395.

funded GSA at $632,211, the first version to appropriate funds to the Federal
Buildings Fund.
H.R. 4871, as passed, would have provided $5,502,333,000 in new obligational
authority for the Federal Buildings Fund. S. 2900, as reported, authorized
$5,502,333,000. The vetoed measure would have provided $5,971,509,000 in new
obligational authority, and directly appropriated $464,154,000 into the Fund to cover
a portion of the Fund’s new obligational needs.
Under H.R. 4871, no funds would be appropriated to the Federal Buildings
Fund for FY2001. In addition, there would be no provision for the $477,484,000 in
the President’s budget request for advanced appropriations. The Committee
specifically stated that there would not be any appropriations for reimbursing the
Federal Buildings Fund for moving costs incurred by GSA associated with relocating
the FCC to a new location in Washington, D.C. The Committee stated that these36
expenses are the responsibility of the agency being moved. S. 2900, as reported,
would not provide direct appropriations to the Fund but would provide $374,345,000
in advance appropriations. H.R. 4516, as vetoed, was silent on the moving costs but
would have provided $276,400,000 advance appropriations.
The House committee also recommended no new obligational authority for
construction and acquisition, which is a decrease of $54,197,000 from FY2000, and
a decrease of $779,788,000 from the President’s budget request. The committee
stated that it is essential for GSA to maintain, to the greatest extent possible, the
inventory of existing federal properties. The Senate version would allow an
obligational authority of $3,000,000 for construction and acquisition. The conferees,
on H.R. 4516, determined that there would be a obligational authority of
$472,176,000 and stipulated that the authority was to be directed to nine projects.
GSA would be required to provide a written report to the Appropriations Committees
showing the proposed allocations. $3,500,000 would be earmarked for the design and
site acquisition of a combined law enforcement facility in Saint Petersburg, Florida.
With regard to new courthouse construction, the House committee noted, with
disappointment, that it was not able to provide any funds for this effort. The
Committee expressed concerned about aspects of the President’s budget’s submission,
since it so greatly differed from the initial request of GSA and the Judicial Conference
in both funding amounts and new construction priorities.37 In addition, H.R. 4871,
as passed, had a provision requiring the judicial and executive branches to reach an
agreement on new courthouse construction before GSA formally submits its budget
request. S. 2900, as reported, would have authorized $671,193,000 to be made
available from the Federal Buildings Fund for repairs and alterations (including three
courthouse projects); and an additional amount of $374,345,000 to be deposited into
the Fund for construction of additional projects (including four courthouse projects).
H.R. 4516, as vetoed, would have provided $472,176,000 for nine new construction
projects (including four courthouse projects); and $276,400,000 in advance funding
for courthouse construction projects.


36H.Rept. 106-756, p. 61.
37Ibid., pp. 61-62.

The House committee recommended a limitation of $490,592,000 for repairs and
alterations, a decrease of $108,082,000 below the enacted limitation level for FY2000
and a decrease of $230,601,000 below the President’s budget request. S. 2900, as
reported, and the conferees would authorize obligation authority for the repairs and
alternations account at $671,193,000. The House and Senate committees, as well as
the conferees, recommended a limitation of $2,944,905,000 for rental of space, which
is an increase of $162,719,000 above the enacted limitation level for FY2000, and the
same as the budget estimate. A limitation of $1,580,909,000 would be provided,
under H.R. 4871, as passed the House, for FY2001 building operations, which is the
same level as provided for FY2000, and a decrease of $43,862,000 below the budget
estimate. The Senate version, as reported, and H.R. 4516, as vetoed, would limit
obligations to the same level as the requested $1,624,771,000.
Presidential transition. The only account, within the vetoed H.R. 4516,
which has been funded specifically in the CR was that through which the General
Services Administration was to administer the presidential transition. On November
2, Congress agreed to a continuing funding resolution (H.J.Res. 123) which was
amended to include the $7.1 million provided in the vetoed legislation.38 There was
no recorded vote on the amendment but the resolution, which amended P.L. 106-275,
was agreed to
through a vote of 310 to 7 (Roll No. 592). The Senate agreed to H.J.Res. 123 by
unanimous consent.39 P.L. 106-426 was signed November 3, 2000.
Policy and operations. P.L. 106-346 provided $13,789,000 for policy and
operations. The House would have appropriated $115,434,000, which was a
decrease of $4,089,000 less than the amount appropriated in FY2000, and a decrease
of $21,546,000 less than the amount in the President’s budget request. S. 2900, as
reported, provided $123,420,000. The vetoed version would have provided the policy
and operations account with $123,920,000.
Office of Inspector General. S. 2900, as reported, and H.R. 4516, as
vetoed, funded the account at $34,520,000.
Allowances and office staff for former Presidents. H.R. 4871, as
passed, would have appropriate $2,517,000 for allowances and office staff for former
Presidents, an increase of $276,000 above the FY2000 enacted level and the same as
the President’s budget request. S. 2900, as reported, and the conference version
would also have funded that account at $2,517,000. In addition, while the House did
not provide funding for presidential transition, S. 2900 would provide $7,100,000, the
amount requested. H.R. 4516, as vetoed, would have funded this account at the same
level.
Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). P.L. 106-554 provides funding
of $29,437,000 for the MSPB. In addition, $2,430,000 will be transferred from the


38Making Further Continuing Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional Record,
daily edition, vol. 146, Nov. 2, 2000, pp. H11784-H11785.
39Making Further Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional
Record, daily edition, vol. 146, Nov. 2, 2000, p. S11504.

Civil Service Retirement and Disability trust fund to provide for administrative
expenses to adjudicate retirement appeals. This total, $31,867,000, was the amount
recommended by the Senate Appropriations Committee and requested by the
President in his FY 2001 budget proposal and in a June 5, 2000 request for an
additional $580,000. The House Appropriations Committee recommended and the
House passed an appropriation of $28,857,000 for the MSPB, including the additional
$2,430,000 for administrative expenses. The law also provides for a 0.22% or
$70,107 across-the-board cut in the FY 2001 funding. After this reduction, the FY

2001 funding is $31,796,893. The MSPB assists federal agencies in running a merit-


based civil service system. The agency’s FY 2000 appropriation, not including the
trust fund transfer, was $27,586,000. P.L. 106-113 mandated a 0.38% or $105,00040
rescission in the FY 2000 funding. The reduction was to be absorbed, said the
MSPB, by reducing the funding dedicated to its 5-year information technology
improvement plan which includes establishment of a system for filing cases
electronically. After the reduction, the FY 2000 funding for salaries and expenses was
$27,481,000. When the trust fund transfer was added, the total FY 2000 funding was
$29,911,000. The FY 2001 appropriation, including the trust fund transfer and after
the rescission, is 6.3% above this amount.
As stated in the Senate Appropriations Committee report, the recommended
appropriation includes $703,000 for mandatory cost increases including required pay
adjustments, $673,000 for the next installment for the ongoing information technology
plan, $138,000 for anticipated costs of additional appeals cases, and $442,000 for41
increased lease costs.
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). The
custodian of the historically valuable records of the federal government since its
establishment in 1934, NARA also prescribes policy and provides both guidance and
management assistance concerning the entire life cycle of federal records. It also
administers the presidential libraries system; publishes the laws, regulations, and
presidential and other documents; and assists the Information Security Oversight
Office (ISOO), which manages federal security classification and declassification
policy; and the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC),
which makes grants nationwide to help nonprofit organizations identify, preserve, and
provide access to materials that document American history.
P.L. 106-554 funds NARA at $305,395,000, with no advance appropriation for
use in the next fiscal year. The allocation of those funds is $209,393,000 for
operating expenses, $95,150,000 for repairs and restoration, and $6,450,000 for the
National Historical Publications & Records Commission grants program. P.L. 106-

346 allocates $6,610,000 for repairs to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library.


The President’s FY2001 budget requested $209,393,000 for NARA operating
expenses, which was $28,995,000 greater than the $180,398,000 appropriated for
FY2000. (With the FY2000 rescission applied, the net funding for operating expenses
was $179,674,000.) H.R. 4871, as passed by the House, would have provided


40Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 395.
41S.Rept. 106-500, p. 78.

$195,119,000. The Senate bill, as reported, and the vetoed conference agreement
would have provided the requested amount. Under the vetoed agreement (H.R.
4516/H.R. 4985), up to $5 million could have been used for the Implementation of
the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act (112 Stat. 1859; 5 U.S.C. 552 note), including
preservation and restoration of declassified records, public access and dissemination
activities, and necessary support services for the Nazi War Criminal Records
Interagency Working Group.42
In addition, $99,560,000 was sought for repairs and restoration of NARA
facilities, an increase of $77,264,000 over the $22,418,000 appropriated for the
current fiscal year. (The FY2000 rescission in this account resulted in net funding of
$22,296,000.) H.R. 4871, as passed by the House, would have appropriated
$5,650,000, with the Senate bill recommending $92,950,000, with $4,950,000 to be
available in FY2001 and $88,000,000 to be available in FY2002. The vetoed
conference agreement would have funded the account at $95,150,000 in FY2001.
The conference report stipulated that $4,950,000 would be for the general repairs and
restoration program and $88,000,000 “for the major repair and restoration project at
the main Archives building, $1,500,000 for the construction of a new Southeast
Regional Archives facility, and $700,000 for the design of a 10,000-square-foot43
extension to the Gerald R. Ford museum.” P.L. 106-346 allocates $6,610,000 for
repairs to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library, but no other amounts for any
NARA programs or operations.
The $6,000,000 requested for the National Historical Publications and Records
Commission (NHPRC) for FY2001 was $250,000 less than the amount appropriated
for FY2000. H.R. 4871, as passed the House, would appropriate $6,000,000. The
Senate bill and the vetoed conference agreement would appropriate $6,450,000.
No new funding was sought for the NARA Records Center Revolving Fund,
which was initially capitalized with a $22 million appropriation in FY2000.
Section 514 of P.L. 106-554 instructs the Archivist of the United States to
transfer land in Grand Rapids, Michigan to the Gerald R. Ford Foundation. The grant
is to be held in trust for the purpose of supporting the Gerald R. Ford Museum in
Grand Rapids and the Gerald R. Ford Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The parcels
are described and the terms and conditions set out.
Office of Government Ethics (OGE). The Office of Government Ethics,
a small agency within the executive branch, was established by the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978. Originally part of the Office of Personnel Management,
OGE became a separate agency on October 1, 1989, as part of the Office of
Government Ethics Reorganization Act of 1988. The Office of Government Ethics
exercises leadership in the executive branch to prevent conflicts of interest on the part
of government employees, and to resolve those conflicts of interest that do occur. In
partnership with executive branch agencies and departments, OGE fosters high ethical


42Conference Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001,
Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 27, 2000, p. H7124.
43 Ibid.

standards for employees and strengthens the public’s confidence that the
Government’s business is conducted with impartiality and integrity. P.L. 106-554
provides $9,684,000, as was requested in the budget, a 6.25% ($570,000) increase
from the $9,114,000 originally appropriated for FY2000. However, the appropriation
for FY2000 was subsequently reduced by .038% ($34,000), the across the board cut
mandated by the consolidated appropriations act of FY2000. Accordingly, the
FY2000 net funding for OGE was $9,080,000, and the FY2001 request of $9,684,000
was an actual increase of $604,000 (6.6%) over the FY2000 appropriations. As
vetoed, H.R. 4516 would have funded OGE at the requested level of $9,684,000.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The budget for OPM is
comprised of budget authority for both permanent and current appropriations. This
report discusses the budget authority for current appropriations. P.L. 106-554
provides funding of $14,609,403,000 for the agency, which is responsible for
administering personnel management functions. This total includes discretionary
funding of $94,095,000 for salaries and expenses and $1,360,000 for the Office of
Inspector General (OIG). It also includes mandatory funding of $5,427,166,000 for
the government payment for annuitants of the employees health benefits program,
$35,000,000 for the government payment for annuitants of the employee life
insurance program, and $8,940,051,000 for payment to the civil service retirement
and disability fund. Included in this total as well are proposed trust fund transfers of
$101,986,000 for salaries and expenses and $9,745,000 for OIG salaries and
expenses. The law also provides for a 0.22% or $455,000 across-the-board cut in the
FY 2001 funding. After this reduction, the FY 2001 funding is $14,608,948,000.
The House Appropriations Committee recommended, and the House passed, an
appropriation of $14,608,779,000 for the agency. This total included discretionary
funding of $93,471,000 for salaries and expenses and the amounts stated above for
the OIG, health benefits, life insurance, and retirement accounts. Included in this total
as well were proposed trust fund transfers of $101,986,000 for salaries and expenses
and $9,745,000 for OIG salaries and expenses. The House-passed amount was
$7,087,000 below the $14,615,866,000 proposed by the President in his FY2001
budget; the reduction applies to the salaries and expenses account (the President
proposed $100,558,000). The House Appropriations Committee report stated that
“the Committee denies without prejudice the President’s request of $6,150,000 for
the Federal Cyber-Service program; $300,000 to develop a workforce planning
model; $300,000 for improvements in setting compensation rates; and $100,000 to
research best practices in compensation systems.”13 The President’s budget also
requested a one million dollar supplemental to “help agencies meet a critical need for
highly trained information security personnel.”14 The House Appropriations
Committee did not address this issue.
The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended an appropriation of
$14,607,000,000. This total included discretionary funding of $94,095,000 for salaries
and expenses; $1,356,000 for the OIG; and the amounts stated above for health
benefits, life insurance, and retirement accounts. Included in this total as well were


13H.Rept. 106-756, p. 75.
14Budget, Appendix, p. 1240.

proposed trust fund transfers of $99,624,000 for salaries and expenses and
$9,708,000 for OIG salaries and expenses. The Senate recommendation was
$6,467,000 below the $14,615,866,000 proposed by the President in his FY 2001
budget.
P.L. 106-113 mandated a 0.38% or $756,000 rescission in the FY2000 funding.15
OPM did not provide details as to how the cut was being absorbed. OPM’s FY2000
appropriation, including the trust fund transfers and after the reduction, was
$14,458,081,000. The FY 2001 appropriation, including the trust fund transfers, and
after the rescission, is 1% above this amount.
As stated in the House Appropriations Committee report, the recommended
appropriation included $237,000 for expanded oversight of non-Title 5 agency merit
systems; $400,000 for new qualification standards to simplify hiring and assessment;
$313,000 to maintain current levels; $800,000 for on-going information technology
support; $700,000 for agency wide information technology architecture; $181,000 for
NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) costs; and $1,900,000 for
administrative financial systems support to ensure an unqualified audit opinion.16
The House Appropriations Committee report “directs OPM to provide a report
on options for addressing federal employees’ elder care needs, including any
legislative recommendations that may be appropriate, to the Committee no later than
March 1, 2001.”17
As stated in the Senate Appropriations Committee report, the recommended
appropriation included $1,500,000 for investment technology infrastructure and
architecture, $1,900,000 for administrative financial systems support and
improvements, $1,574,000 for human resources initiatives, and $181,000 for
mandatory cost increases including required pay adjustments.18
The Senate Committee report “recommends that the pilot project permitting
Executive agencies to use their appropriated funds to help subsidize child care
expenses for their lower paid employees be extended until September 30, 2001.”19
H.R. 5658, as enacted through Public Law 106-554, directs OPM to conduct a
study to develop one or more alternative means for providing federal employees with
at least six weeks of paid parental leave in connection with the birth or adoption of
a child (apart from any other paid leave). OPM is required to report its findings and
recommendations to Congress by September 30, 2001. This was an amendment to
H.R. 4871 (Section 650) which was offered by Representative Carolyn Maloney and
agreed to by the House by voice vote.


15Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 393.
16H.Rept. 106-756, p. 75.
17Ibid., p. 76.
18S.Rept. 106-500, p. 82.
19Ibid., p. 83.

Section 516 of H.R. 5658 provides that OPM may accept and utilize funds made
available to the agency pursuant to court approval to resolve litigation and implement
any settlement agreements for the nonforeign area cost-of-living allowance program.
This was section 513 of S. 2900, as reported.
President Clinton proposed a 3.7% pay adjustment for federal employees in his
FY 2001 budget. This amount is the overall average increase, including locality pay
adjustments. The conference agreement incorporating H.R. 5658 (as well as the
vetoed H.R. 4516 conference agreement, H.R. 4871, as passed by the House, and S.
2900, as reported) is silent on this issue. However, the program funding in the
legislation assumes a 3.7% pay adjustment in January 2001 for federal employees.
Section 140 of H.R. 5666, also enacted through Public Law 106-554, specifies a
3.7% pay adjustment, “consistent with the alternative pay plan submitted by the
administration on November 30, 2000.”20
Locality Pay Designations. Section 637 of H.R. 5658 includes “a new
provision authorizing the President’s Pay Agent to use appropriate data from sources
other than the Bureau of Labor Statistics in making new locality pay designations”
and “directs the President’s Pay Agent to report on the status of efforts to resolve the
methodological concerns with the NCS (National Compensation Survey) program and
on the efficacy of utilizing non-BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics) data in making
comparability payment recommendations.”21 The report must be submitted to the
Senate and House Committees on Appropriations, the Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs, and the House Committee on Government Reform by May 1,
2001. This was section 639 of H.R. 4871, as passed by the House and section 637
of the vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 conference report.
Section 645 of H.R. 5658 includes a provision which makes the compensation
of administrative appeals judges and administrative law judges comparable. This was
an amendment to H.R. 4871 (Section 647) offered by Representative Constance
Morella and agreed to by the House by voice vote. Section 641 of H.R. 5658
(Section 641 of the vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 conference agreement and Section
642 of H.R. 4871, as passed) provides that overtime pay for a firefighter for hours in
a regular tour of duty will be included in any computation of pay under 5 U.S.C. 8114
related to compensation for work injuries. Section 642 of H.R. 5658 (Section 642
of the vetoed H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985 conference agreement and Section 643 of H.R.
4871, as passed) provides that the minimum charge for military leave (without loss
in pay or time) for the reserves and National Guardsmen under 5 U.S.C. 6323(a) will
be one hour and additional charges will be in multiples thereof.
Office of Special Counsel (OSC). P.L. 106-554 provides funding of
$11,147,000 for the OSC. This was the amount requested by the President in his FY
2001 budget proposal. The House Appropriations Committee recommended, and the
House passed, an appropriation of $10,319,000 for the OSC. The Senate
Appropriations Committee recommended an appropriation of $10,733,000. The
House amount was $828,000 below, and the Senate amount was $414,000 below, the


20Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, Dec. 15, 2000, pp. H12276 and H12319.
21H.Rept. 106-756, p. 76.

law and the President’s request. The law also provides for a 0.22% or $24,523
across-the-board cut in the FY 2001 funding. After this reduction, the FY 2001
funding is $11,122,477. The agency investigates federal employee allegations of
prohibited personnel practices and, when appropriate, prosecutes before the Merit
Systems Protection Board; provides a channel for whistle blowing by federal
employees; and enforces the Hatch Act. The agency’s FY2000 appropriation was
$9,740,000. P.L. 106-113 mandated a 0.38% or $37,000 rescission in the FY200022
funding. The OSC said that it will absorb the reduction by delaying the scope of the
planned reconstruction of office space which would have provided the agency’s
lawyers and investigators with private offices. After the reduction, the FY 2000
funding was $9,703,000. The FY 2001 appropriation, after the rescission, is 14.6%
above this amount.
The President’s budget stated that, “The request will enable OSC to reduce its
long-standing case-processing backlogs, and will ensure that OSC’s customers receive
prompt and timely service in accordance with the time frames laid out in [law] ... (240
days to process prohibited practice complaints) and ... (15 days to make initial
determination on whistleblower disclosure).”23 The House Appropriations Committee
report stated that “the Committee denies without prejudice the President’s request of
$772,000 for additional personnel to reduce case backlog, and $56,000 for related
equipment, travel, and training.”.24 As stated in the Senate Appropriations Committee
report, the recommended appropriation included $616,000 for mandatory cost
increases, including required pay adjustments, and $414,000 for five new full-time25
equivalent positions and the related equipment. The report also urges the OSC to
complete an investigation of allegations made by a State Department employee “in a
timely manner.”
General Provisions
This section of the report calls attention, briefly, to some of the law enacted
under the general provisions titles of the Treasury and General Government FY2001
appropriation (see H.R. 5658). Both Title V and Title VI provide general
government-wide guidance on basic infrastructure-like policies, such as requiring
provisions related to the Buy America Act (sections 506 and 507), drug-free federal
workplaces (section 602), and authorizing agencies to pay GSA bills for space
renovation and other services (section 606).
Title V .With the exception of the sections relating to the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program, which continue provisions already in effect from previous
years, the sections noted here are either new or contain modified policies.
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. See discussion of sections

509, 510, and 513 under the “Federal Personnel Issues” section below.


22Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 396.
23Budget, Appendix, p. 1192.
24H.Rept. 106-756, p. 78.
25S.Rept. 106-500, p. 86.

Gerald R. Ford Museum and Library. See discussion of section 514 under
National Archives and Records Administration above.
Data Quality. Section 515 of the bill requires the director of the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), by not later than September 30, 2001, and with
public and federal agency involvement, to issue guidelines under 44 U.S.C.
3504(d)(1) and 3516 that provide policy and procedural guidance to federal agencies
for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of
information, including statistical information, disseminated by the agencies in
fulfillment of the purposes and provisions of chapter 35 of Title 44, United States
Code—the Paperwork Reduction Act. Such guidelines shall (1) apply to the sharing
by federal agencies of, and access to, information disseminated by such agencies, and
(2) require that each federal agency to which the guidelines apply:
!issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and
integrity of information, including statistical information, issued by the agency,
by not later than one year after the date of issuance of the OMB guidelines;
!establish administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and
obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by the agency
that does not comply with the OMB guidelines; and
!report periodically to the OMB director (1) the number and nature of
complaints received by the agency regarding the accuracy of information
disseminated by the agency, and (2) how such complaints were handled by the
agency.
Kyoto Protocol. Section 517 provides that no funds appropriated by the Act
may be used for any aspect of implementation of the December 17, 1997 Kyoto
Protocol on climate changes, which has not been submitted to the Senate for
ratification.
Paperwork Reduction Effectiveness. Under the provisions of section
518, the Office of Management and Budget must, by July 1, 2001, submit to the
appropriate House and Senate committees a report that evaluates, for each agency,
the extent to which the implementation of paperwork burden reduction legislation (31
U.S.C. chapter 35) has been effective and discusses the need for additional procedures
to effect the goals. There is to be an evaluation of the burden imposed by each major
rule that imposes more than 10,000,000 hours of burden and an identification of
specific reductions expected to be achieved, in FY2001 and FY2002, in the burden
imposed by all rules issued by each agency that issued such a major rule.
Title VI. Unless noted, all the provisions set out here are new or modified
policies.
Regulatory Costs Accounting. Section 624 modifies, and makes
permanent, the requirement that OMB annually, beginning for FY2002, submit, with
the budget, an accounting statement and associated report containing an estimate of
the total annual costs and benefits of federal rules and paperwork; an analysis of



impacts of federal regulations on state, local, and tribal government, small business,
wages, and economic growth; and recommendations for reform.
Dept. of Treasury Canine Certification. Section 626 continues, and
makes permanent, the authorization for the Secretary of the Treasury to establish
scientific certification standards for explosives detection canines. It also provides ,
on a reimbursable basis, for the certification of explosives detection canines employed
by federal agencies, or other agencies providing explosives detection services at
airports in the United States.
National Science and Technology Council. Although section 610 is a
continued provision prohibiting interagency expenditures on boards, committees,
councils or commissions without prior statutory authorization, section 635 is a new
provision which provides that funds appropriated in this act, or others, for FY2001
shall be available for the interagency funding of specific projects, workshops, studies,
and similar efforts to carry out the purposes of the national Science and Technology
Council (Executive Order 12881). OMB is required to provide a report describing
the budget of, and resources connected to, the Council to specific congressional
committees by March 21, 2001.
Law Enforcement Retirement. See discussion, in “Law Enforcement
—Washington Area Airport Authority” section below, of section 636 retirement
provisions relating to members of the police force of the Metropolitan Washington
Airports Authority.
Federal Employee Locality Pay Designations. See “Locality Pay
Designations” in the OPM section above, for a discussion of the new provisions in
section 637.
Mandatory Removal of Law Enforcement Officers. Section 639
provides for the mandatory removal from employment of federal law enforcement
officers who are convicted of felonies. Details of the policy are set out in the section
and will be codified at 5 U.S.C. 7371. The policy will be effective January 21, 2001
and will apply to any conviction of a felony entered by a federal or state court on or
after that date.
Statutory Correction. Section 640 of P.L. 106-554 provides correction to
FY2001 provisions enacted earlier. Section 640 of the Legislative Branch and
Treasury FY2001 appropriation (H.R. 4516/4985, vetoed) would have rolled back the
increased rates of contributions federal employees make to the retirement funds.
Section 505 of P.L. 106-346 (Department of Transportation FY2001) provided for
the rollback and Section 504 provided that section 640 of H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985
would have no effect. At the time P.L. 106-346 was signed, H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985
was pending approval by the President and it was presumed it would be approved.
It was subsequently vetoed and normally the language of P.L. 106-346, section 504,
would have been rendered moot.
However, section 504 does not refer to the measure by bill number but refers to
the “Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001.” That is the short
title of H.R. 5658, enacted by P.L. 106-554. If P.L. 106-554 had not contained



language, as found in section 640, any section in P.L. 106-554, which carried the
designation “640," would be rendered not in effect because of the language of section

504 of P.L. 106-346.


Section 644 of P.L. 106-554 repeals section 501 of P.L. 106-346 for the similar
purpose of preserving the integrity of any section numbered 644 in the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 2001.
Federal Firefighter Workmen’s Compensation. Section 641 provides
that overtime paid to federal firefighters will be used in the computation of the
benefits to federal firefighters for work-related injuries.
Military Leave. Section 642 provides that military leave taken by federal
employees must be in increments of one hour.
Federal Child Caregiver Background Checks. See “Federal Child Care”
below for a discussion of the provisions of section 643.
Administrative Appeals Judge — Salary. See discussion of section 645
in “Administrative Appeals Judge — Salary” subsection of the OPM presentation
above.
IG Reports on Individual Data Through Internet Use. Section 646
requires that, by February 19, 2001, the Inspector General of each department or
agency will submit to Congress a report that discloses any activity relating to the
collection or review of singular data or the creation of aggregate lists that include
personally identifiable information about individuals who access any department or
agency’s Internet site. The reports are also to include activities relating to entering
into agreements with third parties of collect, review, or obtain such information or
lists relating to any individual’s access or viewing habits for governmental and
nongovernmental Internet sites.
Department of Transportation Appropriations, 2001
— P.L. 106-346
During the debates in both the House and Senate on the Legislative Branch
Appropriations conference report, several Members indicated that they supported
higher levels of funding for some of the accounts under discussion. They were
assured in floor exchanges that funding would be provided in subsequent
appropriations measures to come before them.
Partial funding is provided for the following accounts:
!
Department of the Treasury: Departmental Offices, Department-wide systems and
capital investments programs, Expanded Access to Financial Services, Federal
Law Enforcement (both the salaries and expenses and the acquisition,
construction, improvements and related expenses accounts), Bureau of Alcohol,



Tobacco, and Firearms, U.S. Customs Service (salaries and expenses), Internal
Revenue Service (three accounts—tax law enforcement, information technology
investments, and staffing tax administration for balance and equity), and the U.S.
Secret Service (salaries and expenses).
!
U.S. Postal Service (no funding)
!
Executive Office of the President: Office of National Drug Control Policy
(Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center) and Funds Appropriated to the
President—Unanticipated Needs.
!
Independent Agencies: General Services Administration (Federal Buildings Fund
and Policy and Operations) and National Archives and Records Administration
(Repairs and Restoration)
In addition to partially funding some of the accounts, P.L. 106-346 (H.R. 4475)
also addresses general provisions, such as privacy, federal employee retirement
changes, and U.S. Secret Service assistance for investigations related to missing and
exploited children. The retirement language was intended as an amendment to the
language in H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, which has since been vetoed. Also, in effect, the
funding was intended as supplemental funding for the accounts within that measure.
The supplemental has been enacted prior to the base account funding.
Privacy Provisions
Section 501 of P.L. 106-346 prohibits funds appropriated by the legislation to
be used by any executive agency (1) to collect, review, or create any aggregate list,
derived by any means, that includes the collection of any personally identifiable
information relating to an individual’s access to or use of any federal government
Internet site of the agency, or (2) to enter into any agreement with a third party,
including another government agency, to collect, review, or obtain any aggregate list,
derived from any means, that includes the collection of any personally identifiable
information relating to an individual’s access to or use of any non-governmental
Internet site. These limitations do not apply to (1) any record of aggregate data that
does not identify particular persons; (2) any voluntary submission of personally
identifiable information; (3) any action taken for law enforcement, regulatory, or
supervisory purposes, in accordance with applicable law; and (4) any action that is a
system security action taken by the operator of an Internet site and is necessarily
incident to the rendition of the Internet site services or to the protection of the rights
or property of the provider of the Internet site.
The first limitation may be viewed as a response to the June press revelation that
the National Drug Control Policy Office, an agency within the Executive Office of the
President, was secretly tracking visitors to its website through the use of computer
software known as “cookies.”26 In response, OMB issued a June 22, 2000,


26See John F. Harris and John Schwartz, “Anti-Drug Web Site Tracks Visitors,” Washington
Post, June 22, 2000, p. A23; Lance Gay, “White House Uses Drug-Message Site to Track
(continued...)

memorandum to the heads of all executive departments and agencies indicating that
“‘cookies’ should not be used at Federal web sites, or by contractors when operating
web sites on behalf of agencies, unless, in addition to clear and conspicuous notice,
the following conditions are met: a compelling need to gather the data on the site;
appropriate and publicly disclosed privacy safeguards for handling of information
derived from “cookies”; and personal approval by the head of the agency.” The
second limitation may be regarded as a response to a September GAO report
indicating that, in a survey of online privacy protections at federal websites, it had
been found that 23 of 70 agencies had disclosed personal information gathered from
their websites to third parties, mostly other agencies. However, at least four agencies
were discovered to be sharing such information with private entities—trade
organizations, bilateral development banks, product manufacturers, distributors, and
retailers. The offending agencies were not identified by GAO. Responding to these
findings, some privacy advocates called for updating the Privacy Act, while others
urged better oversight and enforcement of the statute.27
On October 5, the conference report to accompany H.R. 4475 was filed.28 On
October 6, it was brought up under the rule, H. Res. 612.29 The vote to adopt the
rule was unrecorded. The conference report was agreed to by the House on a vote
of 344-50 (Roll no. 516) and by the Senate on a vote of 78-10 (Record Vote No.

267).30 The President signed P.L. 106-346 on October 23, 2000.


Continuing Resolution
P.L. 106-275,31 as amended, is the statutory vehicle through which all
government programs and agencies, which have not been funded through regular


26 (...continued)
Inquiries,” Washington Times, June 21, 2000, p. A3.
27Lance Gay, “GAO Finds Agencies Sharing Data of On-line Visitors,” Washington Times,
Sept. 8, 2000, p. A3; U.S. General Accounting Office, Internet Privacy: Agencies’ Efforts
to Implement OMB’s Privacy Policy, GAO Report GAO/GGD-00-191 (Washington: Jan.

2000).


28Conference Report on H.R. 4475, Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, [text of H.. Rept. 106-940],Oct.
5, 2000, p. H8922-H9004. See pp. H8934-H8937 for Title V (Treasury/General Government
provisions) text and pp. H8978-H8980 for corresponding explanatory remarks.
29Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on H.R. 4475, Department of
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol.

146, [Consideration and vote on H. Res. 612, the rule on H.R. 4475, H.Rept. 106-941],Oct.


6, 2000, p. H9014-H9018.


30. Conference Report on H.R. 4475, Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146 [Consideration and vote in the
House], Oct. 6, 2000, pp. H9018-H9028. Department of Transportation and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001—Conference Report, Congressional Record, vol. 146,
[Consideration and vote in the Senate],Oct. 6, 2000, pp. S10052-S10059.
31P.L. 106-275; Sept. 29, 2000; 114 Stat. 808.

FY2001 appropriations, are being funded. Most are being funded at FY2000 funding
levels. Most programs or accounts new in FY2001 are receiving no funding.
Subsequent to the passage of P.L. 106-275, there were 20 additional continuing
funding resolutions (CR) for FY2001, most of which amend P.L. 106-275 to provide
daily continuations
One account, within the vetoed funding measure, was funded specifically in the
November 3 (P.L. 106-426) CR is that through which the General Services
Administration will administer the presidential transition. On November 2, Congress
agreed to a continuing funding resolution (H.J.Res. 123) which was amended to
include the $7.1 million provided in the vetoed legislation.32 There was no recorded
vote on the amendment but the resolution, which amended P.L. 106-275, was agreed
to through a vote of 310 to 7 (Roll No. 592). The Senate agreed to H.J.Res. 123 by
unanimous consent.33
P.L. 106-520 (H.J.Res. 125), in addition to extending the funding, amends the
FY2001 continuing funding resolution to authorize the Executive Residence at the
White House to “make expenditures to provide for the orderly transition and moving
expenses following the election on November 7, 2000.”34 That authorization was also
in H.R. 4871, as passed the house, and in H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985, as vetoed. H.J.Res.

125 was adopted in the House November 1335 and in the Senate November 14.36


Legislative Branch Conference Report
Treasury and General Government Provisions
Inclusion of the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government funding
provisions in the legislative branch appropriations37 caught many by surprise. There
are no minority signatures on the conference report. The text of the floor debate on
the rule would indicate that some knew about the strategy and others were caught
unaware.38 The debate on the rule, agreed to in the House July 27, seemed to focus


32Making Further Continuing Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional Record,
daily edition, vol. 146, Nov. 2, 2000, pp. H11784-H11785.
33Making Further Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional
Record, daily edition, vol. 146, Nov. 2, 2000, p. S11504.
34Further Continuing Appropriations, Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional Record, daily edition,
vol. 146, Nov. 13, 2000, p. H11850.
35 Ibid.
36Making Further Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2001, Congressional
Record, daily edition, vol. 146, Nov. 14, 2000, p. S11515.
37For tracking of the legislative branch funding bill, see CRS Report RL30512:
Appropriations for FY2001: Legislative Branch, by Paul Dwyer.
38Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch
(continued...)

more on the protocol than on the substance of the provisions of H.R. 4985, as
introduced and as included in the conference report. The House had passed H.R.
4871 and the Senate had begun debate on that measure, as well as having reported
their own version, S. 2900. H.R. 4985 has received no stand-alone committee or
floor action by either chamber. The House, having already agreed to the rule,
proceeded to debate the conference report, and subsequently agreed to the report, on
September 14, 2000. The Senate rejected the conference report on September 20.
There was substantial objection to the procedural protocol of bringing into a
conference report, provisions of a bill which had been introduced the legislative day
before it became part of the report and which contained spending levels considerably
in excess of the House-passed and Senate-reported versions. There continued to be
contention with regard to the adequacy of the funding levels for IRS accounts and for
courthouse construction. Although there was not a formal press release nor a
Statement of Administration Policy threatening a veto, the probability of a veto was
suggested by both administration representatives and Democratic Members.
The funding levels in H.R. 4985, as introduced and as section 1001 of Division
B of the H.R. 4516 conference report, are markedly different than those in the House-
passed and Senate-reported versions. Table 4 provides the details by account. In
summary, the conference version would have funded the accounts at $30, 309.5
million. The FY2001 request was for $31,208.4 million. The House approved
$29,081.6 million and the Senate Appropriations Committee reported their bill at
$29,180.6 million. There are four accounts which would have exceeded the
President’s request as well as both the House and Senate versions (Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center, Financial Management Service and the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and the U.S. Secret Service, all in the Department
of the Treasury). There are two accounts which would have exceeded the President’s
request and would be equal to, or lower than, either the House or Senate versions
(Financial Crimes Enforcement Network in the Department of the Treasury and the
National Historical Publications and Records Commission Grants Program in the
National Archives and Records Administration). There are 17 accounts in which the
conference version would have exceeded both the House and Senate versions, but
would be equal to (two), or below the President’s request. There are 26 accounts in
which the conference version would have exceeded the funding level proposed by
either the House or the Senate. In most of those instances, the funding level would
have matched the President’s request and whichever congressional version was
higher. Other than the mandatory accounts, there are eight accounts in which the
conference funding level is in agreement with the President’s request and both the
House-passed and Senate-reported versions. (Note to Reader: These differentials are
in P.L. 106-554, as well.)
Data Quality. Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
provisions would require the director of the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), by not later than September 30, 2001, and with public and federal agency


38 (...continued)
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, July 27, 2000, pp.
H7143-H7152.

involvement, to issue guidelines under 44 U.S.C. 3504(d)(1) and 3516 that provide
policy and procedural guidance to federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the
quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information, including statistical
information, disseminated by the agencies in fulfillment of the purposes and provisions
of chapter 35 of Title 44, United States Code—the Paperwork Reduction Act. Such
guidelines (1) would apply to the sharing by federal agencies of, and access to,
information disseminated by such agencies, and (2) would require that each federal
agency to which the guidelines apply:
!issue guidelines ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and
integrity of information, including statistical information, issued by the agency,
by not later than one year after the date of issuance of the OMB guidelines;
!establish administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and
obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by the agency
that does not comply with the OMB guidelines; and
!report periodically to the OMB director (1) the number and nature of
complaints received by the agency regarding the accuracy of information
disseminated by the agency, and (2) how such complaints were handled by the
agency.
Excise Tax. The repeal of the telephone excise tax, although in Division B,
is not part of the Treasury and General Government text. That provision can be
found in Section 1003 of Division B, H.R. 4516. For a discussion of the issue, see
CRS Report RS20119, Telephone Excise Tax, by Louis Alan Talley.
Veto and Subsequent Action
On October 30, 2000, President Clinton vetoed H.R. 4516, sending the FY2001
funding for the legislative branch and the Treasury and general government accounts
back to Congress. In the veto message, the President noted that the “business of the
American people remains unfinished” and stated that he could not “in good
conscience sign a bill that funds the operations of the Congress and the White House
before funding our classrooms, fixing our schools and protecting our workers.”39 On
October 31, the House discussed the veto and referred the veto and bill to the
Committee on Appropriations.40
Many press reports have indicated that the President vetoed the congressional
pay raise. His statement does not mention that issue. There is no provision in H.R.
4516 for a pay raise; the raise goes into effect automatically unless there is language
denying it and H.R. 4516 is silent on the issue. (See “Federal Pay” below.)


39Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001—Veto Message from the President of the
United States, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 146, H. Doc. No. 106-306, Oct. 31,

2000, H11675.


40Ibid., H11675-H11681.

Federal Personnel Issues
Pay
General.Under the Federal Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA),
federal white collar employees, paid under the General Schedule and related salary
systems, are to receive annual adjustments based on two separate mechanisms. The
first is the adjustment to base pay which is based on changes in private sector salaries
as reflected in the Employment Cost Index (ECI). The rate of pay adjustment is
supposed to be the percentage rate of change in that element of the ECI, minus .5.
For January 2001, the base pay adjustment should be 2.7%. At this time there are no
legislative proposals to change that rate. Since the President sent no alternative plan
to Congress by the end of August, the base pay adjustment will be 2.7%
Since the budget recommendation is for 3.7% and since the assumption in this
legislation is that the programs are funded to accommodate that rate, it follows that
the second tier of the adjustment would be 1%. Locality-based payments are
calculated based on the results of surveys of occupations in specific localities within
the continental United States. [See discussion under OPM above with regard to the
designation of those localities.] The surveys show that locality-based payments would
have to average about 16% in order to meet the expectations of FEPCA. On
December 1, 2000, President Clinton sent an alternative plan to Congress which
provides that locality payments equal 1% of payroll.
Federal Wage System. The Federal Wage System (FWS) is designed to
compensate the federal blue collar, or skilled labor, force at rates prevailing in local
wage areas for like occupations. If the statutory system were allowed to be managed
as planned, the wage rates and the rates of adjustment in the over 130 wage areas
would vary, according to the labor costs and compensation in the private sector. For
the last several years, Congress has limited the rates of adjustment, based on the rates
of adjustment for the General Schedule. Part of the rationale for that decision is that,
in certain high costs areas, the some FWS wages would exceed the salaries paid to
General Schedule supervisors. Section 613 of the FY2001 appropriations continues
the limitation. Wages in lower cost areas will be allowed to increase according to the
findings of the wage surveys but the high cost area wages will be capped.
Members of Congress, Judges, and Other Officials. Under the Ethics
Reform Act of 1989, as amended, pay adjustments for federal officials, including
Members of Congress and judges, is also based on ECI calculations, but for a
different 12-month period. The ECI calculations would dictate a pay adjustment in
January 2001 of 3%. However, the statute limits those adjustments to the rate of
adjustment for base pay of the General Schedule. Therefore, if General Schedule base
pay is adjusted at the rate of 2.7%, that will be the maximum rate of adjustment in
salaries of federal officials.
Although there has been substantial journalistic reporting that the President
vetoed the Legislative Branch/Treasury and General Government in order to eliminate
a January 2001 pay raise for Members of Congress, the pay raise would go into effect
regardless of that action. Neither of those bills has any section in it providing for a



pay increase. The increase, under the statute discussed above, is automatic unless
there is specific language in some legislative measure denying it. The language to
deny that pay increase has often been placed in the Treasury and General Government
funding measure. However, both the vetoed bill and P.L. 106-554 are silent on the
matter.
Unlike that for Members of Congress and executive branch officials, the annual
pay increase must be specifically authorized for judges. The authorization for the
January 2001 pay increase is in the Commerce, State, Justice and Judiciary
appropriation (P.L. 106-554, section 309).
President. Pursuant to the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2000 (P.L. 106-58), the incoming President will receive a salary of $400,000 per
annum. Since 1969, Presidents have been paid a salary of $200,000.
Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
Section 630 of H.R. 5658, as enacted through P.L. 106-554 is that same
provision as section 631 of H.R. 4871, as passed the House. It requires health
insurance plans participating in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
(FEHBP) to include coverage of prescription contraceptives under their prescription
drug benefit. It exempts from this requirement three specific health maintenance
organizations for religious reasons as well as “any existing or future plan
[participating in the FEHBP] if the carrier for the plan objects to such coverage on the
basis of religious beliefs.” It also prohibits discrimination against “any individual who
refuses to prescribe or otherwise provide for contraceptives because such activity
would be contrary to the individual’s religious beliefs or moral convictions.” A
requirement that FEHBP plan cover prescription contraceptives was first included in
the FY1999 appropriations legislation. The provision in the FY2001 act is similar to
that included in the FY2000 Treasury and General Government appropriations act.
As reported, S. 2900 contains a similar provision. It would have exempted two
additional plans from the program.
Section 509 of H.R. 5658 prohibits funds appropriated through this Act to be
used to pay for an abortion or the administrative expenses in connection with any
health plan under FEHB which provides any benefits or coverage for abortions. An
exception, in section 510 would be if the mother’s health were endangered or if the
pregnancy were the result of rape.
Section 513 exempts contracts under FEHBP from the cost accounting standards
promulgated under the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 422).
Federal Retirement
Repeal of Temporary Increase in Retirement Contributions. The
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA, P.L. 105-33) mandated a temporary increase of

0.5% in employee contributions under both Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS)


and Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS), which was to be phased in over



3 years. Employee contributions increased by 0.25% on January 1, 1999; by a further
0.15% on January 1, 2000; and were scheduled to rise by another 0.1% on January
1, 2001. Employee contributions were to revert to their previous levels on January
1, 2003. The higher contributions do not increase the benefit accruals of federal
employees under either CSRS or FERS. The President’s proposed budget for
FY2001 included a legislative initiative to repeal the increase in employee
contributions required by the BBA and two bills were introduced in the 106th
Congress for that purpose (H.R. 2631/S. 1472). The higher contribution rates were
repealed for all federal employees with the exception of Members of Congress by P.L.

106-346, the FY2001 Department of Transportation Appropriations Act.


Law Enforcement —Washington Area Airport Authority. Section 636
of H.R. 5658 designates qualified members of the Metropolitan Washington Airports
Authority as eligible to be treated as law enforcement officer under CSRS or FERS,
as applicable. Federal law enforcement officers are permitted under both CSRS and
FERS to receive an immediate, unreduced retirement annuity at age 50 with 20 years
of service. Under FERS, employees in these positions are authorized to receive a
retirement annuity at any age after 25 years of service. Law enforcement officers
must retire upon reaching age 57 or after completing 20 years of service, if later.
Federal law enforcement officers earn a larger retirement benefit for each year of
service than regular federal employees. Under both CSRS and FERS, law
enforcement officers contribute an additional 0.5% of pay over the amount
contributed by regular federal employees.
Increase in maximum allowable contributions to the Thrift Savings
Plan. The Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) was created by the Federal Employees’
Retirement System Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-335) as a retirement savings plan for civilian
federal employees. Under the terms of FERS Act, employees covered by the Federal
Employees’ Retirement System are permitted to contribute to the TSP the lesser of
10% of pay or the maximum deferral permissible under section 402(g) of the Internal
Revenue Code ($10,500 in 2001). Employees covered by the Civil Service
Retirement System are permitted to contribute the lesser of 5% of pay or the
maximum deferral permissible under IRC § 402(g). As amended by P.L. 106-554, the
maximum allowable employee contribution to the TSP will increase by 1 percentage
point each year for five years. The percentage-of-pay limitations on contributions to
the TSP will then be eliminated. However, employee contributions to the TSP will
remain subject to the limits applicable under IRC § 402(g).
Beginning with the open season that starts May 15, 2001, employees covered by
FERS will be allowed to contribute up to 11 percent of pay to the TSP, and those
under CSRS will be allowed to contribute up to 6 percent of pay to the TSP. These
maximum permissible contributions will rise by 1 percentage point each year until
they reach 15 percent for FERS and 10 percent for CSRS in fiscal year 2005. In fiscal
2006, the percent-of-pay limits on TSP contributions will be abolished, and employees
will be subject only to the contribution limits then prevailing under IRC § 402(g).



Federal Child Care
Section 633 of H.R. 5658, as enacted through P.L. 106-554 continues and
modifies the provisions authorizing agencies to provide child care in federal facilities.
Section 643 is a new provision requiring criminal background checks for employees
at federally-provided day care facilities of the executive branch, as proposed in H.R.

4871.


The provisions in H.R. 4871 pertaining to federal child care resemble those
included in last year’s House version of the FY2000 Treasury, Postal, and General
Government appropriations bill (H.R. 2490), and ultimately in law (P.L. 106-58).
H.R. 4871, as passed by the House on July 20, 2000, includes a provision (Sec. 634)
that would have continued to permit executive branch agencies (not including the
General Accounting Office) to use agency funds (otherwise available for agency
salaries and expenses) to provide child care services, in a Federal or leased facility, or
through contract, for civilian employees of the agency. These funds would be used
to improve the affordability of child care for lower income federal employees using
or seeking to use the child care services offered by the agency facility or contractor.
The bill stipulated that amounts paid to licensed or regulated child care providers
would be paid in advance of child care services rendered, covering agreed upon
periods as appropriate. The House also agreed to an amendment (H.Amdt.1019)
which would have required that all current and newly hired workers in all child care
centers located in federally owned or leased facilities undergo criminal background
checks in compliance with the Crime Control Act of 1990.
The Senate’s bill (S. 2900), as approved by the Senate Appropriations
Committee on July 20, 2000, included language identical to H.R. 4871 with respect
to the use of funds for improving affordability of child care for lower income federal
employees (Sec. 634), but did not include the H.R. 4871 provision regarding the
timing of payments to child care providers, nor the House amendment language
requiring that current and newly hired child care workers in federal child care centers
undergo criminal background checks.
The vetoed Legislative Branch Appropriations conference report included federal
child care provisions (H.R. 4985, Sec. 633 and 643) identical to those in H.R. 4871,
as passed, with respect to using funds to improve affordability of federal child care
and requiring criminal background checks of child care workers. However, unlike
H.R. 4871, the conference version (H.R. 4516/H.R. 4985) would not have provided
for advance payment of salaries to providers. P.L. 106-554 enacted the language
from the conference version.
Major Funding Trends
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees have approved the
allocations to the various appropriations. The House, on May 9, 2000, approved
discretionary budget authority at $14.088 billion, with outlays at $14.563 billion. On
July 19, the House Appropriations Committee reported a revised allocation (H.Rept.

106-761) of $14.402 billion in budget authority and $14.751 in outlays. The Senate,



on May 4, 2000, allocated $14.3 billion for budget authority and $14.566 billion for
outlays. While the congressional numbers are in disagreement with one another, they
are consistently lower than the requested funding. The administration’s request for
discretionary funding was for $14.678 billion in budget authority (according to CBO
calculations). H.R. 5658, as enacted through P.L. 106-554, funds the Treasury,
Postal Service, and General Government accounts at $30.31 billion. The mandatory
accounts are funded at $14.68 billion and the discretionary accounts at $15.63 billion.
P.L. 106-346 provides supplemental funding for the Treasury/General Government
accounts in the amount of $348 million.
The sum of mandatory and discretionary funding requested, before CBO
scorekeeping, is $30.8 billion. CBO calculates that total at $31.2 billion.
Table 2. Appropriations for the Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government,
FY1996 to FY2000
(in billions of current dollars) a
FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999 FY2000
23.164 24.102 25.585 27.122 28.257
Source for FY2000: U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, as of July 26 2000.
a These figures, in current dollars, include CBO adjustments for permanent budget authorities,
rescissions, and supplementals, as well as other elements factored into the CBO scorekeeping
process. For a brief presentation on CBO scorekeeping see: U.S. Congressional Budget Office,
Maintaining Budgetary Discipline: Spending and Revenue Options (Washington: GPO, 1999). The
appendix beginning on p. 281 provides the “Scorekeeping Guidelines,” as found in the conference
report to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Also available at [http://www.cbo.gov/].



CRS-47
Table 3. Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President, and General Government Appropriations,
FY2001, by Title
(In millions, without CBO scorekeeping)
H.R. 4516/P.L. 106-346P.L. 106-554
H.R. 4985Oct. 23Dec. 21
FY2000FY2001HouseSenateVetoed(H.R. 4475,H.R. 4577/
TitleEnactedRequestPassedReportedOct. 30Title V)H.R. 5658
$12,317.5 $14,520.7 $13,200.9 $13,161.4 $13,597.7 $306.1 13,597.7
93.1 96.1 96.1 67.1 96.1 — 96.1
iki/CRS-RL30502654.4 702.2 681.5 594.8 691.3 10.5 691.3
g/w14,969.1 16,437.8 15,123.7 15,610.3 15,986.4 31.8 15,986.4
s.or
leak$28,069.1 $31,756.8 $29,102.3 $29,433.6 $30,371.5 $348.4 $30,371.5
://wiki
http!Conference Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, Jan. 14, 2000, p. H7608-7626.
Chart showing Treasury and General Government accounts in detail appears on H7609-7611.
!Funding information for H.R. 4475 provided by staff of House Committee on Appropriations, Oct. 3, 2000.
!P.L. 106-554—Conference Report on H.R., 4577, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, Dec. 15, 2000, H.Rept. 106-1033, pp. H12100-12439. The act is to be known as the
Consolidated Appropriations Act , 2001. Section 1(a)(3) enacts the Treasury and General Government Appropriation (H.R. 5658) by reference.
Legislative text and explanatory remarks for H.R. 5658 appear on pages H12230-H12258. Chart showing Treasury and General Government
accounts in detail appears on H12249-H12258.



CRS-48
Table 4. Department of the Treasury, Postal Service, Executive Office of the President,
and General Government Appropriations
(in thousands of dollars)
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
iki/CRS-RL30502 Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
g/w
s.orTitle I: Department of the Treasury, Selected Accounts
leak
Department
://wiki Offices 134,034161,006149,437150,112156,3156,424–156,315
http
Department
-wide
Systems and
Capital
Investments
Programs *43,448 99,279 41,787 37,279 47,287 15,000 – 47,287
Treasury
Building
Repair
and
Restoration *22,70031,00031,00022,70031,0008,000–31,000



CRS-49
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Office of
Inspector
General *30,599 33,608 31,940 32,899 32,899 – – 32,899
iki/CRS-RL30502Inspector
g/w General
s.or for Tax
leak Adminis-
tration *111,781 118,427 115,477 118,427 118,427 – – 118,427
://wiki
httpExpanded
Access to
Financial
Services – 30,000 2,000 400 2,000 – – 2,000
Money
Laundering
Strategy – 15,000 – – – – –
Financial
Crimes
Enforcement
Network 27,818 34,694 34,694 37,596 37,576 – – 37,576



CRS-50
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Counter
terrorism
Fund
(emergency
iki/CRS-RL30502 funding)–55,000–55,00055,000––55,000
g/w
s.orFederal Law
leakEnforcement
Training
://wikiCenter *105,202110,814110,814122,403123,68830,000–123,688
http
Interagency
Crime and
Drug
Enforcement *60,502 103,476 103,476 90,976 103,476 – – 103,476
Financial
Management
Service *200,555202,851198,736202,851206,851––206,851
Bureau of
Alcohol,
Tobacco,
and Firearms *564,773760,051731,325724,937768,6954,148–768,695



CRS-51
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
U.S. Customs
Service *1,809,9152,386,1412,184,5432,064,3152,258,39318,934–2,258,393
Bureau of the
iki/CRS-RL30502 Public Debt *177,133182,901182,901182,901182,901––182,901
g/wInternal
s.or
leak Revenue
Service, Total *8,216,4898,943,6748,452,9988,535,0698,639,493––8,639,493
://wiki
http Processing,
Assistance,
and
Management *3,280,2503,699,4993,487,2323,506,9393,567,001––3,567,001
Earned
Income
Tax Credit
Compliance
Initiative 144,000 145,000 145,000 145,000 145,000 – – 145,000
Tax Law
Enforcement 3,336,838 3,443,859 3,332,676 3,378,040 3,382,402 7,974 – 3,382,402



CRS-52
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Information
Systems 1,455,4011,583,5651,488,0901,505,0901,545,090––1,545,090
Information
iki/CRS-RL30502 Technology
g/w Investments–-71,751–––71,751––
s.or
leakStaffing Tax
Administration
://wiki For balance
http and equity—————141,000––
U.S. Secret
Service *691,497829,521828,821782,562832,7412,904–832,741
Violent Crime
Reduction
Program
(Crime
Control
Trust Fund)*130,081–––––––



CRS-53
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Bureau of
Alcohol,
Tobacco and
Firearms 27,920 –- – – – – – –
iki/CRS-RL30502
g/w Financial
s.or Crimes
leak Enforcement
Network *1,750 –- – – – – – –
://wiki
http Interagency
Crime and
Drug
Enforcement *14,761 – – – – – –
U.S. Secret
Service *3,570 –- – – – – – –
ONDCP-
HIDTA –- –- – – – – – –



CRS-54
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Gang
Resistance
Education
and Training:
iki/CRS-RL30502 Grants*11,880––––––
g/w
s.or U.S. Customs
leak Service61,000–-––––––
://wiki Federal Law
httpEnforcement
Training
Center 9,200 –- – – – – – –
Federal Drug
Control
Programs:
Special
Forfeiture
Fund –- –- – – – – – –
Total,
Treasury 12,352,437 14,520,692 13,225,949 13,161,407 13,597,742 306,135 – 13,597,742



CRS-55
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Current Year,
FY2001 12,352,437 14,098,443 13,200,949 13,161,407 13,597,742 – – 13,597,742
(12,317,53 (14,043,44 (13,200,94 (13,105,90
iki/CRS-RL30502Appropriations 7) 3) 9) 5) (13,542,742) – – (13,542,742)
g/w est. (-
s.or
leakRescission – –- – – – – – 29,794)
://wikiEmergency
http Funding(34,900)(55,000)–(55,502)(55,000)––(55,000)
Advance
Approp.
FY2002 – 422,249 – – – – – –



CRS-56
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Title II: U.S. Postal Service
Payments to
Postal
iki/CRS-RL30502Service Fund*28,62029,00029,000–29,000––29,000
g/wAdvance
s.or
leakAppropriation,
FY2002 64,436 67,093 67,093 67,093 67,093 – – 67,093
://wiki
httpRescission–––––––est. (64)
Total,
Postal Service *93,05696,09396,09367,09396,093––96,093
Title III: Executive Office of the President (EOP) m and Funds Appropriated to the President
Compensation
of the
President 250390390390390––390
The White
House Office
(salaries and
expenses) *52,243 53,288 52,135 53,288 53,288 – – 53,288



CRS-57
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Executive
Residence at
the White
House
iki/CRS-RL30502 (operating
g/w expenses)*9,22510,90010,28610,90010,900––10,900
s.or
leakWhite House
Repair
://wiki and
http Restoration*8085,5106585,510968–c968
Office of the
Vice President
(salaries and
expenses) *3,609 3,673 3,664 3,673 3,673 – – 3,673
Official
Residence of
the Vice
President
(operating
expenses) *330 354 354 354 354 – – 354



CRS-58
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Council of
Economic
Advisers *3,825 4,110 3,997 4,110 4,110 – – 4,110
iki/CRS-RL30502Office of
g/w Policy
s.orDevelopment 4,017 4,032 4,030 4,032 4,032 – – 4,032
leak
National
://wiki Security
httpCouncil 6,970 7,165 7,148 7,165 7,165 – – 7,165
Office of
Administration
Contingent 39,050 43,737 41,185 43,737 43,737 – – 43,737
Emergency
Supplemental 8,400 – – – – – – –
Office of
Management
and Budget63,25668,78667,14367,93568,786––68,786



CRS-59
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Office of
National Drug
Control Policy
(ONDCP)
iki/CRS-RL30502 Salaries and
g/w Expenses
s.orTitle II,22,823
leak P.L. 106-1133,00025,40024,75924,31224,759––24,759
://wikiONDCP
http Counterdrug
Technology
Assessment
Center 29,052 20,400 29,750 29,052 29,053 7,000 – 29,053
Federal Drug
Control
Program,
High Intensity
Drug
Trafficking
Areas
Program
(HIDTA) 191,271 192,000 217,000 196,000 206,500 – – 206,500



CRS-60
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Federal Drug
Control
Program,
Special
iki/CRS-RL30502 Forfeiture
g/w Fund215,297259,000219,000144,300233,600––233,600
s.or
leakFunds
Appropriated
://wiki to the
http President -
Unanticipated
Needs 9961,000–––1,000––
Elections
Commission -
Puerto Rico–2,500–––2,500––
Total, EOP
and Funds
Appropriated
to the
President 654,422 702,245 681,499 594,758 691,315 10,500 – 691,315



CRS-61
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Rescission———————est. (1,521)
Title IV: Independent Agencies
iki/CRS-RL30502Committee for Purchase from
g/w People Who
s.or
leak Are Blind or
Severely
://wiki Disabled2,6644,1584,1584,1584,158––4,158
http
Federal
Election
Commission 38,00840,50040,24039,75540,500––40,500
Federal Labor
Relations
Authority 23,737 25,058 25,058 25,058 25,058 – – 25,058
General
Services
Administration 137,059870,988152,471167,557632,211––632,211



CRS-62
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Federal
Buildings
Fund (-20,022) 681,871 – – 464,154 11,350 – 464,154
iki/CRS-RL30502Advance
g/wAppropriations
s.orFY2002-2004 – 477,484 – 374,345 276,400 – – 276,400
leak
Policy and
://wiki Operations 116,223136,980115,434123,420123,92013,789–123,920
http
Office of
Inspector
General 33,317 34,520 34,520 34,520 34,520 – – 34,520
Allowances
and Office
Staff for
Former
Presidents 2,241 2,517 2,517 2,517 2,517 – – 2,517
Expenses,
Presidential
Transition –- 7,100 – 7,100 7,100 – 7,100 7,100



CRS-63
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Merit Systems
Protection
Board
(salaries and
iki/CRS-RL30502 expenses)27,48129,43728,85729,43729,437––29,437
g/w
s.orMorris K.
leak Udall
Scholarship
://wiki and
http Excellence
in National
Environmental
Policy
Foundation 1,992 3,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 – – 2,000
Environmental
Dispute
Resolution
Fund 1,245 1,250 1,250 500 1,250 – – 1,250



CRS-64
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
National
Archives and
Records
Administration 222,622309,355201,171220,793305,395––305,395
iki/CRS-RL30502
g/w Operating
s.or Expenses 179,674209,393195,119209,393209,393––209,393
leak
Reduction
://wiki of Debt-5,598-5,598-5,598-5,598-5,598––-5,598
http
Repairs and
Restoration 22,296 99,560 5,650 4,950 95,150 6,610 – 95,150
National
Historical
Publications
and Records
Commission:
Grants
Program *4,2506,0006,0006,4506,450––6,450



CRS-65
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Records
Center
Revolving
Fund 22,000 –- – – – – – –
iki/CRS-RL30502
g/wOffice of
s.orGovernment
leak Ethics9,0809,6849,6849,6849,684––9,684
://wikiOffice of
httpPersonnel
Management 14,458,081 14,615,866 14,608,779 14,607,000 14,609,403 – – 14,609,403
Salaries and
Expenses 90,240 100,558 93,471 94,095 94,095 – – 94,095
Office of
Inspector
General 956 1,360 1,360 1,356 1,360 – – 1,360



CRS-66
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Government
Payment for
Annuitants,
Employees
iki/CRS-RL30502 Health
g/w Benefits5,105,3955,427,1665,427,1665,427,1665,427,166––5,427,166
s.or
leak Government
Payment for
://wiki Annuitants,
http Employees
Life Insurance36,20035,00035,00035,00035,000––35,000
Payment to
Civil Service
Retirement
and Disability
Fund 9,120,558 8,940,051 8,940,051 8,940,051 8,940,051 – – 8,940,051
Office of
Special
Counsel 9,70311,14710,31910,73311,147––11,147



CRS-67
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
United States
Tax Court35,04537,43937,30535,47437,305––37,305


iki/CRS-RL30502
g/w
s.or
leak
://wiki
http

CRS-68
P.L.

106-


Leg. BranchP.L. 106-275,
Conf. Report346asP.L. 106-
H.R. 4516/Oct. 23554
House SenateH.R. 4985(H.R.amendeDec. 21
Bureau orFY2000 FY2001PassedReportedVetoed Oct.4475,dH.R. 4577/
Agency Enacted a RequestH.R. 4871S. 290030Title V) bH.R. 5658
Total,
Independent
Agencies14,969,14716,437,79615,123,72215,610,32615,986,378 31,749–15,986,378
iki/CRS-RL30502Current Year,
g/w FY200114,969,14715,960,31215,123,72215,610,32615,709,978––15,709,978
s.or
leak(14,967,84 (15,960,31 (15,123,72 (15,147,98
://wikiAppropriations 7) 2) 2) 1) (15,709,978) – – (15,709,978)
http est.
Rescissions (-2,000) –- – – – – – (34,562)
Advanced
Approp.,
FY2002-2004 – 477,484 – 462,345 276,400 – – 276,400
Report on H.R. 4516, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2001, Congressional Record, vol. 146, Jan. 14, 2000, p. H7608-H7626. Chart
showing Treasury and General Government accounts in detail appears on H7609-H7611.
Report on H.R. 5658,as enacted through P.L. 106-554, Congressional Record, vol. 146, Dec. 15, 2000, p. H12230-H12258. Chart showing
Treasury and General Government accounts in detail appears on p. H12249-H12258.



CRS-69
:
totals provided include the funding reductions pursuant to the 0.38% rescission required by P.L. 106-113. Those individual accounts noted with “*”
reflect the appropriated sum reduced by the rescission. Not all of the rescissions are at the .38% rate, because agencies had discretion as to how to
apply the reductions.
V of P.L. 106-346 (H.R. 4475), Department of Transportation Appropriation, 2001, provides partial funding for selected accounts which are
generally covered under the Treasury and General Government appropriation legislation.
106-520 (H.J.Res. 125), a further continuing funding resolution which amends P.L. 106-275, the FY2001 continuing funding resolution, provides
an authorization for the use of funds to support the moving of families to and from the White House. No specific amount is named, however, it is
estimated that it will be about $200,000.


iki/CRS-RL30502
g/w
s.or
leak
://wiki
http

Glossary of Budget Process Terms
The following definitions are selected from the “Glossary of Budgetary Terms,” as
found in Manual on the Federal Budget Process, a CRS report (98-720) by Robert
Keith in consultation with Alan Schick.
Account. A control and reporting unit for budgeting and accounting.
Appropriation. A provision of law providing budget authority that permits federal
agencies to incur obligations and to make payments, of the Treasury for specified
purposes. Annual appropriations are provided in appropriations acts; most permanent
appropriations are provided in substantive law.
Authorization. A provision in law that authorizes appropriations for a program or
agency.
Budget Authority. Authority provided by law to enter into obligations that normally
result in outlays. The main forms of budget authority are appropriations, borrowing
authority, and contract authority.
Budget Resolution. A concurrent resolution passed by both Houses of Congress, but
not requiring the signature of the President, setting forth the congressional budget for
at least the next five fiscal years. The budget resolution sets forth various budget
totals and functional allocations, and may include reconciliation instructions, to
designated House or Senate committees.
Continuing Resolution. An act (in the form of a joint resolution) that provides budget
authority to agencies or programs whose regular appropriation has not been enacted
after the new fiscal year has started. A continuing resolution usually is a temporary
measure that expires on a specified date or is superseded by enactment of the regular
appropriations act. Some continuing resolutions, however, are in effect for the
remainder of the fiscal year and are the means of enacting regular appropriations.
Direct Spending. Budget authority, and the resulting outlays, provided in laws other
than annual appropriations acts. Appropriated entitlements are classified as direct
spending. Direct spending is distinguished by the Budget Enforcement Act from
discretionary spending and is subject to the PAGO rules. It is also referred to as
“mandatory spending.”
Discretionary Spending. Budget authority, and the resulting outlays, provided in
annual appropriations acts, but not including appropriated entitlements.
Federal Funds. All monies collected and spent by the federal government other than
those designated as trust funds. Federal funds include general, special, public
enterprise, and intragovernmental funds.
Mandatory Spending. See “Direct Spending.”



Obligation. A binding agreement (such as through a contract or purchase order) that
will require payment.
Outlays. Payments made (generally through the issuance of checks or disbursement
of cash) to liquidate obligations. Outlays during a fiscal year may be for payment of
obligations incurred in prior years or in the same year.
PAGO (Pay-as-You-Go) Process. The procedure established by the Budget
Enforcement Act to ensure that revenue and direct spending legislation does not add
to the deficit or reduce the surplus. PAGO requires that any increase in the deficit or
reduction in the surplus due to legislation be offset by other legislation or
sequestration. PAGO is enforced by estimating the five-year budgetary effects of all
new revenue and direct spending laws.
Reconciliation Process. A process established in the Congressional Budget Act by
which Congress changes existing laws to conform tax and spending levels to the levels
set in a budget resolution. Changes recommended by committees pursuant to a
reconciliation instruction are incorporated into a reconciliation bill.
Revolving Fund. An account or fund in which all income derived from its operations
is available to finance the fund’s continuing operations without fiscal year limitation.
Scorekeeping. Procedures for tracking and reporting on the status of congressional
budgetary actions affecting budget authority, receipts, outlays, the surplus or deficit,
and the public debt limit.
Supplemental Appropriation. Budget authority provided in an appropriations act in
addition to regular or continuing appropriations already provided. Supplemental
appropriations acts sometimes include items not included in regular appropriations
acts for lack of timely authorization.
Trust Funds. Accounts designated by law as trust funds for receipts and expenditures
earmarked for specific purposes.
User Fees. Fees charged to users of goods or services provided by the federal
government. In levying or authorizing these fees, Congress determines whether the
revenue should go into the U.S. Treasury or should be available to the agency
providing the goods or services.



For Additional Reading
CRS Issue Briefs
CRS Issue Brief IB10053, Federal Employees and the FY2001 Budget, by Sharon S.
Gressle.
CRS Issue Brief IB95035, Federal Regulatory Reform: An Overview, by Roger
Garcia.
CRS Issue Brief IB10014, Gun Control, by William J. Krouse.
CRS Issue Brief IB89148, Item Veto and Expanded Impoundment Proposals, by
Virginia A. McMurtry.
CRS Info Packs
CRS Info Pack 517G, Government Performance and Results Act: Implementing the
Results.
CRS Reports
CRS Report 98-648, Appropriations Bills: What Are “General Provisions?”, by
Sandy Streeter.
CRS Report 98-558, Appropriations Bills: What is report language? by Sandy
Streeter.
CRS Report RL30202, Appropriations for FY2000: Treasury, Postal Service,
Executive Office of the President, and General Government, coordinated by
Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RL30512, Appropriations for FY2001: Legislative Branch, by Paul
Dwyer.
CRS Report 97-635, The Balanced Budget Act of 1997: Retirement and Health
Insurance Provisions for Postal and Federal Personnel, by Carolyn L. Merck.
CRS Report RL30458, The Budget Reconciliation Process: Timing of Legislative
Action, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report RS20255, Civil Service Retirement Bills in the 106th Congress, by
Patrick J. Purcell.
CRS Report RL30023, Civil Service Retirement Programs: Financing and Budget
Status, by Patrick Purcell.
CRS Report 97-684, The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction,
by Sandy Streeter.



CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Appropriations Acts: Brief Overview of Recent
Practices, by Sandy Streeter.
CRS Report 98-157 GOV, Congressional Overrides of Presidential Vetoes, by Gary
L. Galemore.
CRS Report RL30353, Discretionary Spending Limits and Social Security Surplus,
by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 96-329, Federal Civilian Employment Reduction, by Barbara L.
Schwemle.
CRS Report RL30336, The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, by Carolyn
L. Merck.
CRS Report RL30698, Federal Employees’ Overtime Pay: 106th Congress
Legislation, by Barbara L. Schwemle.
CRS Report 98-956, Federal Pay: FY2000 Salary Adjustment, by Barbara L.
Schwemle.
CRS Report RL30359, Federal Pay: FY2001 Salary Adjustment, by Barbara L.
Schwemle.
CRS Report 98-558, Government Performance and Results Act and the
Appropriations Process, by Sandy Streeter.
CRS Report RS20257, Government Performance and Results Act: Brief History and
Implementation Activities During the First Session of the 106th Congress, by
Genevieve J. Knezo.
CRS Report 97-382, Government Performance and Results Act: Implications for
Congressional Oversight, by Frederick M. Kaiser and Virginia A. McMurtry.
CRS Report 98-4, Implementation of P.L. 105-206: Personnel Management
Flexibility for the Internal Revenue Service, by Barbara L. Schwemle.
CRS Report 98-721, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report RL30536, IRS Restructuring and Tax Law Compliance, by Sylvia
Morrison.
CRS Report RS20278, Judicial Salaries: Current Situation, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RS20644, Long-term Care Insurance for Federal Personnel, by Carolyn
L. Merck.
CRS Report RL30254, Long-term Care: The President’s FY2001 Budget Proposals
and Related Legislation, by Carol V. O’Shaughnessy, Bob Lyke, and Carolyn
L. Merck.



CRS Report 98-720, Manual on the Federal Budget Process, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report RL30194, Merit Systems Protection Board: Background, Strategic and
Performance Plans, and Congressional Oversight, by Barbara L. Schwemle.
CRS Report 98-773, Office of Personnel Management: Background, Strategic and
Performance Plans, and Congressional Oversight, by Barbara L. Schwemle.
CRS Report 94-971, Pay and Retirement Benefits for Federal Civil Service and
Military Personnel: Increases from 1969 to 2000, by Patrick Purcell.
CRS Report 98-147 GOV, President Clinton's Vetoes, by Gary L. Galemore.
CRS Report RS20709, Presidential Transition 2000-2001: Background and Federal
Support, by Stephanie Smith.
CRS Report 98-156 GOV, The Presidential Veto and Congressional Procedure, by
Gary L. Galemore.
CRS Report 98-148 GOV, Presidential Vetoes, 1789-Present: A Summary
Overview, by Gary L. Galemore
CRS Report RS20212, Restructuring of the IRS: Where Does It Stand?, by Sylvia
Morrison.
CRS Report 98-53, Salaries of Federal Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RL30014, Salaries of Members of Congress: Current Procedures and
Recent Adjustments, by Paul E. Dwyer.
CRS Report 97-1011, Salaries of Members of Congress: Payable Rates and
Effective Dates, 1789-1999, by Paul E. Dwyer.
CRS Report RS20388, Salary Linkage: Members of Congress and Other Federal
Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RS20114, Salary of the President Compared with That of Other Federal
Officials, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RS20115, Salary of the President: Process for Change, by Sharon S.
Gressle.
CRS Report RL30363, The Sequestration Process and Across-the-Board Spending
Cuts for FY2000, by Robert Keith.
CRS Report 98-844, Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Effects, and
Process, by Sharon S. Gressle.
CRS Report RL30443, The 0.38 Percent Across-the-Board Cut in FY2000
Appropriations, by Robert Keith.



CRS Report RS20111, Travel Costs of the President, Vice President, and First Lady,
by Rogelio Garcia.
CRS Report RL30450, United States Office of Special Counsel: Background,
Strategic and Performance Plans, and Congressional Oversight, by Barbara L.
Schwemle.
CRS Report RS20719, Vetoed Annual Appropriations Acts: Presidents Carter
through Clinton, by Gary L. Galemore.
Other Readings
Syracuse University, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Government
Performance Project, Grading Government, (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University,
February 1999).
U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Treasury and Generalth
Government Appropriation Bill, 2000, report to accompany S. 1282, 106
Cong., 1st sess., S.Rept. 106-5887 (Washington: GPO, 1999).
U.S. Congressional Budget Office, Maintaining Budgetary Discipline: Spending and
Revenue Options (Washington: GPO, 1999). [Available on CBO Web site.]
U.S. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Customs Service
Strategic Plan (FY97-02), by Commissioner of Customs George Weiss,
(Washington: U.S. Customs Service, August 1, 1997).
U.S. General Accounting Office, High Risk Series: An Update, GAO report
GAO-01-263, (Washington: January 2001)
——-, High Risk Series, IRS Management, GAO Report HR 97-8 (Washington:
February 1997).
——-, Customs Service: Comments on Strategic Plan and Resource Allocation
Process, GAO Report GGD-98-15, (Washington: October 16, 1998).
——-, Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of the
Treasury, GAO report OCG-99-14, (Washington: October 21, 1998).
——-, Performance and Accountability Series, Major Management Challenges and
Program Risks: A Governmentwide Perspective, GAO report GAO-01-241,
(Washington: January 2001).
——- Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of the
Treasury, GAO report GAO-01-254, (Washington: January 2001).
——-, Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: U. S. Postal Service,
GAO report GAO-01-262, (Washington: January 2001).



Important information regarding current and past budgets (including budget
documents), the federal budget process, and duties and functions are available at the
following web sites.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
[http://www.cbo.gov]
General Accounting Office (GAO)
[http://www.gao.gov]
National Commission on Restructuring the Internal Revenue Service
[http://www.house.gov/natcommirs/main.htm]
Office of Government Ethics
[http://www.usoge.gov]
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
[http://www.whitehouse.Gov/OMB/index.html]
Office of Management and Budget, Statements of Administration Policy (SAPS)
[http://www.whitehouse.Gov/OMB/legislative/sap/index.html]