Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations







Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress



This report monitors actions taken by the 110th Congress for the FY2009 Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) appropriations bill. On September 30, 2008, the President
signed a continuing resolution (P.L. 110-329) that funds most CJS agencies at their FY2008 levels
through March 6, 2009, or until a full-year appropriation is enacted. In addition, several CJS
agencies are funded at rates above their FY2008 level. For example, the Census Bureau is funded
at a rate that would be equal to a full-year FY2009 appropriation of $2.906 billion—double the
amount provided for FY2008.
Earlier, the House Appropriations Committee approved a draft FY2009 CJS appropriations bill
that would have provided $59.657 billion, or 9.2% more than the FY2008 enacted level of
$54.637 billion. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported a comparable FY2009 bill (S.

3182) that would have provided $60.724 billion, or 11.1% more than the FY2008 enacted level.


The Administration’s FY2009 request initially included $56.563 billion for CJS agencies, or 3.5%
more than the FY2008 enacted level, but later the Administration amended its request for the
Department of Commerce. For Commerce, the FY2009 request initially included $8.217 billion,
or 19.8%, more than the FY2008 enacted level. The amended request included an additional
$546.0 million for the 2010 Census that was partially offset by canceling or shifting other
amounts for Commerce. This budget amendment, however, was submitted too late for either
House or Senate consideration. The House bill would have provided $8.707 billion for Commerce
(a 27% increase), including $2.605 billion for Census. The Senate bill would have provided
$9.402 billion for Commerce (a 37.1% increase), including $3.151 billion for Census.
For Justice, the FY2009 request included $23.089 billion, or 2.1% less than the FY2008 enacted
level. Although this decrease largely reflected a proposed $1.5 billion cut in law enforcement
assistance, the request also included increases of $492.7 million for national security
investigations, $100.0 billion for a Southwest border crime initiative, and $67.1 million to support
federal detention and incarceration programs. For Justice, the House bill would have provided
$25.439 billion (a 7.8% increase) and the Senate bill, $25.779 billion (a 9.3% increase). Both bills
included increased funding for law enforcement assistance.
For science agencies, the FY2009 request included $24.474 billion, or 4.7% more than the
FY2008 enacted level. The House bill included $24.628 billion (a 5.3% increase) for science
agencies, the Senate bill, $24.673 billion (a 5.5% increase). For related agencies, the FY2009
request included $784.0 million, or 3.1% less than the FY2008 enacted level. The House bill
included $833.1 million (a 9.2% increase) for related agencies, the Senate bill $869.4 million (an

11.1% increase).


In addition, Congress passed FY2008 supplemental funding (P.L. 110-252) for several CJS
accounts, including the Census Bureau ($210.0 million), the Department of Justice ($449.0
million), and science agencies ($125.0 million). This report will be updated to reflect legislative
action.






Most Recent Developments.............................................................................................................1
Overview of FY2009 CJS Appropriations......................................................................................2
FY2009 Request........................................................................................................................2
FY2009 House Appropriations Committee-Approved Draft Bill.............................................4
FY2009 Senate-Reported Bill...................................................................................................4
Synopsis of Enacted FY2008 Appropriations...........................................................................5
Funding Trends, FY2002-FY2008............................................................................................5
Survey of Selected Issues................................................................................................................6
Department of Commerce.........................................................................................................6
Department of Justice................................................................................................................7
Science Agencies.......................................................................................................................8
Related Agencies.......................................................................................................................9
Department of Commerce...............................................................................................................9
International Trade Administration (ITA)...............................................................................12
Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)....................................................................................13
Economic Development Administration (EDA).....................................................................14
Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA)................................................................17
Economic and Statistics Administration (ESA)......................................................................17
U.S. Census Bureau (Census).................................................................................................18
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)................................20
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)..........................................................................21
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).........................................................22
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).................................................23
The President’s FY2009 Budget Request.........................................................................24
House Appropriations Committee Recommendations......................................................26
Senate Appropriations Committee Recommendations......................................................26
Department of Justice....................................................................................................................27
Backgr ound ............................................................................................................................. 27
FY2009 Budget Request and Congressional Action.........................................................29
FY2008 Supplemental Funding Request and Congressional Action................................30
FY2009 Continuing Resolution (CR)...............................................................................31
General Administration...........................................................................................................32
General Administration.....................................................................................................32
Administrative Review and Appeals (ARA).....................................................................32
Federal Office of Detention Trustee (OFDT)....................................................................33
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)..............................................................................33
U.S. Parole Commission.........................................................................................................33
Legal Activities.......................................................................................................................33
General Legal Activities...................................................................................................34
Office of the U.S. Attorneys..............................................................................................34
U.S. Marshals Service (USMS)........................................................................................34
Other Legal Activities.......................................................................................................35
National Security Division (NSD)..........................................................................................35
Interagency Law Enforcement................................................................................................35
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)....................................................................................36
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)..............................................................................37





Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)................................................37
Federal Prison System (Bureau of Prisons).............................................................................38
Office on Violence Against Women........................................................................................38
Office of Justice Programs......................................................................................................39
Justice Assistance..............................................................................................................39
State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance..................................................................40
Weed and Seed Program...................................................................................................41
Community Oriented Policing Services............................................................................41
Juvenile Justice Programs.................................................................................................41
Public Safety Officers Benefits Program..........................................................................42
Salaries and Expenses.......................................................................................................42
Science Agencies...........................................................................................................................42
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)..................................................................43
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)......................................................44
National Science Foundation (NSF).......................................................................................47
Related Agencies...........................................................................................................................51
Commission on Civil Rights...................................................................................................52
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)..........................................................52
U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)...........................................................................53
Legal Services Corporation (LSC)..........................................................................................54
Marine Mammal Commission (MMC)...................................................................................55
National Veterans Business Development Corporation (VBC)...............................................55
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)....................................................................55
State Justice Institute (SJI)......................................................................................................56
Table 1. Legislative Status of CJS Appropriations..........................................................................2
Table 2. CJS Appropriations, FY2008 Enacted and FY2009 Proposed........................................3
Table 3. Funding Trends for CJS Departments and Agencies, FY2002-FY2008...........................6
Table 4. Funding for the Department of Commerce.......................................................................11
Table 5. NOAA Appropriations For FY2008, the FY2009 Request, and Congressional
Action ......................................................................................................................................... 25
Table 6. Funding for the Department of Justice............................................................................29
Table 7. FY2008 Supplemental Funding for the Department of Justice......................................31
Table 8. Funding for Science Agencies.........................................................................................43
Table 9. Funding for NASA..........................................................................................................45
Table 10. National Science Foundation.........................................................................................48
Table 11. Funding for CJS Related Agencies................................................................................51
Table 12. CJS Appropriations by Account, FY2008 Enacted and FY2009 Proposed..................57





Author Contact Information..........................................................................................................60
Key Policy Staff............................................................................................................................61






On September 30, 2008, the President signed into law the Consolidated Security, Disaster 1
Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 110-329; H.R. 2638). This law
includes a continuing resolution (CR) that funds most Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) and
related agencies at their FY2008 levels through March 6, 2009, or until a full-year appropriations
bill is enacted. For several accounts, however, the CR includes funding at levels above those
appropriated for FY2008. For example, the CR funds the Census Bureau through March 6, 2009,
at a rate that would be equal to a full-year FY2009 appropriation of $2.906 billion. By
comparison, Congress appropriated $1.440 billion for Census for FY2008 (including a $210.0
million supplemental appropriation).
The CR funds the Federal Prison System at a rate of $5.397 billion for the entire fiscal year, the
Detention Trustee at $1.246 billion, and Department of Justice Legal Activities at $3.390 billion.
The CR requires that about a third of the funding provided for Legal Activities be transferred to
the Office of Personnel Management for costs associated with the federal observer program
authorized under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Finally, for most agencies, the CR stipulates that
FY2008 emergency funding will not be regarded in calculating FY2009 funding levels, except for
certain agencies, which include the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
In addition, P.L. 110-329 includes supplemental emergency funding for three CJS-related
accounts for relief and recovery from recent hurricanes and other natural disasters. For example,
the law provides $400.0 million for the Economic Development Administration to provide
disaster relief under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Other
amounts are provided for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ($92.0 million)
and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) ($30.0 million). For FY2009,
the NASA provision also allows the Administration to maintain its current seven decision unit
budget structure rather than reverting to its previous budget structure of three units.
On June 25, 2008, the House Appropriations Committee approved a draft FY2009 Commerce,
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) appropriations bill that would have provided
$59.657 billion ($56.858 billion in discretionary funding). The House committee-approved draft
bill included $8.707 billion for the Department of Commerce (DOC), $25.439 billion for the
Department of Justice (DOJ), $17.769 billion for NASA, $6.854 billion for the National Science
Foundation (NSF), among other amounts.
On June 19, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported an FY2009 CJS appropriations
bill (S. 3182; S.Rept. 110-397) that would have provided $60.724 billion. The Senate-reported
bill included $9.402 billion for DOC, $25.779 billion for DOJ, $17.814 billion for NASA, $6.854
billion for NSF, among other amounts.
1
For further information, seeCRS Report RL34711, Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2009 (P.L. 110-329): An
Overview, by Robert Keith.






Table 1. Legislative Status of CJS Appropriations
Subcommittee Conference Senate
Markup Report House Committee House Senate Public
Committee |S. 3182 Passage Passage House Senate Law
House Senate Passage Passage
06/12/08 06/18/08 Approved Approved a
06/25/08; 06/19/08;
Draft Filed 06/23/08;
Bill S.Rept. 110-397
a. Continuing Resolution enacted September 30, 2008; P.L. 110-329
Also, on June 26, 2008, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2642) was cleared by
Congress, following an exchange of amendments that resolved differences (principally related to
domestic spending) in previous House- and Senate-passed versions of this bill. For DOJ, the
Administration had requested $185.8 million for DOJ in FY2008 supplemental funding for
counterterrorism-related activities and programs. The President signed H.R. 2642 into law on
June 30, 2008 (P.L. 110-252). For FY2008, this act provided the Census Bureau with an
additional $210.0 million, DOJ with $449.0 million, NASA with $62.5 million, and NSF with
$62.5 million.

As Table 2 shows, the Administration’s FY2009 request originally included $56.563 billion for
those departments and agencies funded through the CJS appropriation, or $1.926 billion more
than the enacted FY2008 appropriation of $54.637 billion (a 3.5% increase). On June 9, 2008,
however, the Administration submitted an FY2009 budget amendment to Congress for the DOC
that addressed difficulties associated with the 2010 Decennial Census that have been encountered
by the Census Bureau. This amendment requested an additional $546.0 million for the 2010
Census that was partly offset by $111.0 million in reductions in other DOC programs and by
shifts in other amounts within the Census Bureau account. The House CJS subcommittee chair,
Representative Alan Mollohan, observed that the budget amendment was submitted too late for
the subcommittee to consider it before the scheduled June 12, 2008 markup.






Table 2. CJS Appropriations,
FY2008 Enacted and FY2009 Proposed
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
Departments
and Related FY2008 FY2009 aHouse House-Senate-Senate-FY2009
Agencies Enacted Request Draft Bill Passed Reported Passed Final
Department of
Commerce 6,856.5 8,216.5a 8,706.9 9,402.4
Department of
Justice 23,591.9b 23,088.9 25,438.8 25,778.6
Science Agencies 23,379.6 24,473.5 24,628.4 24,673.3
Related Agencies 808.8 784.0 883.1 869.4
Total 54,636.8b 56,563.0 59,657.1 60,723.6
Sources: House Appropriations Committee Print on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R.
2764/P.L. 110-161); Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009—Appendix; House
Appropriations Committee-approved draft bill and report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. On June 9, 2008, the Department of Commerce submitted an FY2009 budget amendment to Congress that
substantially changed the amount requested for the Department of Commerce. See Table 4.
b. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161) includes $285.5 million in emergency spending
for the Department of Justice.
Neither the House nor the Senate incorporated the Administration’s budget amendment into the
tables in the legislative reports accompanying the House draft and Senate-reported CJS
appropriations bills. As a consequence, with the exception of Table 4 on Commerce, the tables in
this report do not reflect the FY2009 budget amendment. Nor do the tables in this report include
the amounts provided for FY2008 to CJS departments and agencies by the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252).
For Commerce, nonetheless, the Administration’s FY2009 request initially included $8.217
billion, or $1.360 billion more than the enacted FY2008 level (a 19.8% increase). This increase
included an additional $1.374 billion for Bureau of the Census, but also included decreases of
$147.1 million (-52.6%) for the Economic Development Administration and $17.1 million (-

47.1%) for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.


For Justice, the President’s FY2009 budget request included $23.089 billion, or $502.8 million
less than the enacted FY2008 level (a 2.1% decrease). This decrease largely reflected proposed
reductions in state and local law enforcement assistance. The FY2009 request, for example,
included $792.7 million for the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), or nearly $1.489 billion less
than the FY2008 enacted level of $2.282 billion (a 65.3% decrease). And, the FY2009 request
included $280.0 million for the Office of Violence Against Women (OVW), or a proposed
reduction of $120.0 million less than the FY2008 enacted level of $400.0 million (a 30%
decrease). Conversely, the FY2009 request included new funding of $492.7 million for national
security investigations, $100.0 million for a Southwest border crime fighting initiative, and $67.1
million to support essential federal detention and incarceration programs.






For science agencies, the FY2009 request included $24.474 billion, or $1.094 billion more than
the enacted FY2008 level (a 4.7% increase). Among other things, the FY2009 request included
$396.8 million for the NSF and the National Nanotechnology Initiative.
For related agencies, the FY2009 request included $784.0 million, or nearly $24.8 million less
than the enacted FY2008 level (a 3.1% decrease). The Legal Services Corporation would have
absorbed the bulk of this decrease, as the FY2009 budget request for the corporation only
included $311.0 million, a reduction of $39.5 million, as compared to the corporation’s enacted
FY2008 appropriation (an 11.3% decrease).
The House Appropriations Committee approved a draft FY2009 spending measure that would
have provided CJS departments and agencies with $59.657 billion, a 9.2% increase over the
FY2008 enacted level and a 5.5% increase over the FY2009 request. For Commerce, this measure
included $8.7 billion, a 27% increase over the FY2007 enacted level and a 6% increase over the
FY2009 request. The House draft bill included $2.605 billion for the Census Bureau, the same
amount as originally requested by the Administration (a 111.7% increase over the FY2008
enacted level). The draft bill also included $4.253 billion for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and $816.7 million for National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST).
For Justice, the draft bill would have provided $25.439 billion, a 7.8% increase over the FY2008
enacted level and a 10.2% over the FY2009 request. This amount included $7.108 billion for the
FBI, $1.939 billion for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), $1.054 billion for the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), and $5.734 billion for the Bureau
of Prisons. The draft bill also included $3.129 billion for state and local law enforcement
assistance (OJP and OVW), instead of cutting such funding by $1.609 billion, as proposed by the
Administration.
For science agencies, the draft bill would have provided $24.628 billion, including $17.769
billion for NASA and $6.854 billion for NSF. This amount would have provided a 5.3% increase
over the FY2008 enacted level and a 0.6% increase over the FY2009 request. For related
agencies, the bill would have provided $883.1 million, a 9.2% increase over the enacted level and
a 12.6% increase over the FY2009 request. It included $350.4 million for the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and $390.0 million for the Legal Services Corporation (LSC).
The Senate Appropriations Committee reported an FY2009 CJS spending bill (S. 3182; S.Rept.
110-397) that would have provided $60.724 billion, an 11.1% increase over the FY2008 enacted
level and a 7.4% increase over the FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill included $9.402
billion for the DOC, a 37.1% increase over the FY2008 enacted level and a 14.4% increase over
the FY2009 request. This bill included $3.151 billion for the Census Bureau (a 156.1% increase
over the FY2008 enacted level). It also included $4.446 billion for NOAA and $814.0 million for
NIST.
For the DOJ, the Senate bill included $25.779 billion, a 9.3% increase over the FY2008 enacted
level and an 11.6% increase over the FY2009 request. This amount included $7.27 billion for the






FBI, $1.954 billion for the DEA, $1.043 billion for the ATF, and $5.974 billion for the Bureau of
Prisons. It also included $3.136 billion for the state and local law enforcement assistance (OJP
and OVW), rather than cutting such assistance by $1.609 billion, as proposed by the
Administration.
For science agencies, the Senate bill would have provided $24.673 billion, including $17.814
billion for NASA and $6.854 billion for the NSF. This amount would have been a 5.5% increase
over the FY2008 enacted level and a 0.8% increase over the FY2009 request. For related
agencies, the bill would have provided $869.0 million, including $342.0 million for the EEOC
and $390.0 million for the LSC.
On December 26, 2007, the President signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R.
2764) into law (P.L. 110-161). This act included the FY2008 CJS appropriations bill, as well as

10 other appropriations bills, in addition to emergency military funding for Iraq and Afghanistan.


Congressional leaders opted to use the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Appropriations bill, 2008 (H.R. 2764) as the legislative vehicle for the FY2008 omnibus spending
measure. As shown in Table 2, Congress appropriated $54.637 billion for the federal
departments, bureaus, agencies, administrations, offices and activities funded under the CJS
appropriations bill in P.L. 110-161. Congress had previously passed continuing resolutions to 2
fund those departments and agencies in the absence of the regular FY2008 CJS appropriation.
Also, Congress has passed a second FY2008 supplemental spending measure, the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2642; P.L. 110-252), that includes funding for several CJS 3
accounts.
Table 3 shows CJS appropriations over a seven year period FY2002-FY2008, including
supplemental appropriations. Funding for the Department of Commerce increased by 14.1% from
FY2002 through FY2005. Due to rescissions, it decreased by 1.9% for FY2006, but when
compared to the previous year increased by 3.1% for FY2007 and 3.5% for FY2008.
2
For further information, see CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief Overview of
Recent Practices, by Sandy Streeter.
3 For further information, see CRS Report RL34451, FY2008 Spring Supplemental Appropriations and FY2009 Bridge
Appropriations for Military Operations, International Affairs, and Other Purposes (P.L. 110-252), by Stephen Daggett
et al.






Table 3. Funding Trends for CJS Departments and Agencies,
FY2002-FY2008
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
Department/Agencies FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008
Department of Commerce 5,739 5,796 5,943 6,550 6,426 6,625 6,857
Department of Justice 23,707 19,648 19,850 21,000 21,404 23,210 23,592
Science Agencies 19,710 20,600 20,960 21,676 22,833 22,207 23,380
Related Agencies 739 753 778 781 782 801 909
Total 49,895 46,681 47,584 50,201 51,499 52,931 54,742
Sources: Funding totals for the Department of Commerce, Department of Justice, and Science Agencies
provided by the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations. Funding totals for related
agencies compiled by CRS from the Appendixes to the Budgets for the United States Government for FY2003-FY2009.
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
Funding for the Department of Justice decreased by 17.1% from FY2002 to FY2003. This
decrease largely reflects the transfer of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service to the
Department of Homeland Security. Justice funding has increased by 20.1% from FY2003 to
FY2008.
Funding for the science agencies has gradually increased by 15.8% from FY2002 to FY2006,
decreased by 2.7% for FY2007 and increased by 5.3% for FY2008. Funding for related agencies
increased by 9.5% from FY2002 to FY2008. Funding for all departments and agencies currently
under the CJS appropriations bill decreased by 6.4% from FY2002 to FY2003, but it has
increased from FY2003 to FY2008 by 17.3%.

For the Department of Commerce (DOC), the Administration’s original budget did not anticipate
some problems which later emerged with the equipment for the 2010 Decennial Census.
Consequently, on June 8, 2008, the Administration submitted a revised Department of Commerce
budget that addressed the Census Bureau’s equipment problems and adjusted funding in other
DOC accounts. Another key issue included export promotion and funding for Commerce trade
and technology programs, as the deficit in the U.S. current account has nearly doubled from $98.8 4
billion in January 2000 to $183.1 billion in second quarter 2007. In addition, the anniversary of
hurricanes Katrina and Rita also drew attention to the Department’s weather and ocean-
stewardship programs.
4
Second quarter 2008 data was released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis on September 17, 2008. A current
account deficit is a measure of the U.S. position in international financial flows. It includes the combined balances on
trade in goods and services, income, and net unilateral current transfers. A current account deficit means that the United
States is a net borrower.






Other issues could have included the following:
• implementation of the American Competitiveness Initiative, announced in
February 2006, that called for the provision of $50 billion for research and
another $86 billion in tax incentives over 10 years across several Commerce and
related agencies accounts, to increase U.S. leadership in technological research,
development, and education;
• the ability of U.S. trade agencies and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to
fight intellectual property infringement abroad;
• proposed increases in funds for Economic and Statistics Administration to revise
the measure of the health sector in gross domestic product (GDP);
• the efficacy of U.S. trade agency enforcement of U.S. trade remedy laws against
unfair foreign competition;
• proposed consolidation of activities currently funded under the Economic
Development Administration’s Public Works, Technical Assistance, Research and
Evaluation, Economic Adjustment Assistance and Defense Economic Adjustment
Assistance programs under a Regional Development Administration (RDA);
• implementation of the Technology Innovation Program at the National Institute
of Standards and Technology, which replaced the Advanced Technology
Program, given the Administration’s budget request included no funding for the
effort;
• continuation of federal funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership at
the National Institute of Standards and Technology given the Administration’s
budget proposal that recommended termination of federal support for this
program;
• addressing aging equipment serving the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration’s (NOAA) technical missions; and
• funding levels for NOAA’s satellite programs, ocean and coastal research-related
projects, and tsunami research systems.
During consideration of the Administration’s FY2009 budget request, several issues have been
brought to Congress’ attention that have had implications for the appropriations process. Those
issues included the following:
• continuing oversight of the FBI’s transformation and the redirection of a larger
share of the its resources towards combating domestic and international
terrorism, and away from traditional crime;
• rising crime rates in medium-size and smaller cities (in 2006 as compared to
2005, cities with populations of 100,000 to 249,999 reported a 2.3% increase in
the reported number of violent crime; and cities with populations of 50,000 to
99,999, 25,000 to 49,999, and 10,000 to 24,999 reported violent crime increases
of 3.5%, 3.8%, and 2.8%, respectively);






• proposed consolidation of the existing 38 federal law enforcement assistance
programs into four “competitive” grant programs and a reduction in such
assistance to $589.0 million for FY2009 ($1.422 billion less than the amount
appropriated by Congress for FY2008, or a 70.7% decrease);
• proposed consolidation of Office on Violence Against Women programs into a
single “competitive” grant program, and a reduction in that Office’s budget to
$280.0 million for FY2009 (30% decrease as compared to the FY2008
appropriation);
• proposed $100.0 million Southwest Border Enforcement Initiative that would
increase resources to bolster DOJ’s efforts to combat illegal immigration, drug
trafficking, and firearms smuggling across the Southwest border between the
United States and Mexico in the Administration’s FY2009 budget request;
• FY2008 budget shortfall for the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) in light of projections
that its facilities could have been 39% over capacity in 2008 and could be 42% 5
over capacity in 2009; and
• proposed elimination of a prisoner reentry initiative under the Administration’s
FY2009 grant consolidation plan, when an estimated 650,000 offenders are being 6
released from prison annually.
As the United States works to remain competitive in the global world economy, key science
issues are likely to revolve around
• providing funding for the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69), a law that
authorizes increases in the nation’s investment in science and engineering
research at the NSF, National Institute of Standards Technology laboratories, and
Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science and science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs at NSF, DOE, and the
Department of Education,7 and the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI),
which responds to similar concerns (the White House’s Office of Science and
Technology Policy reports that the FY2009 budget request includes funding for 8
America COMPETES Act initiatives at 88% of the FY2009 authorization level);
5
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, Quick Facts About the Bureau of Prisons, available online at
http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp.
6 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,Learn About Reentry,” available at
http://www.reentry.gov/learn.html.
7 For more information, see CRS Report RL34396, The America COMPETES Act and the FY2009 Budget, by Deborah
D. Stine, and CRS Report RL34328, America COMPETES Act: Programs, Funding, and Selected Issues, by Deborah
D. Stine.
8 Testimony of Dr. John Marburger, III, Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, House
Committee on Science and Technology, Funding for the America COMPETES Act in the FY2009 Administration thnd
Budget Request, hearing, 110 Congress, 2 session, February 14, 2008, available at
http://democrats.science.house.gov/Media/File/Commdocs/hearings/2008/Full/14feb/Marburger_Testimony.pdf.






• funding NASA budget priorities that are driven by the President’s Vision for
Space Exploration, which were endorsed by Congress in the NASA
Authorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-155), and include goals like returning the
space shuttle to flight status (already accomplished), then retiring it by 2010;
completing the International Space Station (ISS), but discontinuing U.S. use of it
by 2017; returning humans to the moon by 2020; and sending humans to Mars
and “worlds beyond;” and
• funding for the NSF’s work under the National Nanotechnology Initiative
directed at understanding and exploiting the unique properties of matter that can
emerge at the nanoscale, including fabrication of new materials and devices as
well as related environmental, health, and safety concerns ($396.8 million in the 9
FY2009 request).
For related agencies, a key issue for Congress was whether to fund the Legal Services
Corporation’s FY2009 budget at $311.0 million as requested by the Administration, a reduction of
$39.5 million as compared to the FY2008 enacted level of funding.

The origin of the Department of Commerce dates to 1903 with the establishment of the
Department of Commerce and Labor (32 Stat. 825). The separate Department of Commerce was
established on March 4, 1913 (37 Stat. 7365; 15 U.S.C. 1501). The department’s responsibilities
are numerous and quite varied, but its activities center on five basic missions: (1) promoting the
development of U.S. business and increasing foreign trade; (2) improving the nation’s
technological competitiveness; (3) encouraging economic development; (4) fostering
environmental stewardship and assessment; and (5) compiling, analyzing, and disseminating
statistical information on the U.S. economy and population.
The following agencies within the Commerce Department carry out these missions:
• International Trade Administration (ITA) seeks to develop the export potential of
U.S. firms and to improve the trade performance of U.S. industry;
• Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), formerly the Bureau of Export
Administration, enforces U.S. export laws consistent with national security,
foreign policy, and short-supply objectives;
• Economic Development Administration (EDA) provides grants for economic
development projects in economically distressed communities and regions;
9
For further information, see CRS Report RL34511, Nanotechnology: A Policy Primer, by John F. Sargent Jr.
10 This section was coordinated by Oscar Gonzales and Edward Murphy, CRS Government and Finance Division.






• Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) seeks to promote private and
public sector investment in minority businesses;
• Economic and Statistics Administration (ESA), excluding the Census Bureau,
provides (1) timely information on the state of the economy through preparation,
development, and interpretation of economic data; and (2) analytical support to
department officials in meeting their policy responsibilities. Much of this analysis
is conducted by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA);
• United States Census Bureau (Census), a component of ESA, collects, compiles,
and publishes a broad range of economic, demographic, and social data;
• National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) advises the
President on domestic and international communications policy, manages the
federal government’s use of the radio frequency spectrum, and performs research
in telecommunications sciences;
• United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) examines and approves
applications for patents for claimed inventions and registration of trademarks;
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) assists industry in
developing technology to improve product quality, modernize manufacturing
processes, ensure product reliability, and facilitate rapid commercialization of
products on the basis of new scientific discoveries; and
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides scientific,
technical, and management expertise to (1) promote safe and efficient marine and
air navigation; (2) assess the health of coastal and marine resources; (3) monitor
and predict the coastal, ocean, and global environments (including weather
forecasting); and (4) protect and manage the nation’s coastal resources.
As Table 4 shows, the original FY2009 requested appropriation amount of $8.217 billion is
$1.360 billion more than the FY2008 enacted amount of $6.857 billion (P.L. 110-161) for the
Department of Commerce, a 19.8% increase. The largest percentage increase for a single agency
is for the Census Bureau, which requests a 111.7% increase. The Census Bureau request was
increased on June 9, 2008, at the expense of other programs as part of a revised budget request for 11
the entire Department of Commerce. The House Committee did not consider the June 9 revision
timely and proceeded on the basis of the original budget submission. The House Committee
provides the Department of Commerce $8.707 billion, which is a 27.0% increase above the
FY2008 enacted amount and a 6.0% increase above the original FY2009 requested amount. The
Senate Committee provides $9.402 billion, which is a 37.1% increase above the FY2008 enacted
amount and a 14.4% increase above the original FY2009 requested amount.
The June 9, 2008, revised request recommended canceling funding in several Department of
Commerce programs in order to provide additional funds for the 2010 census. The total requested
increase for the 2010 Census is almost $546.0 million, although other Census Bureau funding
would be decreased. Although both the House Committee and the Senate Committee considered
11 th
Letter from the Executive Office of the President to Congress, June 9, 2008. OMB Estimate No. 5, 110 Congress, nd
2 Session, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/amendments/amendment2_6_9_08.pdf.






the revised request untimely, the Senate Committee’s increase for the 2010 Census was also
nearly $546.0 million. In order to fund this increase, the Administration requested cancellation of
$70.0 million in unobligated balances associated with the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of

2008 (P.L. 110-234).


Table 4. Funding for the Department of Commerce
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2008 FY2009 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Bureau or Agency Enacted Requesta Revisedb Draft Bill Reported Enacted
International Trade c
Administration 405.2 420.4 417.3 425.4 420.4
Bureau of Industry and
Security 72.9 83.7 83.2 83.7 83.7
Economic Development
Administration 279.9 132.8 123.6 282.8 232.8
Minority Business
Development Agency 28.6 29.0 28.6 31.5 29.0
Economic and Statistics
Administration (excluding
Census) 81.1 90.6 90.1 89.1 90.6
Census Bureau 1,230.2 2,604.6 3,139.9 2,604.6 3,151.0
National
Telecommunications and
Information Administrationd 36.3 19.2 18.4 40.9 59.2
Patent and Trademark
Officee (1,915.5) (2,075.0) (2,075.0) (2,087.0) (2,075.0)
National Institute of
Standards and Technology 755.8 638.0 636.0 816.9 813.5
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration 3,896.5 4,103.9 4,090.7 4,252.6 4,445.9
Departmental Management 70.0 94.2 93.7 79.3 76.2
Total: Department of
Commerce 6,856.5 8,216.5 8,721.5 8,706.9 9,402.4
Sources: House Appropriations Committee Print on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764/P.L. 110-

161); U.S. Department of Commerce Budget Justifications, available at


http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY09CBJ.html; House Appropriations Committee- approved draft bill and
report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. Original FY2009 Administration request.
b. June 9, 2008 revised Administration request. The June 9 FY2009 announcement for the budget request
revision presented individual program account changes. Figures reflect estimated net changes for agencies as
a whole.
c. Total funding for ITA may be higher than these amounts due to retained fees.
d. Does not include $45 million in mandatory spending from the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety
Fund.






e. The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees. The fees collected, but not obligated
during the current year are available for obligation in the following fiscal year and do not count toward the
appropriation totals. Only newly appropriated funds count toward the annual appropriation totals.
In addition, funding would be reduced in the following Department of Commerce accounts:
International Trade Administration, reduced $3.2 million; Bureau of Industry and Security,
reduced $0.5 million; Economic Development Administration, reduced $9.2 million; Minority
Business Development Administration, reduced $0.4 million; Economics and Statistics 12
Administration, reduced $0.5 million; other programs in Census, reduced $10.8 million;
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, reduced $0.8 million; National
Institute of Standards and Technology, reduced $2.0 million; National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, reduced $13.2 million; and Departmental Management, reduced $0.5 million.
The discussions of each agency below reflect the original budget request, except when otherwise
noted.
Also, for the Census Bureau, both the House- and Senate-passed versions of the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) include $210.0 million to address issues related to the

2010 Census.



The ITA provides export promotion services, works to assure compliance with trade agreements,
administers trade remedies such as antidumping and countervailing duties, and provides
analytical support for ongoing trade negotiations. ITA’s mission is to improve U.S. prosperity by
strengthening the competitiveness of U.S. industry, promoting trade and investment, and ensuring
fair trade and compliance with trade laws and agreements. ITA strives to accomplish this through
the following four policy units and the Executive and Administrative Directorate: 1)
Manufacturing and Services Unit, responsible for certain industry analysis functions and
promoting the competitiveness and expansion of the U.S. manufacturing sector; 2) Market Access
and Compliance Unit, responsible for monitoring foreign country compliance with trade
agreements, identifying compliance problems and market access obstacles, and informing U.S.
firms of foreign business practices and opportunities; 3) Import Administration Unit, responsible
for administering the trade remedy laws of the United States; 4) Trade Promotion/U.S. Foreign
Commercial Service program, responsible for conducting trade promotion programs, providing
U.S. companies with export assistance services, and leading interagency advocacy efforts for
major overseas projects; and 5) the Executive and Administrative Directorate, responsible for
providing policy leadership, information technology support, and administration services for all
of ITA.
The President’s FY2009 request for ITA was $420.4 million, a $15.2 million (3.8%) increase over 14
the FY2008 funding level of $405.2 million. The request anticipated the collection of $9.4
12
This $10.8 million reduction within Census includes reductions to other periodic census programs and a $5.2 million
reduction in salaries and expenses.
13 The sections on ITA, USTR, and ITC were written by M. Angeles Villarreal, Analyst in International Trade and
Finance, CRS Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division.
14 Figures do not reflect the $3.2 million reduction in the revised budget request. See above.






million in fees, raising available funds to $429.9 million. The ITA Budget Estimates for FY2009 15
presented a priority list of new programmatic and base-level changes from the FY2008 budget.
These included budget increases for an Adjustments to Base (ATB) and for a China
Countervailing Duty Group Initiative; budget decreases due to the closure of a Trade Compliance
Office in Seoul, Korea; and streamlining of the Domestic Office Structure. The House
Appropriations Committee-approved bill would have provided $425.4 million, 5.0% over the
FY2008 enacted level and 1.2% over the FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill would have
provided $420.4 million, 3.8% over the FY2008 enacted level and the same amount as the
FY2009 request.

The BIS administers export controls on dual-use goods and technology through its licensing and
enforcement functions. It cooperates with other nations on export control policy and provides
assistance to the U.S. business community to comply with U.S. and multilateral export controls.
BIS also administers U.S. anti-boycott statutes and is charged with monitoring the U.S. defense
industrial base. Authorization for the activities of BIS, the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C.
2401, et seq.), last expired in August 2001. On August 17, 2001, President Bush invoked the
authorities granted by the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1703(b)) to
continue in effect the system of controls contained in the act and by the Export Administration
Regulations (15 C.F.R., Parts 730-799) and has renewed that authority yearly.
The President’s FY2009 request for BIS was $83.7 million, a $10.8 million (14.8%) increase 17
from the FY2008 enacted funding level of $72.9 million. The FY2009 funding request for BIS
was divided between licensing activity ($41.0 million), enforcement activity ($36.8 million), and
management and policy coordination ($5.9 million). Of these amounts, $14.8 million was
requested for Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) enforcement. Slightly more than half of the
requested increase ($5.8 million) was for restoration of FY2008 base reductions; $2.6 million was
for cost-of-living adjustments; and $2.4 million was for new programmatic initiatives. These
included enhancing counter-proliferation efforts through the addition of BIS criminal
investigators, placing an export control officer in Singapore to prevent the illegal transhipments
of controlled items, and adding export compliance specialists for the Validated End-User
program. In FY2008, BIS had budget authority for 365 positions. With the restorations to base
and new initiatives, BIS sought budget authority for 396 positions for FY2009. Both the House
and Senate Appropriations Committee recommended the amount of the President’s request ($83.7
million). The Administration’s June 9 budget amendment sought to reduce the amount of the BIS
budget by $500,000 to be taken from the proposed inflation adjustment for the agency’s account.
(For more information on this amendment, please refer to the section on the “U.S. Census Bureau
(Census)”) .
15
International Trade Administration, Budget Estimates: Fiscal Year 2009, Congressional Submission.
16 This section was written by Ian F. Fergusson, Specialist in International Trade and Finance, Foreign Affairs,
Defense, and Trade Division.
17 Figures do not reflect the $0.5 million reduction in the revised budget request. See above.







The EDA was established under the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as
amended (42 U.S.C. § 3121). The EDA’s mission is to help communities and regions generate
new jobs and retain existing jobs by stimulating industrial and commercial growth in
economically distressed areas. EDA assistance emphasizes the needs of urban areas with high
unemployment, low income, or other severe conditions of economic distress.
In the past three budget requests, the Bush Administration sought to replace EDA assistance with
new initiatives. In FY2006, the Administration budget proposed terminating EDA and 16 other
federal community and economic programs and replacing them with a new, but lower-funded,
program known as Strengthening America’s Community Initiative. In its FY2007 and FY2008
budget requests, the Bush Administration proposed consolidating EDA assistance programs under
a new Regional Development Account (RDA). As proposed by the Administration, the past
initiatives would have been funded at a level below EDA’s current year appropriations. During
the past three years, Congress has consistently rejected the Administration’s proposals to reduce
and restructure EDA assistance programs.
For the fourth consecutive year, the Administration budget proposed a reduction in EDA
assistance programs. For FY2009, the Administration’s original budget request included $132.8
million for EDA assistance, which was significantly less than the FY2008 enacted amount of 19
$279.9 million. Specifically, the Administration’s FY2009 budget request included the
following:
• $32.8 million for salaries and expenses, $2.0 million more than appropriated in
FY2008;
• $7.0 million for public works grants, $141.0 million less than FY2008 funding
level;
• $40.0 million for economic adjustment assistance, $2.3 million less than
appropriated in FY2008;
• $27.0 million for planning assistance, $1.6 million more than the FY2008
appropriation;
• $14.0 million for trade adjustment assistance, unchanged from the FY2008
appropriation;
• $9.0 million for technical assistance, $400,000 less than the FY2008
appropriation;
• $1.0 million for research, $530,000 less than the FY2008 appropriation; and
• $2.0 million for Global Climate Change Mitigation Incentive Fund, $7.5 million
less than appropriated in FY2008.
18
This section was written by Eugene Boyd, Analyst in Federalism and Economic Development Policy, CRS
Government and Finance Division.
19 Figures do not reflect the $9.2 million reduction in the revised request. See above.






The budget would reduce funding for EDA assistance programs, not including salaries and
expenses, by 60%, from $249.1 million appropriated for FY2008 to $100.0 million. The most
significant reduction would be borne by EDA’s public works grants, a 95% reduction. The
proposed reduction in funding for public works projects would shift the agency’s focus from
assisting in financing infrastructure development to providing assistance in support of economic
development-related planning, technical assistance, and research and evaluation activities. In
testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, the
Department of Commerce’s Assistant Secretary for Economic Development, Sandy Baruah,
stated that the reduction in public works funds was a result of making difficult choices among 20
competing priorities in a tight budget environment. Opponents of the proposed cuts, such as the
National Association of Development Organizations, have contended that the $147.0 million in
proposed cuts “could potentially result in the loss or delay of nearly $4.12 billion in new private
sector investments and the setback of saving or generating more than 52,000 jobs in distressed 21
areas across the nation.”
On June 9, 2008, the Administration forwarded to Congress a revised budget request for the
Department of Commerce programs. The revised budget request was sought in order to offset an
increase in funding for decennial census activities. It proposed eliminating $7.2 million initially
requested for EDA’s public works grants. If approved, the reduction would have terminated the
program. The Administration also sought a reduction in funding for the EDA salaries and 22
expenses by $1.968 million. The requested revisions were considered untimely and were not
acted upon by Congress. For a summary discussion of this proposed revision, see the “U.S.
Census Bureau (Census)” section of this report.
On June 23, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended $232.8 million in funding
for EDA activities ($200.0 million) and salaries and expenses ($32.8 million). This was $100.0
million more than requested by the Administration, but $47.1 million less than appropriated in
FY2008. The Committee’s recommendation of $200.0 million for assistance programs includes
the following:
• $105.8 million for public works, an activity the Administration wanted to
eliminated;
• $42.3 million for economic adjustment grants;
• $27.0 million for planning assistance;
• $15.0 million for trade adjustment assistance;
20
U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, Testimony of
Sandy K. Baruah Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development, U.S. Department Department of
Commerce, March 5, 2008, available at
http://www.eda.gov/I ma geCach e/EDAP ublic/documen ts/pdfdocs2008/skb writtentestimon y030508_2 epdf/v1/skbwritte
ntestimony030508.pdf.
21 National Association of Development Organizations, Legislative Action Alert, Economic Development
Administration: Urge Lawmakers to Restore Public Works Funding, Reject 53 Percent Overall Budget Reduction, p. 2,
available at http://www.nado.org/uploaded_files/eda2009.pdf .
22 A copy of the transmittal to the Speaker of the House from the Executive Office of the President, Office of
Management and Budget is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/amendments/
amendment2_6_9_08.pdf.






• $9.4 million for technical assistance, $400,000 more than requested by the
Administration; and
• $500,000 for research and evaluation activities.
On June 2008, the House Appropriations Committee also took action on the appropriations
measure. The House Appropriations Committee-approved draft bill recommended an
appropriation of $282.8 million for EDA. This included $250.0 million for economic
development assistance and $32.8 million for salaries and expenses. This was $2.9 million more
than appropriated in FY2008, $150.0 million more than requested by the Administration, and
$50.0 million more than recommended by the Senate. The $250.0 million for EDA assistance
programs includes the following:
• $138.2 million for public works grants;
• $40.3 million for economic adjustment assistance;
• $31.0 million for planning grants;
• $15.8 million for trade adjustment assistance;
• $9.4 million for technical assistance; and
• $490,000 for research and evaluation activities.
In addition, the House bill recommended $14.7 million in grant assistance for the Global Climate
Change Mitigation Fund, which was first funded under the FY2008 appropriations act. The
recommended funding level was $12.7 million more than requested by the Administration and
$5.0 million more than appropriated in FY2008.
Despite the Administration’s request that the public works programs be terminated, the House and
Senate bills recommend continued support for and funding of the program. The report
accompanying the draft bill encourages EDA to give greater consideration when evaluating
applications for assistance to projects that
• diversify the regional economy;
• support the development of emerging industry clusters;
• advance innovation and technology transfers; and
• encourage the commercialization of university-based research and development.
The Continuing Resolution signed into law by the President on September 30, 2008 (P.L. 110-
329), allocates $400.0 million in EDA funds for necessary expenses. These expenses include
disaster relief, long-term recovery, and restoration of infrastructure related to the consequences of
hurricanes, floods, and other natural disaster occurring during 2008 for which the President
declared a major disaster under Title IV of the Stafford Act.







The MBDA, established by Executive Order 11625 on October 13, 1971 (36 FR 19967, 3 C.F.R.,
1971-1975 Comp., p. 616) is charged with the lead role in coordinating all the federal
government’s minority business programs. As part of its strategic plan, the MBDA seeks to
develop a more industry-focused, data-driven, technical assistance approach to give minority
business owners the tools essential for becoming first or second tier suppliers to private
corporations and the federal government in the new procurement environment. Progress will be
measured in relation to entrepreneurial parity and strategic growth through increased gross
receipts, number of employees, and size and scale of firms associated with minority business
enterprise.
The FY2009 requested amount for MBDA was $29.0 million. This was $0.4 million more than 24
the FY2008 enacted amount of $28.6 million, a 1.4% increase. MBDA programs are primarily
delivered through National and Regional Enterprise Centers (NECs and RECs), which service
strategic growth firms, identify new opportunities, and provide project management of grantees.
The amount requested for grants, subsidies, and contributions in FY2009 remains the same as
FY2008, $11.2 million.
The Senate Committee recommendation provided $29.0 million. The recommendation was
$377,000 above the FY2008 enacted level and the same as the budget request. The increase
provided for inflationary adjustments and ensured that funds will be available for the existing
Native American Business Development Centers. The House Appropriations Committee-
approved draft bill recommended $31.5 million for MBDA. The recommendation was $2.9
million above the FY2008 enacted level.

The ESA provides economic data, analysis, and forecasts to government agencies and, where
appropriate, to the public. The ESA includes the Census Bureau (discussed separately), the
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), and STAT-USA. The ESA has three core missions: to
compile a system of economic data, to interpret and communicate the forces at work in the
economy, and to support the information and analytical needs of the executive branch. Census is
excluded from the following discussion of ESA because its budget is submitted separately. The
regional input-output modeling system (RIMS) is also excluded because it is funded entirely
through user fees instead of annual appropriations.
23
This section was written by Oscar Gonzales, Analyst in Economic Development Policy, CRS Government and
Finance Division.
24 Figures do not reflect the $0.4 million revised request. See discussion at the beginning of Commerce section of this
report.
25 This section was written by Edward V. Murphy, Analyst in Financial Institutions, CRS Government and Finance
Division.






The FY2009 requested amount for ESA was $90.6 million.26 This represented a 10.5% increase
over the comparable FY2008 enacted amount of $81.1 million. BEA represented 96% of the
FY2009 ESA budget request. The most prominent ESA programs are BEA’s four statistical
accounts: (1) National Income and Product Accounts, (2) Regional Economic Accounts, (3)
Industry Input-Output Tables, and (4) International Balance of Payments. BEA’s four core
programs support other agencies and policymakers. The National Economic Accounts support
federal budget projections and macroeconomic policy. Regional data are used to allocate federal
funds and for state budget forecasts. Industry accounts are used to compile the other datasets and
also by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Producer Price Index. Balance of payments data are
required by international agreements on exchange rates.
ESA has an initiative to revise the measure of the health sector in gross domestic product (GDP).
The initiative requested $3.2 million in additional FY2009 funds to address the question, “do the
large increases in U.S. health expenditures represent increases in costs or increases in the delivery
of real medical services to an aging population?” In putting forth the initiative, the Administration
argued that health care spending will continue to be the most important long-term issue
confronting the federal budget. Improper measurement of productivity in health services might
cause significant errors in Medicare spending projections. Erroneous productivity measures could
also affect the formula used to compensate service providers participating in federal programs.
The Senate Committee recommendation provided $90.6 million. The recommendation was 11.8%
more than the FY2008 enacted level and the same as the original FY2009 budget request. The
House committee-approved draft bill recommended $89.1 million for ESA, which was 9.9%
more than the FY2008 enacted amount and 1.7% less than the original FY2009 requested amount.

A census of the U.S. population, conducted every 10 years, is authorized by the Constitution th
(Article I, Section 2, clause 3, as modified by Section 2 of the 14 Amendment). The Bureau of
the Census, established as a permanent office on March 6, 1902 (32 Stat. 51), conducts this
decennial census under Title 13 of the U.S. Code, which also authorizes the Census Bureau to
collect and compile a wide variety of other demographic, economic, housing, and governmental
data.
To fund the bureau in FY2009, the Administration initially requested $2.605 billion, including
$238.7 million for salaries and expenses and $2.366 billion for periodic censuses and programs.
By comparison, the FY2008 enacted amounts were $1.230 billion for the bureau as a whole, with
$202.8 million for salaries and expenses and $1.027 billion for periodic censuses and programs.
The large difference (+$1.375 billion) between the FY2009 request and FY2008 enacted amount
for the bureau primarily reflected heightened preparations, known as the “ramp up,” for the 2010
census. About 91%, or $2.143 billion, of the initial periodic censuses and programs request was
for these activities.
26
Figures do not reflect the $0.5 million reduction in the revised request. See above.
27 This section was written by Royce Crocker, Specialist in American National Government, CRS Government and
Finance Division.






In preparation for 2010, the bureau planned three new initiatives, the first of which involved
reengineering the census to prepare for a short-form only enumeration. The short-form
questionnaire is designed to gather data from all households for, among other purposes, the
constitutionally mandated reapportionment of the U.S. House of Representatives and within-state
redistricting. The census long-form questionnaire, which since 1940 had collected detailed data
from a sample of households, will be replaced by the American Community Survey (ACS). The
ACS is an ongoing survey of about 250,000 households per month. By 2010, it will provide the
equivalent of long-form data yearly, instead of once a decade, to states and sub-state jurisdictions.
Data already are available for states and localities with at least 65,000 persons.
Second, the bureau is making improvements to its Master Address File (MAF) and Topologically
Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing mapping system (TIGER). As described by the
bureau director, “the MAF/TIGER Enhancement Program is a multi-year effort to collect and 28
correct the locations of streets and other geographic information.” Because the census involves
mailing out questionnaires and having them mailed back to the bureau, the accuracy of
MAF/TIGER is essential for sending questionnaires to the right housing units.
Third, the bureau intended to automate fully the pre-census address verification and post-census
non-response followup (NRFU) processes. Address verification will be conducted to improve
MAF accuracy. In the NRFU process, enumerators will try to obtain correct data from those who
have not completed and returned their census forms. Due to contract delays, significant cost
overruns, and scheduling and performance problems, however, the handheld computers on which
the bureau was relying for both address verification and NRFU will be used only for the former
process. The bureau will resort to the traditional paper-based NRFU, and thus will require
additional funds for, among other purposes, hiring more temporary census workers than originally
anticipated.
The altered non-response follow-up plan could increase the overall cost of the 2010 census from a 29
projected $11.5 billion to between $13.7 and $14.5 billion. The Supplemental Appropriations
Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252; 122 Stat. 2323) included an extra $210.0 million for the 2010 census in
FY2008, and after the bureau’s initial FY2009 budget request, it sought additional FY2009 funds.
On June 9, 2008, the Administration submitted an FY2009 budget amendment requesting almost
$546.0 million more for the 2010 census, to be offset by reductions in other accounts and
cancellations of unobligated balances in the Department of Commerce and other entities. House
and Senate appropriators deemed the amended request submission untimely, although the Senate
Appropriations Committee recommended an amount for the bureau that exceeded the original
FY2009 request of $2.605 billion by $546.4 million. House appropriators recommended the
amount originally requested. The Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2009, H.R. 2638, Division A, Section 120 (P.L. 110-329; 122 Stat. 3574),
funded the bureau’s salaries and expenses account at the FY2008 level of $202.8 million until
March 6, 2009, but gave periodic censuses and programs $2.906 billion—almost equal to the
28
Testimony of U.S. Census Bureau Director Steve H. Murdock in U.S. Congress, House Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, The Fiscal Year 2009 Budget,
April 3, 2008, p. 3, at [http://www.census.gov/ Press-Release/www/2008/murdock4-3-08.htm].
29 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2010 Census: Plans for Decennial Census Operations and Technology
Have Progressed, but Much Uncertainty Remains, GAO-08-886T, June 11, 2008, p. 1.






FY2009 amended request. “From such amounts,” according to Section 120, “funds may be used
for additional promotion, outreach, and marketing activities.”

The NTIA is the executive branch’s principal advisory office on domestic and international
telecommunications and information technology policies. Its mandate is to provide greater access
for all Americans to telecommunications services, support U.S. attempts to open foreign markets,
advise on international telecommunications negotiations, fund research grants for new
technologies and their applications, and assist nonprofit organizations converting to digital st
transmission in the 21 century. The NTIA also manages federal use of radio frequency spectrum
domestically and internationally.
For FY2009, the Bush Administration requested $19.2 million for NTIA, with only the
administrative functions of NTIA receiving direct funding. The House Appropriations Committee
approved $40.9 million for FY2009. The Senate Appropriations Committee has approved $36.2
million for FY2009. There are two major components to the NTIA appropriated budget (a third
program, which is a revolving fund based on spectrum auctions, is discussed below). The first is
Salaries and Expenses. For FY2009, the Bush Administration requested $19.2 million; both the
House and Senate appropriators approved $19.2 million for FY2009. Traditionally, a large part of
this function has been for the management of various information and telecommunications
policies, both domestically and internationally. The second NTIA component is Public
Telecommunications and Facilities Planning and Construction (PTFPC). The Bush
Administration requested (as it did in previous years) that this program’s funding be eliminated,
arguing that most of the construction and refurbishing of public telecommunications facilities has
already been done and that any remaining support that is needed should come from local public
broadcasting entities. For FY2009, however, both the congressional appropriations committees
disagreed with the Administration’s position, citing the ongoing need for upgrading of public
broadcasting facilities, particularly as the deadline of converting all analog broadcasts to digital in
2009 approaches. For FY2009, the House Appropriations Committee approved $21.7 million; the
Senate Appropriations Committee approved $20.0 million. In addition, Senate appropriators have
called for reinstating the Technology Opportunity Program (TOP), which was discontinued after
FY2005, at $20.0 million for FY2009. This program would provide funding for broadband
deployment in those areas of the United States that do not have access to this technology.
The third program that is administered by NTIA, but to date not directly funded by appropriated
money, was established through the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. That law (P.L. 109-171)
called for the creation of a Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Fund, which would
offset receipts from the auction of spectrum licenses made available when analog signals are
concluded in February 2009. The initial auction began on January 24, 2008 and concluded on
March 17, 2008. The receipts of the auction are intended to fund the following programmatic
functions at NTIA: a digital-analog converter box program to assist consumers in meeting the
30
This section was written by Glenn McLoughlin, Specialist in Technology and Telecommunications Policy, CRS
Resources, Science, and Industry Division.






2009 deadline for receiving television broadcasts in digital format; public safety interoperable
communications grants (which would be granted to ensure that public safety agencies have a
standardized format for sharing voice and data signals on the radio spectrum); New York’s 9/11
digital transition funding (until the Freedom Tower is completed); assistance to low-power
television stations for converting from analog to digital transmission; a national alert and tsunami
warning program; and funding to enhance a national alert system as stated in the ENHANCE 911
Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-494).

The USPTO examines and approves applications for patents on claimed inventions and
administers the registration of trademarks. It also assists other federal departments and agencies
to protect American intellectual property in the international marketplace. The USPTO is funded
by user fees paid by customers that are designated as “offsetting collections” and subject to
spending limits established by the Committee on Appropriations.
The Administration’s FY2009 budget request recommended providing the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office with $2.075 billion in budget authority, an increase of 8.3% over the previous
fiscal year. The budget proposal also stated that the USPTO should have “full access” to all fees
collected and that fee increases enacted in 2005 and 2006, and extended through 2008, be
continued.
The draft bill approved by the House Committee on Appropriations would have given the USTPO
the budget authority to spend $2.087 billion in FY2009, 8.9% above FY2008. S. 3182, as
reported from the Senate Committee on Appropriations, provided the USPTO with $2.075 billion
in budget authority, an increase of 8.3% over the previous fiscal year. Both bills would continue
earlier enacted fee increases. The Senate bill also included language “to allow the USPTO to have
fuller access to fees” collected.
P.L. 110-161, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008, gave the USPTO the budget
authority to spend $1.916 billion in fees collected (8.2% above FY2007) and mandated the
continuation of existing fee increases.
Beginning in 1990, appropriation measures have at times limited the ability of the USPTO to use
the full amount of fees collected in each fiscal year. Although over the past several years the
USPTO has been given the budget authority to use all collected fees, this issue remains an area of
controversy. Opponents of this approach argue that agency operations are supported by payments
for services that must be financed in the year the expenses are incurred. Proponents of methods to
limit USPTO fee usage maintain that the fees are necessary to help balance the budget and that
the budget authority given to the USPTO is sufficient to cover operating costs.
31
This section was written by Wendy H. Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division.







NIST is a laboratory of the Department of Commerce. The organization’s mandate is to increase
the competitiveness of U.S. companies through appropriate support for industrial development of
pre-competitive generic technologies and the diffusion of government-developed technological
advances to users in all segments of the American economy. NIST research also provides the
measurement, calibration, and quality assurance techniques that underpin U.S. commerce,
technological progress, improved product reliability, manufacturing processes, and public safety.
For FY2009, the Administration’s original budget proposed $638.0 million in funding for NIST.
On June 6, 2008, the President submitted a series of amendments to his budget, including a
reduction of $2.0 million in the amount requested for NIST (from the Manufacturing Extension
Partnership (MEP) program). The new request of $636.0 million was 15.9% below FY2008 due 33
to an absence of support for the Technology Innovation Program (TIP) and a significant
decrease in financing MEP. Funding for in-house research and development under the Scientific
and Technical Research and Services (STRS) account (including the Baldrige National Quality
Program) was to increase 21.5% to $535.0 million; MEP would have been provided $2.0 million
to close out the federally financed portion of the program such that “MEP centers will become
independent, as intended in the program’s original authorization.” Construction support would
have declined 38.3% to $99.0 million.
The draft bill approved by the House Committee on Appropriations funded NIST at $816.9
million, 8.1% above FY2008. The STRS account would have increased 13.7% to $500.7 million;
support for TIP at $65.2 million would remain constant, and MEP funding increased 36.2% to
$122.0 million. Construction would decrease 19.6% to $129.0 million. S. 3182, as reported by the
Senate Committee on Appropriations, provided $813.5 million for the program, an increase of

7.6% over FY2008. Included was $489.5 million for the STRS account (an 11.1% increase),


$65.0 million for TIP, and $110.0 million for MEP (a 22.8% increase). The construction budget
would have decreased 7.2% to $149.0 million.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008, P.L. 110-161, funded NIST at $755.8 million,
11.7% above the FY2007 figure. Support for the STRS account increased 1.4% to $440.5 million
(including the Baldrige National Quality Program). The Technology Innovation Program
(formerly the Advanced Technology Program (ATP)) was appropriated $65.2 million (with an
additional $5.0 million from FY2007 unobligated balances under ATP), 17.6% below FY2007.
Funding for the MEP program decreased 14.4% to $89.6 million. Support for construction almost
tripled to $160.5 million.
Continued support for the Advanced Technology Program was a major funding issue. ATP was
created to provide “seed financing,” matched by private sector investment, to businesses or
consortia (including universities and government laboratories) for development of generic
technologies that have broad applications across industries. Opponents of the program cited it as a
prime example of “corporate welfare,” whereby the federal government invests in applied
32
This section was written by Wendy H. Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division.
33 The Technology Innovation Program replaced the Advanced Technology Program as mandated by P.L. 110-69.






research activities that, they emphasize, should be conducted by the private sector. Others
defended ATP, arguing that it assisted businesses in developing technologies that, while crucial to
industrial competitiveness, would not or could not be developed by the private sector alone.
Although Congress maintained (often decreasing) funding for ATP, the initial appropriation bills
passed by the House since FY2002 failed to include financing for the program. In FY2006,
support for the program was cut 41.0% and in 2007, P.L. 110-69 replaced ATP with the
Technology Innovation Program, which focuses on small and medium sized firms. The
Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008 provided funding for this new initiative. The
Administration’s FY2009 budget request did not include financing for TIP, whereas both House
and Senate bills would have provided support similar to that appropriated in FY2008.
The budget for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, another extramural program
administered by NIST, has been debated since the FY2004 appropriations deliberations. Although
congressional support for MEP remained constant in the recent past, the Administration’s FY2004
budget request, the initial House-passed bill, and the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act
substantially decreased federal funding for this initiative, reflecting the President’s
recommendation that manufacturing extension centers “with more than six years experience
operate without federal contribution.” P.L. 108-447, however, restored financing for MEP in
FY2005 to the level that existed prior to the 63.0% reduction taken in FY2004. While support
decreased in FY2006, it remained significantly above the FY2004 figure; FY2007 funding
remained similar to the previous fiscal year. For FY2008, funding for MEP was reduced. The
President’s FY2009 budget proposal recommended curtailing the federally financed portion of the
program and provided $2.0 million to accomplish this objective. The House and Senate FY2009
appropriations bills included large increases in funding for MEP.
As part of the American Competitiveness Initiative,34 announced by the President in his 2006
State of the Union message, the Administration indicated intentions to double funding over 10
years for “innovation-enabling research” performed at NIST. This was to be accomplished
through increased support of NIST’s “core” programs, defined as internal research in the STRS
account and the construction budget. To this end, the President’s FY2007 budget requested an
18.3% increase in funding for intramural R&D at the laboratory; support for research performed
within the NIST facilities under P.L. 110-5 increased 9.6% over FY2006. For FY2008, the
omnibus appropriations legislation provided for a small increase in the STRS account. The
President’s FY2009 budget proposed an additional 21.5% in funding for this in-house research
and development. Increases in the STRS account were included in the House and Senate bills, but
at amounts less than in the budget request.

The mission of NOAA is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment and
conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet the nation’s economic, social, and 36
environmental needs.
34
For further information, see The White House, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Domestic Policy Counsel,
American Competitiveness Initiative: Leading the World in Innovation, February 2006, 23 pp.
35 This section was prepared by Wayne A. Morrissey, Information Research Specialist, Knowledge Services Group.






The Bush Administration’s FY2009 revised budget request37 recommended $4.104 billion for
NOAA (see Table 5). This amount was slightly over 5.3%, or $208.0 million more than FY2008
enacted appropriations of $3.896 billion. The President requested Congress to restore funding for
NOAA programs cut in FY2008 in favor of “congressionally directed programs,” an estimate of 38
which is around $150.0 million. Funding for these programs was not requested by the
Administration for FY2009. Also, reflected in Table 5 is an Administration budget amendment
that reduced the original FY2009 request for NOAA by $13.2 million.
Table 5 is organized by the FY2009 NOAA budget structure and includes the Operations,
Research, and Facilities (ORF) discretionary account; the Procurement, Acquisition, and
Construction (PAC) discretionary account; and “Other Accounts,” composed of discretionary
funding for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF), the Coastal Zone Management
Fund (CZMF), and NOAA fisheries financing. Offsetting budget authority for NOAA may also
be transferred to or from another agency, such as with the Promote and Develop American
Fishery Products Fund (PDAF) from USDA; or transferred internally, as with the CZMF.
Congress has also approved additional budget authority from previous fiscal year(s) unobligated
appropriations in some years. From time to time, the agency has also received emergency
appropriations or has been subject to congressionally mandated rescissions as noted in Table 5.
Of the $4.104 billion requested for NOAA for FY2009, $2.834 billion was for ORF; $1.239
billion for PAC; and a net total of $30.9 million for NOAA’s Other Accounts, which include 39
PCSRF, CZMF, and fishery financing (Table 5). Additional budget authority (BA) requested by
the President for NOAA would have offset the amount of discretionary funding the agency would
have require otherwise. For FY2009, $79.0 million would have been transferred from the PDAF
to the ORF account. The PDAF contains collections transferred from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Additional offsetting BA for ORF of $11.0 million would have be derived, with
Congress’s approval, from FY2008 unobligated appropriations. Another $3.0 million would have
been be transferred internally from CZMF collections to ORF to administer the Coastal Zone
Management Program. In addition to NOAA’s five ORF budget line offices, funding was
requested for NOAA Program Support (PS), a cross-cutting budget activity that funds agency
administration, facilities maintenance, education, and the Office of Marine and Aviation
Operations (OMAO). The OMAO funds marine services (hydrographic data collection) and

(...continued)
36
Mission statement, Department of Commerce, NOAA FY2009 Budget Summary, February 4, 2008, at
http://www.corporateservices.noaa.go v/~nbo /FY08%20Rollout%20Materials/1_3 1_ 07_ROLLOUT/Blue_ Book/
Ch.0_TOC_and_INTRO_08_Final.pdf.
37 See introductory section in this report for the Department of Commerce.
38 CRS estimated this amount according to funding reported by conferees in the Joint Explanatory Statement to
accompany H.R. 2764 (amended), House Appropriation Committee Print, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008,
Division B-Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008, pp. 618-791, January 30,
2008. Available at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_house_committee_prints&docid=f:39564b.pdf.
39 The request for PCSF was $35.0 million. However, NOAA’s accounting is sensitive to offsetting budget authority
and, therefore, the amount of $30.9 million is a net total for Other Accounts.






manages the fleet of marine vessels and aircraft, including the NOAA Corps commissioned
officers who pilot them.
The Bush Administration’s overarching budget priorities for NOAA for FY2009 included (1)
Congress’s authorizing the agency to use unobligated appropriations and reprogramming budget
authority for programs it did not request in FY2008, that is, “congressionally directed programs”;
(2) “recapitalizing” NOAA by infusing funding into aging facilities, equipment, technology,
vessels, buildings, and other agency infrastructure; (3) assuring that NOAA satellite programs are
able to meet mission requirements and keep to schedule; (4) managing and maintaining
meteorological, climate, and environmental data; and (5) implementing the President’s Ocean 40
Initiative.
Table 5. NOAA Appropriations For FY2008,
the FY2009 Request, and Congressional Action
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
NOAA Accounts FY2008 Enacted FY2009 Request House Draft Bill Senate-Reported
Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF)
NOS National Ocean Service 467.9 449.3 472.2 516.8
NMFS NOAA Fisheries 708.6 726.2 744.4 777.3
OAR NOAA Research 387.9 372.3 396.3 403.4
NWS National Weather Service 805.3 818.8 825.8 847.9
NESDIS NOAA Satellites 179.2 165.3 179.2 177.9
PS Program Support 392.4 392.4 410.0 426.5
Total ORF Budget Authority 2,941.3 2,924.3 3,027.9 3,149.8
Budget Authority Offsets
(PDAF/CZMF and transfers/deobligations) (82.0) (90.0) (45.6) (97.9)
Subtotal ORF Discretionary 2,859.3 2,834.3 2,982.3 3,051.9
Procurement, Acquisition, & Construction
(PAC)a 979.2 1,238.7 1,212.3 1,258.0
Other Accounts (net total)
PCSRF/CZMF/Finance 58.0 30.9 58.0 86.0
Total: NOAAb 3,896.5 4,103.9 4,252.6 4,445.9
Sources: House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and related
Agencies, Comparative Statement of New Budget (Obligational) Authority for 2008 and Budget Requests and
Amounts Recommended in the Bill for 2009, June 2008; House Committee on Appropriations, draft bill and
report; and Senate Committee on Appropriations, Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2009 (S. 3182; S.Rept. 110-397), June 23, 2008.
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
40
See Department of Commerce, NOAA, FY2009 Budget Highlights,President’s Ocean Initiative,” at
http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/~nbo/FY09_Rollout_Materials/POI_One_Pager_FINAL.pdf.






a. The FY2009 PAC request was divided as follows: $24.4 million for NOS; $10.4 million for OAR; $111.9
million for NWS; $992.6 million for NESDIS; and $92.5 million for Program Support. (PS) The House bill as
reported provided PAC funding as follows: NOS $48.1 million; NMFS $0; OAR $10.4 million; NESDIS
$992.6 million; and PS $49.4 million. The Senate report on S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397) recommended PAC
funding as follows: NOS $39.4 million; NMFS $4.6 million; OAR $15.6 million; NWS $106.4 million; $992.6
million; and PS $102.4 million. In each case, the PAC totals are offset by $2 million in deobligations. The
Manager’s Amendment to the draft House bill as reported transfers $32,360,000 to NIST. That amount was
derived from reducing PAC funding for PS for construction of the Pacific Regional Center reduced from
$60,250,00 to $22,890,000 and adding $5,000,000 to the Marine Sanctuaries Construction/Acquisition
(PAC/NOS), which leaves a balance of $32,360,000 for transfer to NIST.
b. The FY2008 enacted total reflects a rescission of $11.3 million required by P.L. 110-161. In the President’s
revised FY2009 budget, about $4.0 million from ORF and $9.0 million from PAC were reprogrammed
internally to cover various inflationary cost increases at NOAA.
The House CJS Subcommittee on Appropriations amendment recommends a total of $4.212
billion for NOAA for FY2009 (Table 5). This amount was about 7.5%, or $316.0 million, more
than FY2008 enacted level of $3.896 billion. It was 2.6%, or $108.0 million more than the
FY2009 request of $4.104 billion. Further, it was 5.2%, or $235.0 million less than the Senate
Appropriation Committee recommendation of $4.446 billion. The House committee
recommended funding for NOAA discretionary accounts as follows: ORF $2.982 billion; PAC
$1.212 billion; and Other Accounts, a net $58.0 million (i.e., PCSRF $65.0 million, CZMF $3
million; and fisheries financing an offsetting $4.0 million).
The Senate CJS Subcommittee on Appropriations recommended a total of $4.446 billion for
NOAA for FY2009 (Table 5). This amount was 14.2 %, or $550.0 million more than the $3.896
billion enacted for FY2008 and 8.3%, or $342.0 million, more than the $4.104 billion requested
for FY2009. The Senate committee recommended funding for NOAA discretionary accounts as
follows: ORF $3.052 billion; PAC $1.258 billion; and a net $86.0 million for NOAA’s Other
Accounts (i.e., PCSRF $90.0 million, CZMF $3.0 million, and fisheries financing an offset of $4
million). The Senate also proposed a $50.0 million Disaster Mitigation Fund (DMF) that would
have primarily supported victims of economic hardship in communities whose livelihood depends
on fisheries and living marine natural resources.
In all circumstances, total funding for NOAA would have been increased, as compared with total
appropriations of $3.896 billion that NOAA received for FY2008. Discretionary funding
requested by the President for ORF for FY2009 was less than FY2008 appropriations, however.
The President requested about a third of the funding for the PCSRF recommended by the Senate
Appropriations Committee. The House recommended about two-thirds of the Senate committee
recommendation for PCSRF. It appeared that discretionary funding for ORF, and in particular,
NOS, OAR, and NESDIS would have been most affected by cuts proposed by the Administration
for FY2009. Although the House committee recommendation for PAC was less than the
Administration’s request, this was because $32.4 million of PS funding for construction would
have been transferred to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The Senate
committee had no similar proposal. In general, the Senate committee recommendation showed
substantial increases for NOAA across the board. The Senate bill report indicated that this






recommendation would have strengthened national response to the U.S. Joint Ocean Commission 41
finding on U.S. ocean policy. For the NOAA Geostationary Earth-orbiting Observation Satellite
(GOES) funding, the House and Senate committees recommended about $520.3 million. Also,
both recommended $65.4 million for the management of the last of NOAA’s current Polar-
orbiting Earth Observations Satellites (POES) and $288.0 million would have been for the
NOAA/DOD/NASA National Polar-orbiting Earth Observation Satellite System (NPOESS),
which combined with supporting ground control systems totaled $992.6 million, the same amount
requested by the Bush Administration for FY2009.
Where House and Senate committee funding proposals appeared to have diverge significantly
was in the Senate’s recommendation for the PCSRF and the Senate committee’s $50.0 million
Disaster Mitigation Fund. The Senate committee also proposed more funding than the House for
increased fuel costs and encouraged the Administration to more aggressively seek opportunities
for commercial satellite data acquisition to support federal programs. Further, the Senate
committee cited “more than $425,000,000 worth of open competitive funding ... not at the
expense of basic science operations and research requested by the Administration,” which was in
addition to ocean-related programs funded under the NOAA Sea Grant Program, Ocean
Explorations, Marine Sanctuaries, Response and Restoration, Navigation Services, Integrated
Ocean Observation Systems, and the Coral Reef program.
The FY2009 Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act (P.L.
110-329), Division B, provided $75.0 million for fisheries disaster assistance and $17.0 million in
supplemental appropriations for NOAA to improve its hurricane track and intensity forecasts for
the protection of life and property. These amounts are not reflected in Table 5.

Established by an act of 1870 (28 U.S.C. 501) with the Attorney General at its head, the
Department of Justice provides counsel for citizens in federal cases and protects them through
law enforcement. It represents the federal government in all proceedings, civil and criminal,
before the Supreme Court. In legal matters, generally, the department provides legal advice and
opinions, upon request, to the President and executive branch department heads. The major
functions of DOJ agencies and offices are described below.
41
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on the Departments of Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies, Departments of Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
2009, Report to Accompany S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397), June 23, 2008, p. 29, “Joint Ocean Commission Initiative.”
42 This section was written by Celinda Franco, CRS Specialist in Crime and Drug Policy; Nathan James, CRS Analyst
in Crime Policy; and William J. Krouse, CRS Specialist in Domestic Security and Crime Policy; CRS Domestic Social
Policy Division. For further information, see CRS Report RL34530, Department of Justice (DOJ) Appropriations for
FY2008 and FY2009, by William J. Krouse, Celinda Franco, and Nathan James.






• United States Attorneys prosecute criminal offenses against the United States,
represent the federal government in civil actions, and initiate proceedings for the
collection of fines, penalties, and forfeitures owed to the United States.
• United States Marshals Service provides security for the federal judiciary,
protects witnesses, executes warrants and court orders, manages seized assets,
detains and transports unsentenced prisoners, and apprehends fugitives.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigates violations of federal criminal
law; helps protect the United States against terrorism and hostile intelligence
efforts; provides assistance to other federal, state, and local law enforcement
agencies; and shares jurisdiction with Drug Enforcement Administration over
federal drug violations.
• Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigates federal drug law
violations; coordinates its efforts with state, local, and other federal law
enforcement agencies; develops and maintains drug intelligence systems;
regulates legitimate controlled substances activities; and conducts joint
intelligence-gathering activities with foreign governments.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) enforces federal law
related to the manufacture, importation, and distribution of alcohol, tobacco,
firearms, and explosives. It was transferred from the Department of the Treasury
to the Department of Justice by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-

296).


• Federal Prison System (Bureau of Prisons) provides for the custody and care of
the federal prison population, the maintenance of prison-related facilities, and the
boarding of sentenced federal prisoners incarcerated in state and local
institutions.
• Office on Violence Against Women coordinates legislative and other initiatives
relating to violence against women and administers grant programs to help
prevent, detect, and stop violence against women, including domestic violence,
sexual assault, and stalking.
• Office of Justice Programs (OJP) manages and coordinates the activities of the
Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of
Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office of
Victims of Crime.
• Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)advances the practice of
community policing by awarding grants to law enforcement agencies to hire and
train community policing professionals, acquire and deploy crime-fighting
technologies, and develop and test innovative policing strategies.
Most crime control has traditionally been a state and local responsibility. With the passage of the
Crime Control Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-351), however, the federal role in the administration of
criminal justice has increased incrementally. Since 1984, Congress has approved five major
omnibus crime control bills, designating new federal crimes, penalties, and additional law
enforcement assistance programs for state and local governments.






The President’s FY2009 DOJ budget request included $23.089 billion as shown in Table 6, or a
$503.0 million reduction, as compared to the FY2008 enacted appropriation of $23.592 billion.
This proposed reduction of 2.1% was largely reflected in cuts to grant programs administered by
the Office of Justice (OJP), Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program, and Office
of Violence Against Women (OVW).
Table 6. Funding for the Department of Justice
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
Accounts FY2008 Enacteda FY2009 Request House Draft Bill Senate- Reported FY2009 Enacted
General Administration 1,794.8 1,952.1 2,014.2 1,928.4
General Administration 257.6 321.3 384.7 292.7
Administrative Review & Appeals 240.6 259.8 264.8 264.8
Detention Trustee 1,225.9 1,295.3 1,289.1 1,295.3
Office of the Inspector General 70.6 75.7 75.7 75.7
U.S. Parole Commission 11.5 12.6 12.6 12.6
Legal Activities 3,584.0 3,829.7 3,841.9 3,864.7
General legal activities 745.5 804.0 804.0 804.0
United States Attorneys 1,754.8 1,831.3 1,836.3 1,831.3
United States Marshals Service 866.5 933.1 940.3 968.1
Otherb 217.1 261.2 261.2 261.2
National Security Division 73.4 83.8 83.8 83.8
Interagency Law Enforcement 497.9 531.6 521.9 511.7
Federal Bureau of Investigation 6,657.7 7,108.1 7,108.1 7,270.1
Salaries and expenses 4,184.9 4,339.6 3,310.1 4,359.7
Counterintelligence and National 2,308.6 2,725.5 3,755.0 2,725.5
Security
Construction 164.2 43.0 43.0 185.0
Drug Enforcement Administration 1,857.6 1,936.6 1,939.1 1,954.4
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives 1,007.6 1,027.8 1,054.2 1,042.8
Federal Prison System 5,425.5 5,533.9 5,733.9 5,973.9
Office of Violence Against Women 400.0 280.0 435.0 415.0
Office of Justice Programs 2,282.0 792.7 2,694.1 2,721.1
Justice assistance 196.2 134.6 95.0 240.0
State and local law enforcement
assistance 1,008.1c 404.0 1,277.0 1,387.0
Weed and seed program fund 32.1 25.0
Community oriented policing services 587.2 627.0 600.0






Accounts FY2008 Enacteda FY2009 Request House Draft Bill Senate- Reported FY2009 Enacted
Salaries and Expensesc195.0d
Juvenile justice programs 383.5 185.0 431.0 400.0
Public safety officers benefits 74.8 69.1 69.1 69.1
Total: Department of Justice 23,591.9 23,088.9 25,438.7 25,778.6
Sources: House Appropriations Committee Print on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764/P.L. 110-
161); Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009—Appendix; House Appropriations Committee-
approved draft bill and report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. The FY2008 Enacted column does not reflect a DOJ budget reprogramming request for $240.0 million that
has been submitted by the Administration to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, and
partially approved by the committees for $109.0 million. Nor does it reflect additional FY2008 funding that
was provided to some DOJ agencies as part of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252).
b. Other includes Antitrust Division, Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, U.S. Trustee System Fund,
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, Fees and Expenses of Witnesses, Community Relations Service,
and the Asset Forfeiture Fund.
c. Includes $100.0 million in emergency funding that was appropriated for security at the Presidential
Nominating Conventions.
d. The House committee-approved draft bill included an account that provided $195.0 million for salaries and
expenses of OJP, OVW, and COPS.
The House Appropriations Committee approved a draft bill that would have provided DOJ with
$25.439 billion for FY2009. This amount would have included $7.108 billion for the FBI, $1.939
billion for the DEA, $1.054 billion for the ATF, and $5.734 billion for the Bureau of Prisons. The
House draft bill also would have included $3.129 billion in state and local law enforcement
assistance (OJP and OVW), instead of cutting such funding by $1.62 billion, as proposed by the
Administration.
The Senate Appropriations Committee reported a bill (S. 3182; S.Rept. 110-252) that would have
provided DOJ with $25.779 billion for FY2009. This amount included $7.27 billion for the FBI,
$1.954 billion for the DEA, $1.043 billion for the ATF, and $5.974 billion for the Bureau of
Prisons. The Senate-reported bill also included $3.136 billion in state and local law enforcement
assistance (OJP and OVW).
For FY2008, the Administration requested $185.8 million in supplemental funding for DOJ as
shown in Table 7. The House-passed bill (H.R. 2642) would have provided DOJ with $407.3
million in supplemental funding, and the Senate-passed bill (also H.R. 2642) would have
provided $1.131 billion. In an exchange of amendments, the House and Senate resolved their
differences, and the bill was cleared for the President on June 26, 2008. The Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) included an additional $449.0 million for DOJ. Although
the discussion below describes the amounts at the account and subaccount level provided for DOJ
in P.L. 110-252, those amounts have not been incorporated into the FY2008 enacted funding
levels given below.






On September 30, 2008, the President signed into law the Consolidated Security, Disaster
Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 110-329). This law included a CR that
funded most DOJ agencies at FY2008 levels through March 6, 2009; however, a few DOJ
accounts received funding over those FY2008 levels. For example, the CR funded the Bureau of
Prisons’ salaries and expenses account at a rate that would have been equal to a full-year FY2009
appropriation of $5.397 billion; the Detention Trustee at a rate that was equal to a full-year
appropriation of $1.246 billion; and departmental Legal Activities at a rate that would have
equaled a full-year appropriation of $3.390 billion. Of the amount provided for Legal Activities,
the CR required that an amount corresponding to $1.090 billion of a full-year appropriation be
transferred to the Office of Personnel Management for costs associated with the federal observer
program provided under Section 8 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. §1973f).
Furthermore, the CR funded the FBI at its FY2008 level of funding through March 6 and
stipulated that $144.0 million in FY2008 emergency supplemental funding that Congress
appropriated for the FBI would be regarded as part of that calculation. In the discussions below of
the DOJ budget accounts, the CR is not mentioned, unless it provided amounts that were different
from those provided for FY2008.
In addition, Congress provided DOJ with an additional $449.0 million in FY2008 funding as part
of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-152). This FY2008 supplemental funding
has not been incorporated into Table 6. Instead, that funding is broken out separately in Table 7.
Table 7. FY2008 Supplemental Funding for the Department of Justice
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
House- Senate-Enacted
Accounts Request Passed Passed June 26,
May 15 May 22 2008
General Administration 4.0 4.0 4.0
Office of the Inspector General 4.0 4.0 4.0
Legal Activities 24.0 25.3 75.3 35.3
General Legal Activities 4.1 1.7 1.7 1.7
U.S. Attorneys 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
U.S. Marshals Service 14.9 18.6 68.6 28.6
Federal Bureau of Investigation 140.2 174.8 247.6 188.7
Counterterrorism 101.1 92.2 165.0 106.1
FY2009 Advanced Appropriation 39.1 82.6 82.6 82.6
Drug Enforcement Administration 8.5 12.2 22.7 29.9
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Federal Prison System 9.1 187.1 187.1 187.1
State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance 590.0
Total: FY2008 DOJ Supplemental 185.8 407.3 1,130.6 449.0






Sources: For House amounts, see Congressional Record, Daily Edition, vol. 154 (May 15, 2008), p. H4012. For
Senate amounts, see Congressional Record, Daily Edition, vol. 154 (May 19, 2008), p. S4302. For enacted amounts,
see the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
The General Administration account provides funds for salaries and expenses for the Attorney
General’s office, the Inspector General’s office, as well as other programs designed to ensure that
the collaborative efforts of DOJ agencies are coordinated to help fight crime as efficiently as
possible. The General Administration budget request was $1.952 billion for FY2009. This amount
was $157.3 million more than the enacted FY2008 appropriation of almost $1.795 billion, an
increase of 8.8%. The House committee-approved draft bill would have provided $2.014 billion
for General Administration, 12.2% more than the FY2008 enacted level and 3.2% more than the
FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $1.928 billion for General
Administration, 7.4% more than the FY2008 level and 1.2% less than the FY2009 request.
Also, in Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252), Congress provided the Office of
the Inspector General (OIG) with an additional $4.0 million. Described below are several General
Administration subaccounts, such as the OIG.
For General Administration, the FY2009 budget request included $321.3 million dollars, an
increase of $63.7 million over the $257.6 million appropriation for FY2008 (an increase of
24.7%). Examples of programs funded under this subaccount include the Joint Automated
Booking System and the Automated Biometric Identification System. The latter is designed to
integrate fingerprint identification systems maintained by DOJ and Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). Under this subaccount, DOJ also continues to enhance its counterterrorism and
intelligence capabilities through the Law Enforcement Wireless Communications program
(LEWC, formerly known as Narrowband Communications), through which nationwide integrated
wireless networks are being developed and implemented to support the federal law enforcement
and homeland security missions of DOJ. In addition, funding for the Justice Information Sharing
Technology (JIST) program provides for investments in information technology to further support
the Department’s strategic goals.
The House draft bill would have provided $384.7 million, 49.3% more than FY2008 level and
19.7% more than the President’s request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $292.7
million, 13.6% more than FY2008 enacted level, but 8.9% less than the President’s request.
ARA includes the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) and the Office of the Pardon
Attorney (OPA). The Attorney General is responsible for the review and adjudication of
immigration cases in coordination with the DHS’s efforts to secure the nation’s borders. The
EOIR handles these matters. The OPA receives and reviews petitions for executive clemency. For
FY2008, Congress appropriated $240.6 million for ARA. The President’s budget request included
$259.8 million for ARA funding in FY2009. The requested amount exceeded the FY2008 funding
level by $19.1 million, representing an increase of 8.0%. The House draft bill would have






provided $264.8 million, 10% more than the FY2008 enacted level and 1.9% more than the
President’s request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided the same amount as the House
draft bill.
The OFDT provides overall management and oversight for federal detention services relating to
federal prisoners in non-federal institutions or otherwise in the custody of the U.S. Marshals
Service. The FY2009 budget request for OFDT was almost $1.295 billion. This amount was 5.7%
more than the FY2008 appropriation of almost $1.226 billion. The House draft bill would have
provided $1.289 billion for OFDT, 5.1% more than FY2008 enacted level and 0.5% less than the
President’s request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided the same amount as the
President’s request.
The CR (P.L. 110-329) funded the Detention Trustee through March 6, 2009, at a rate equal to the
amount that would have been available if Congress had appropriated $1.246 billion in full-year
funding, or until a full-year appropriation is enacted.
The OIG is responsible for detecting and deterring waste, fraud, and abuse involving DOJ
programs and personnel; promoting economy and efficiency in DOJ operations; and investigating
allegations of departmental misconduct. The President’s FY2009 budget request included nearly
$75.7 million for the OIG. This amount was $5.1 million greater than the amount appropriated by
Congress for FY2008 and would have represented a 7.2% increase in funding for FY2009. Both
the House draft and Senate-reported bills would have provided the same amount as the
President’s FY2009 request.
As noted above, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) included an additional
$4.0 million for the OIG.
The U.S. Parole Commission adjudicates parole requests for prisoners who are serving felony
sentences under federal and District of Columbia code violations. For FY2009, the President’s
budget request for the Parole Commission was just under $12.6 million, or a 9.7% increase as
compared to the FY2008 appropriation of almost $11.5 million. Both the House committee-
approved draft bill and the Senate-reported bill would have provided the same amount as in the
President’s FY2009 request.
The Legal Activities account includes several subaccounts: general legal activities, U.S.
Attorneys, U.S. Marshals Service, and other legal activities. For FY2009, the President’s budget
request for legal activities included almost $3.830 billion, an increase of 6.9% and nearly $245.7
million more than the FY2008 enacted funding level of $3.584 billion for these activities. The
House committee-approved draft bill would have provided almost $3.842 billion for legal
activities, 7.2% more than the FY2008 enacted level and 0.3% more than the President’s request.






The Senate-reported bill would have provided almost $3.865 billion, 7.8% more than the FY2008
enacted level and 0.9% more than the President’s request.
In the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252), Congress provided an additional
$35.3 million in FY2008 funding for certain Legal Activities program accounts, including
General Legal Activities, U.S. Attorneys, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
The CR (P.L. 110-329) funded the Legal Activities account through March 6, 2009, as if Congress
had appropriated $3.390 billion in full-year funding for those activities, or until a full-year
FY2009 appropriation is enacted. The CR also specified that an amount corresponding to $1.090
billion of the $3.390 billion in full-year funding was to be transferred to the Office of Personnel
Management’s salaries and expenses account for costs associated with the federal observer
program provided under Section 8 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. §1973f).
The General Legal Activities account funds the Solicitor General’s supervision of the
department’s conduct in proceedings before the Supreme Court. It also funds several
departmental divisions (tax, criminal, civil, environment and natural resources, legal counsel,
civil rights, and antitrust). The FY2009 budget request included $804.0 million for general legal
activities, $58.5 million more than the FY2008 enacted appropriation, or a proposed 7.8%
increase in funding. The House draft and Senate-reported bills would have included the same
level of funding as the President’s FY2009 budget request. In addition, as part of the
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252), Congress provided an additional $1.7
million for the General Legal Activities account.
The U.S. Attorneys enforce federal laws through prosecution of criminal cases and represent the
federal government in civil actions in all of the 94 federal judicial districts. For FY2009, the
President’s budget request would have provided $1.831 billion for the U.S. Attorneys Office, a
4.4% increase over the prior year. For FY2008, the U.S. Attorneys’ appropriated budget was
almost $1.755 billion. The House draft bill would have included $1.836 billion for the U.S.
Attorneys Office, 4.6% more than enacted FY2008 appropriations, and 0.3% more than the
President’s FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill would have included the same level of
funding as requested by the President for FY2009.
In addition, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) included an additional
$5.0 million for the Office of the U.S. Attorneys.
The USMS is responsible for the protection of the federal judicial process, including protecting
judges, attorneys, witnesses, and jurors. In addition, USMS provides physical security in
courthouses, safeguards witnesses, transports prisoners from court proceedings, apprehends
fugitives, executes warrants and court orders, and seizes forfeited property. For FY2008, the
appropriation for the USMS was $866.5 million. The President’s request for FY2009 proposed
USMS funding of $933.1 million, an increase of $66.6 million, or 7.7% over the FY2008 enacted
level. The House draft bill would have provided $940.3 million for USMS, 8.5% more than






FY2008 enacted levels and 0.8% more than the President’s budget request. The Senate-reported
bill would have provided $968.1 million, 11.7% more than FY2008 enacted funding and 3.8%
more than the President’s budget request.
The Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) included an additional $28.6 million
for the USMS.
For other legal activities—the Community Relations Service, the U.S. Trustee Fund (which is
responsible for maintaining the integrity of the U.S. bankruptcy system by, among other things,
prosecuting criminal bankruptcy violations), and the Asset Forfeiture program—the President’s
FY2009 budget request included $261.2 million. This amount reflected an increase in funding of
$44.1 million, or a 20.3% increase over the FY2008 enacted level of $217.1 million. The House
draft and Senate-reported bills would have provided the same funding level as requested in the
FY2009 President’s budget.
The NSD coordinates DOJ’s national security and terrorism missions through law enforcement
investigations and prosecutions. The NSD was established in DOJ in response to the
recommendations of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States
Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD Commission), and authorized by Congress on
March 9, 2006, in the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-
177). Under the NSD, the DOJ resources of the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review and the
Criminal Division’s Counterterrorism and Counterespionage Sections were consolidated to
coordinate all intelligence-related resources and ensure that criminal intelligence information is
shared, as appropriate.
For FY2009, the President’s budget request proposed NSD funding of $83.8 million. In FY2008,
Congress appropriated nearly $73.4 million for NSD. The proposed funding level for FY2009
reflected a 14.2% increase over the FY2008 enacted appropriation. The House committee-
approved draft and Senate-reported bills would have provided the same funding level as
requested in the President’s FY2009 budget.
The Interagency Law Enforcement account reimburses departmental agencies for their
participation in the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) program.
Organized into nine regional task forces, this program combines the expertise of federal agencies
with the efforts of state and local law enforcement to disrupt and dismantle major narcotics-
trafficking and money-laundering organizations. From DOJ, the federal agencies that participate
in OCDETF are the Drug Enforcement Administration; the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; the U.S. Marshals Service; the Tax and
Criminal Divisions of DOJ; and the U.S. Attorneys. From DHS, the U.S. Bureau of Immigration
and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard participate in OCDETF. In addition, from
the Department of the Treasury, the Internal Revenue Service and Treasury Office of Enforcement






also participate. State and local law enforcement agencies participate in approximately 90% of all 43
OCDETF investigations.
For FY2009, the President’s request would have provided almost $531.6 million for OCDETF.
The proposed FY2009 funding level would have exceeded the FY2008 OCDETF enacted funding
level of $497.9 million by 6.8%. The House draft bill would have provided $521.9 million, 4.8%
more than the FY2008 enacted level, but 1.8% less than the President’s request. The Senate-
reported bill would have provided $511.7 million, 2.8% more than the FY2008 enacted level, but

3.7% less than the President’s request.


The FBI is the lead federal investigative agency charged with defending the country against
foreign terrorist and intelligence threats; enforcing federal laws; and providing leadership and
criminal justice services to federal, state, municipal, tribal, and territorial law enforcement
agencies and partners. Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the FBI has reorganized and
reprioritized to focus more sharply on preventing terrorism and related criminal activities.
For FY2009, the President’s request would have provided $7.108 billion for the FBI, including
$2.726 billion for counterterrorism investigations, foreign counterintelligence, and other national
security activities, as well as construction funding of nearly $43.0 million. The enacted FY2008
FBI budget included $6.658 billion, of which $2.309 billion was provided for national security
activities, and $164.2 million was provided for construction. Taken as a whole, the FY2009
budget request would have exceeded the FBI’s FY2008 funding level by $450.4 million, an
overall funding increase of 6.8%.
The House committee-approved draft bill would have provided FY2009 FBI funding at the same
levels as the President’s budget request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $7.270
billion for the FBI, 9.2% more than the FY2008 funding level and 2.3% more than the President’s
request and the House amount.
In the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252), Congress provided the FBI with an
additional $188.7 million for counterterrorism purposes, of which $106.1 million was a
supplemental appropriation for FY2008 and $82.6 million was an advanced FY2009
appropriation to ensure operational continuity in the event that the FY2009 appropriations were
not enacted by the end of FY2008.
The CR (P.L. 110-329) funded the FBI at its FY2008 level of funding through March 6, 2009, and
stipulated further that $144.0 million in FY2008 emergency supplemental funding that Congress
appropriated for the FBI would be regarded as part of that calculation. As a result, the FBI would
be funded at a rate that would be equal to a full-year appropriation of $6.802 billion.
43
U.S. Department of Justice, Interagency Law Enforcement, FY2009 Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement
Congressional Submission, February 2008, p. 9.






The DEA is the lead federal agency tasked with reducing the illicit supply and abuse of dangerous
narcotics and drugs through drug interdiction and seizures of illicit revenues and assets from drug
trafficking organizations. According to DEA, the agency’s efforts to reduce the drug supply have 44
contributed to a 23% drop in national drug use over the past five years. By 2009, one of DEA’s
goals is to recover $3.0 billion in illegal proceeds annually from international drug trafficking
networks operating in the United States. In testimony delivered before a congressional committee
on April 19, 2007, DEA noted that they continue to face evolving challenges in limiting the
supply of illicit drugs such as the illicit use of pharmaceutical drugs available through the
Internet; enforcement along the Southwest border with Mexico where DEA estimates that 85% of 45
illicit drugs are smuggled into the United States.
For FY2009, the President’s budget requested almost $1.937 billion in funding for DEA. This
amount would have exceeded the enacted FY2008 funding level of $1.858 billion by $79.0
million and would have reflected a 4.3% funding increase. The House committee-approved draft
bill would have provided $1.939 billion, 4.4% above the FY2008 enacted level and 0.1% over the
FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $1.954 billion, 5.2% above the
FY2008 enacted level and 0.9% over the FY2009 request.
As part of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252), DEA received an additional
$29.9 million.
The ATF enforces federal criminal law related to the manufacture, importation, and distribution of
alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. ATF works both independently and through
partnerships with industry groups, international, state and local governments, and other federal
agencies to investigate and reduce crime involving firearms and explosives, acts of arson, and
illegal trafficking of alcohol and tobacco products.
For FY2009, the President’s request included nearly $1.028 billion for ATF. The President’s
request would have provided a funding increase of $20.2 million, or 2% more than FY2008
enacted level. The House committee-approved draft bill would have provided $1.054 billion,
4.6% above the FY2008 enacted level and 2.6% over the FY2009 request. The Senate-reported
bill would have provided $1.043 billion, 3.5% above the FY2008 enacted level and 1.5% over the
FY2009 request.
As part of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252), ATF received a
supplemental appropriation of $4.0 million.
44
Statement of Karen Tandy, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Agency, Hearing before the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Drug Threats and Enforcement
Challenges, April 19, 2007.
45 Ibid.






The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) maintains federal penal institutions nationwide and contracts with
state, local, and private facilities for additional detention space. BOP projects that in 2008 there
will be 207,020 inmates in the federal prison system population; the bureau further estimates that 46
this population will grow to approximately 213,220 by the end of 2009. Of the total number of
federal inmates, nearly 167,000 are in facilities operated by BOP, while the remaining 17% are in
contract care at privately operated secure facilities, residential reentry centers, or serving a
sentence of home confinement. BOP estimates that its facilities were operating at 39% above
capacity as of January 29, 2008, and they estimate that by 2009 the facilities will be operating at 47

42% above capacity.


The President’s FY2009 budget request proposed BOP funding of almost $5.534 billion, of which
$95.8 million would have been provided for the acquisition of sites and construction of facilities.
This amount would have exceeded total enacted FY2008 appropriations of $5.426 billion by over
$108.4 million, reflecting a 2% increase. The House committee-approved bill included $5.734
billion for the BOP, a 5.7% increase over the FY2008 enacted level and a 3.6% increase over the
FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill included $5.974 billion for BOP, a 10.1% increase over
the FY2008 enacted level and an 8% increase over the FY2009 request.
The Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) included an additional $187.1 million
for the BOP. In addition, the CR (P.L. 110-329) funded the Federal Prison System’s salaries and
expenses account through March 6, 2009, at a rate that would have been equal to a full-year
appropriation of $5.397 billion.
The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) was created to administer programs created
under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994 and subsequent legislation. These
programs provide financial and technical assistance to communities around the country to
facilitate the creation of programs, policies, and practices designed to improve criminal justice
responses related to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.
The President’s FY2009 budget request would have provided $280.0 million for OVW, a
reduction of $120.0 million or a 30% decrease in funding compared to FY2008 funding of $400.0
million. Under the President’s FY2009 proposal, OVW’s current formula and discretionary grant
programs would have been consolidated into a single grant program, the Prevention and
Prosecution of Violence Against Women and Related Victim Services Program. Grants under the
proposed consolidated program would have been awarded on a competitive basis to state, local,
and tribal governments. Funding would have supported efforts to develop and implement
effective, coordinated prevention and prosecution of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual
assault and stalking, and support related victims services. According to the President’s FY2009
proposal, the consolidated grant awards would have been “designed to forge state, local and tribal
46
U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, FY2009 Congressional Budget Submission, p. 2.
47 Ibid., pp. 2-3.






partnerships among police, prosecutors, the judiciary, victim advocates, health care providers,
faith leaders, and others to help provide victims with protection and needed services, while 48
enabling communities to hold offenders accountable.”
Both the House committee-approved draft bill and the Senate-reported bill rejected the
Administration’s consolidation proposal and would have maintained OVW’s current program
structure. The House draft bill would have provided OVW with $435.0 million, an increase of
8.8% over the FY2008 enacted level and 55.4% over the FY2009 request. The Senate-reported
bill would have provided $415.0 million, an increase of 3.8% over the FY2008 enacted level and

48.2% over the FY2009 request.


The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) manages and coordinates the National Institute of Justice,
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of
Victims of Crimes, Bureau of Justice Assistance, and related grant programs. For OJP, the
Administration’s FY2009 budget request included $792.7 million, or nearly $1.489 billion less
than the FY2008 appropriation of $2.282 billion. The House committee-approved draft bill would
have included $2.694 billion, an increase of 18.1% over the FY2008 enacted level and an increase
of 239.8% over the FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill would have included $2.721 billion,
an increase of 19.2% over the FY2008 enacted level and an increase of 243.2% over the FY2009
request.
The Administration’s FY2009 request included $134.6 million for this account, or 31.4% less
than what was appropriated in FY2008. The FY2009 request included funding for the following
programs:
• $34.7 million for National Institute of Justice (NIJ);
• $53.0 million for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS);
• $34.2 million for the Regional Information Sharing System (RISS); and
• $12.7 million for support services and administrative expenses for the Office of
Victims of Crime.
By comparison, the enacted FY2008 appropriation for Justice Assistance was $196.2 million. The
FY2008 appropriations for some of those programs included the following:
• $37.0 million for NIJ;
• $34.8 million for BJS;
• $40.0 million for RISS;
48
U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Budget for Fiscal Year 2009, Appendix,
p. 728.






• $50.0 million for missing children programs; and
• $11.3 million to support state and local law enforcement agencies in the
prevention, investigation and prosecution of Internet, high-tech and economic 49
crimes.
The House draft bill would have provided $95.0 million for the Justice Assistance account, 51.6% 50
less than the FY2008 enacted level and 29.4% less than the FY2009 request. The Senate-
reported bill would have provided $240.0 million for the justice assistance account, 22.3% more
than the FY2008 enacted level and 78.2% more than the FY2009 request.
The Administration requested $404.0 million for the State and Local Law Enforcement
Assistance account for FY2009. In addition, the Administration proposed collapsing 16 State and
Local Law Enforcement Assistance grant programs, 14 COPS grant programs (described below),
along with the Weed and Seed program (also described below), into three competitive grant
programs. Under this proposal, the FY2009 request included:
• $200.0 million for a Violent Crime Reduction Partnership Initiative to assist
communities experiencing high rates of violent crime—with an emphasis on
reducing drug trafficking and gang activity—by providing resources for forming
and participating in multi-jurisdictional task forces that would include members
of federal, state, and local law enforcement;
• $200.0 million for a Byrne Public Safety and Protection Program to assist and
allow state, municipal, local, tribal, and territorial governments with developing
programs that address the particular needs of their jurisdiction; and
• $4.0 million for community policing training and technical assistance for state,
municipal, local, tribal and territorial governments and other public and private
entities to advance community policing, expand cooperation between law
enforcement agencies and community members, and enhance public safety.
By comparison, the FY2009 budget request of $404.0 million for the State and Local Law 51
Enforcement Assistance grants program was $504.1 million less than the $908.1 million
Congress appropriated for this program for FY2008.
49
Congressional Record, Daily Edition, vol. 153 (December 17, 2007), p. H15800.
50 The House committee-approved draft bill included funding for several programs that received appropriations for
FY2008 under the Justice Assistance account under different accounts for FY2009. For example, the House-
recommended bill included $63.0 million for missing children program under the Juvenile Justice Programs account,
$18.0 million for grants to support state and local law enforcement agencies in the prevention, investigation and
prosecution of Internet, high-tech and economic crimes under the State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance
account, and $45.0 million for RISS under the Community Oriented Policing Services account.
51 Excluding the $100.0 million in emergency funding that Congress appropriated for security at the Presidential
Nominating Conventions under this program.






The House draft bill would have included $1.277 billion for the State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance account, 40.6% more than the FY2008 enacted level and 216.1% more
than the FY2009 request. The Senate-reported bill would have included $1.387 billion for this
account, 52.7% more than the FY2008 enacted level and 243.3% more than the FY2009 request.
The Weed and Seed program is designed to provide grants to help communities build stronger,
safer neighborhoods by implementing local-level approaches to solve and prevent crimes. The
program provides assistance for community-based strategies of “weeding and seeding” activities
based on the premise that leaders from neighborhood and community organizations, including
faith-based organizations, law enforcement and private enterprise, must be involved in leveraging
resources to solve community problems at the local level. Site funding generally provides
resources for “weeding” activities, which include joint law enforcement operations and
community policing, and “seeding” activities, which range from prevention activities, including
physically improving the neighborhood and economic development.
The enacted FY2008 level of funding for the Weed and Seed program was $32.1 million. The
Administration did not request any funding for the Weed and Seed program for FY2009. Instead,
the Administration’s grant consolidation proposal would have incorporated the Weed and Seed
program into the proposed Byrne Public Safety and Protection program (described above). The
House committee-approved draft bill would have included $15.0 million for the Weed and Seed 52
program, 53.3% less than the FY2008 enacted level. The Senate-reported bill would have
included $25.0 million for Weed and Seed, 22.1% less than the FY2008 enacted level.
For FY2009, the Administration’s budget request did not include specific funding for a number of
COPS programs and initiatives. Instead, the Administration proposed consolidating COPS grant
programs under the proposed $4.0 million “competitive” community policing training and
technical assistance program (described above). By comparison, for FY2008 Congress enacted
$587.2 million in appropriations for COPS programs. For FY2009, the House draft bill would
have included $627.0 million for COPS, 6.8% more than the FY2008 enacted level. The Senate-
reported bill would have included $600.0 million for COPS, 2.2% more than the FY2008 enacted
level.
The Administration FY2009 budget included $185.0 million for Juvenile Justice programs in
FY2009, or 51.8% less than what was appropriated in FY2008. The Administration’s grant
consolidation proposal would have consolidated the seven existing juvenile justice programs into
a single competitive Child Safety and Juvenile Justice grant program that would have been
awarded to state and local governments. According to the Administration, the proposed grant
52
The House Committee-approve draft bill included funding for the Weed and Seed program under the Community
Oriented Policing Services account instead of appropriating funding for the program under its own account.






program would have allowed state and local governments to develop juvenile justice or child
safety programs that addressed local needs, including reducing incidents of child exploitation and
abuse, improving juvenile justice outcomes, and addressing school safety needs.
Both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees rejected the Administration’s
consolidation proposal and approved funding along the lines of the FY2008 juvenile justice
program account and subaccount structure. The House draft bill would have provided $431.0
million for Juvenile Justice Programs, 12.4% more than the FY2008 enacted level and 133%
more than the FY2009 request. The Senate-passed bill would have included $400.0 million, 4.3%
more than the FY2008 enacted level and 116.2% more than the FY2009 request.
The Public Safety Officers’ Benefits (PSOB) program provides three different types of benefits to
public safety officers or their survivors: death, disability, and education. The PSOB program is
intended to assist in the recruitment and retention of law enforcement officers, firefighters, and
first responders and to offer peace of mind to men and women who choose careers in public 53
safety. For FY2008, Congress appropriated $74.8 million for the PSOB program. For FY2009,
the Administration requested $69.1 million for the PSOB program, which was 7.6% less than
what was appropriated for FY2008. Both the House draft bill and Senate-reported bill would have
provided the same amount as requested by the Administration.
The House committee-approved draft bill included an account that would have provided $195.0
million for salaries and expenses of OJP, OVW, and COPS. Of the $195.0 million, up to $14.0
million would have been provided for OVW, up to $130.0 million for OJP, and up to $30.0
million for COPS. In addition, up to $21.0 million would have been provided for the Office of
Audit, Assessment, and Management (OAAM) under OJP.

The Administration’s FY2009 budget included $24.474 billion for science agencies, or about
$1.094 billion over the enacted FY2008 amount, or a 4.7% increase, as shown in Table 8. The
FY2009 request included $396.8 million for the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the
National Nanotechnology Initiative. The House Appropriations Committee-approved draft bill
included $24.628 billion for science agencies, a proposed 5.3% increase over the FY2008 enacted
level. The Senate-reported bill included $24.673 billion for science agencies, a proposed 5.5%
increase over the FY2008 enacted level.
53
U.S. Department of Justice, FY2009 Budget and Performance Summary, Part III: Department of Justice Request
Information by Appropriation, Office of Justice Programs (OJP) and Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS),
available online at http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/2009summary/.






In addition, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) provided NASA with
$62.5 million and NSF with $62.5 million in additional FY2008 funding. This supplemental
funding has not been incorporated into the Table 8, Table 9, or Table 10, however.
The Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L.
110-329; H.R. 2638) included a continuing resolution that funds science agencies at FY2008
levels through March 6, 2009, or until a full-year appropriations bill is enacted. For recovery from
recent hurricanes and other natural disasters, P.L. 110-329 also included $30.0 million for NASA.
Additional language in the act allows NASA to maintain its current budget structure.
Table 8. Funding for Science Agencies
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2008 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Accounts Enacted Request Draft Bill Reported Final
Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) 5.2 5.3 5.3 5.2
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) 17,309.4 17,614.2 17,769.0 17,814.0
National Science Foundation (NSF) 6,065.0 6,854.1 6,854.1 6,854.1
Total: Science Agencies 23,379.6 24,473.6 24,628.4 24,673.3
Sources: House Appropriations Committee Print on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764/P.L. 110-
161); Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009—Appendix; House Appropriations Committee-
approved draft bill and report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is one of two offices in the Executive 55
Office of the President (EOP) funded in the CJS appropriations bill. Established in 1976 by The 56
National Science and Technology Policy and Organization Act, OSTP provides advice within
the EOP on scientific and technical aspects of policy issues, assists in the development of the
federal R&D budget, coordinates and evaluates federal R&D programs, and consults with non-
federal entities on science and technology matters.
For FY2009, the President’s budget requested $5.3 million for OSTP, $119,000 more than the
FY2008 enacted funding level. The FY2008 explanatory statement directed that funding
appropriated to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for costs related to the Science and
Technology Policy Institute (STPI), OSTP’s federally funded research and development center, be
transferred to OSTP. These funds are not reflected in the OSTP budget request. Instead, funding
54
This section was prepared by Dana Shea, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
55 The other is the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
56 P.L. 94-282, codified at 42 U.S.C. 6611-18.






for STPI continues to be requested through the NSF. Policy issues related to OSTP include its
oversight and coordination of interagency R&D activities, such as the National Nanotechnology
Initiative and the American Competitiveness Initiative, its role in maintaining the nation’s
international scientific stature, and its leadership in federal support of science and mathematics
education.
The House committee recommended the requested amount. The Senate committee recommended
$5.2 million for OSTP, $119,000 less than the President’s request. The Senate committee report
directed OSTP to convene a series of federal meetings over the next six months to coordinate the
research and development of ground-based radar. The Senate committee report also required
OSTP to provide a report to the committee containing the results of these meetings and a plan for
future year budget requests.

NASA was created by the 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act (P.L. 85-568) to conduct
civilian space and aeronautics activities. The agency is managed from headquarters in
Washington, DC. It has nine major field centers around the country, plus the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, which is operated under contract by the California Institute of Technology.
NASA requested $17.614 billion for FY2009, a 1.8% increase over its FY2008 appropriation.
The House Committee recommended $17.769 billion. The Senate Committee recommended
$17.814 billion. See Table 9 for a breakdown by appropriations account. As directed by
Congress, there are now seven appropriations accounts rather than the previous three. In addition,
a change in how NASA accounts for overhead expenses complicates comparisons between
FY2009 and previous years. In the new system, overhead costs formerly included in program
budgets are instead budgeted in the Cross-Agency Support account. This change reduces the
stated cost of most programs without affecting actual program content. As a result, amounts
expressed in the new system are not directly comparable with amounts expressed in the previous
system. In Table 9 and in the discussion of specific NASA programs that follows, all FY2008
amounts have been adjusted for the accounting change to make them comparable with FY2009.
Budget priorities throughout NASA are being driven by the Vision for Space Exploration,
announced by President Bush in January 2004 and endorsed by Congress in the NASA
Authorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-155). The Vision includes returning the space shuttle to flight
status (already accomplished) then retiring it by 2010; completing the International Space Station
(ISS), but discontinuing U.S. use of it by 2017; returning humans to the moon by 2020; and then
sending humans to Mars and “worlds beyond.” The President did not propose significantly
increased funding for NASA to accomplish the Vision. Instead, most of the funding was to come
from redirecting funds from other NASA activities. Moreover, subsequent NASA funding overall
has been less than was projected at the time of the Vision announcement. The funding
requirements of the Vision thus constrain other NASA programs.
57
This section was prepared by Daniel Morgan, Analyst in Science and Technology Policy, Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.






Table 9. Funding for NASA
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2008 aFY2009 House Senate- FY2009
Accounts Enacted Request Draft Bill Reported Final
Science 4,706.2 4,441.5 4,518.0 4,522.9
Aeronautics 511.7 446.5 515.0 500.0
Exploration 3,143.1 3,500.5 3,505.7 3,530.5
Space Operations 5,526.2 5,774.7 5,764.7 5,774.7
Education 146.8 115.6 187.2 130.0
Cross-Agency Support 3,242.9 3,299.9 3,244.8 3,320.4
Inspector General 32.6 35.5 33.6 35.5
Total: NASA 17,309.4 17,614.2 17,769.0 17,814.0
Sources: NASA Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Estimates, available at http://www.nasa.gov/news/budget/; House
Appropriations Committee-approved draft bill and report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. FY2008 amounts have been adjusted for the accounting change (see text) to make them comparable with
FY2009.
The requested $4.442 billion for Science in FY2009 was a 6% decrease. Within this total,
increases for Earth Science and Planetary Science would be offset by decreases for Heliophysics
and Astrophysics. The request for Earth Science would fund two new missions recommended by
the National Research Council, while the request for Planetary Science would initiate a new
program in lunar robotic science. The decrease for Heliophysics reflected a transfer of the Deep
Space and Near Earth Networks to the Space Operations account and corresponded to almost the
entire decrease in the Science account overall. In Astrophysics, two programs have been of
particular congressional interest: the NASA/Department of Energy Joint Dark Energy Mission
(JDEM) and the Space Interferometer mission (SIM). The request included funds for JDEM, as 58
directed by Congress in the FY2008 explanatory statement, but not for SIM. NASA explained
that a new exoplanet exploration initiative could include a smaller, medium-class version of SIM,
as recommended by the FY2008 Senate report (S.Rept. 110-124). The House committee
recommended $4.518 billion, including additions to the request to cover cost growth in the Glory,
Mars Science Laboratory, and James Webb Space Telescope missions, as well as $50.0 million
additional for Earth Science decadal survey missions and $20.0 million to initiate development of
a thermal infrared sensor (TIRS) for the Landsat Data Continuity Mission. The Senate committee
recommended $4.523 billion, including similar additions to cover cost growth and fund decadal
survey missions, but only “available funds” for TIRS.
The FY2009 request for Aeronautics was $447.0 million, a 13% decrease. According to NASA,
its aeronautics research portfolio is “closely aligned” with the national aeronautics R&D plan
issued by the White House in December 2007 and addresses 47 of the 51 foundational technology
58
Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H15820 and H15923.






challenges identified by the National Research Council in June 2006.59 The House committee
recommended $515.0 million, with the additional funds to be devoted to R&D on “green” aircraft
and support of the Next Generation Air Transportation System. The Senate committee
recommended $500.0 million.
The requested $3.501 billion for Exploration in FY2009 was an 11% increase. Within this
amount, Constellation Systems would receive $3.048 billion, a 23% increase, while Advanced
Capabilities would receive $452.0 million, a 33% decrease. Constellation Systems is responsible
for development of the Orion crew vehicle and Ares I launch vehicle, successors to the space
shuttle. The proposed 23% increase was consistent with NASA’s previous projections as the
program moves toward a planned initial operating capability for Orion and Ares I (i.e., a first
crewed flight) in March 2015. NASA describes the current level of budget reserves within
Constellation Systems as “minimal” and is seeking to compensate for it through “rigorous risk 60
management.” The FY2009 request for Constellation Systems also restored full funding for
Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS), which seeks to help private-sector
companies develop space transportation systems that could service the ISS after the shuttle is
retired. The House committee recommended $3.506 billion, including an increase of $25.0
million for research on the space station and a decrease of $20.0 million for COTS. The Senate
committee recommended $3.530 billion, including an increase of $30.0 million to accelerate
development of the Ares V heavy lift rocket.
The FY2009 request for Space Operations, which funds the space shuttle, the ISS, and the Space
and Flight Support program, was $5.775 billion. A requested decrease of $285.0 million for the
space shuttle was largely offset by a requested increase of $247.0 million for the ISS. Both
changes were consistent with NASA’s previous projections: they reflected the trend toward the
shuttle program’s completion in 2010 and the planned construction schedule of the ISS. A
requested increase for Space and Flight Support resulted mostly from transferring the Deep Space
and Near Earth Networks from the Science account. The gap between the end of shuttle flights in
2010 and the expected availability of Orion and Ares I in 2015 raises several issues. Some
analysts are concerned that placing a fixed termination date on the shuttle may create schedule
pressure similar to that identified as a contributing factor in the Columbia disaster. Some question
whether the United States should be dependent on Russia to launch U.S. astronauts to the ISS
during the gap period. A major concern is how NASA will retain its skilled workforce during the
transition from shuttle to Orion, especially if Orion’s schedule slips and the gap lengthens. The
House committee recommended $5.765 billion for Space Operations, including $10.0 million less
than the request for Space and Flight Support, and directed NASA to consider two final shuttle
logistics flights to the ISS, currently manifested as “contingency” flights, as baseline flights. A
House administrative provision would direct NASA to provide a report on costs for shuttle
retirement and transition activities for FY2006 through FY2015. The Senate committee
recommended the requested amount, $5.775 billion.
59
Executive Office of the President, National Science and Technology Council, National Plan for Aeronautics
Research and Development and Related Infrastructure, December 2007, at http://www.aeronautics.nasa.gov/releases/
aero_rd_plan_final_21_dec_2007.pdf; and National Research Council, Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics:
Foundation for the Future, 2006, at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11664.html.
60 Budget reserves are funds that have been allocated to a program but have not yet been assigned to a particular
component of the program. Instead they are held in reserve, in the expectation that as development proceeds, some
components will require additional resources to overcome unforeseen technical challenges.






The Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252) provided $62.5 million for NASA. In
addition, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act,
2009 (P.L. 110-329) provided $30.0 million in FY2008 supplemental funding to remain available
until expended for NASA’s recovery from recent hurricanes and other natural disasters. For
FY2009, additional language in P.L. 110-329 allows NASA to maintain its new seven-account
budget structure rather than reverting to the old structure of three accounts.

The NSF was created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (64 62
Stat.149).The NSF has the broad mission of supporting science and engineering in general and
funding basic research across many disciplines. The majority of the research supported by the
NSF is conducted at U.S. colleges and universities. In addition to helping to ensure the nation’s
supply of scientific and engineering personnel, the NSF promotes academic basic research and
science and engineering education across many disciplines. Other federal agencies, in contrast,
support mission-specific research. The NSF provides support for investigator-initiated, merit-
reviewed, competitively selected awards, state-of-the-art tools, and instrumentation and facilities.
Also, NSF provides almost 30% of the total federal support for science and mathematics
education. Support is provided to academic institutions, industrial laboratories, private research
firms, and major research facilities and centers. Although the NSF does not operate any
laboratories, it does support Antarctic research stations, selected oceanographic vessels, and
national research centers. In addition, the NSF supports university-industry relationships and U.S.
participation in international scientific ventures.
The FY2009 request for the National Science Foundation (NSF) was $6.854 billion, a 13% 63
increase ($789.1 million) over the enacted FY2008 level of $6.065 billion. (See Table 10).
President Bush’s American Competitiveness Initiative has proposed to double the NSF budget
over the next 10 years. The FY2009 was to be another installment toward that doubling. NSF
identified several strategies in the FY2009 budget request: maintain a portfolio with “powerful
momentum” across all disciplines; build a world-class science and engineering workforce;
perform effectively with the highest standards of accountability; and support potentially
transformative research. Transformative research is described as “cutting edge” and revolutionary,
and several reports have recommended that funds be allocated specifically for this type of
research. NSF contends that in the global environment of science and engineering, support for
transformative, high-risk, high-reward research is critical to U.S. competitiveness. These
strategies parallel some of the goals contained in the President’s request, and are designed to
promote research that will drive innovation and support the design and development of world-
class facilities, instrumentation, and infrastructure.
61
This section was prepared by Christine M. Matthews, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, Resources,
Science, and Industry Division.
62 P.L. 81-507 (64 Stat.149), 42 U.S.C. §1861.
63 The FY2008 estimate does not include a rescission of $33.0 million from prior year unobligated balances as required
by P.L. 110-161.






Included in the FY2009 request was $5.594 billion for Research and Related Activities (R&RA),
a 16.0% increase ($772.0 million) above the enacted FY2008 level of $4.822 billion. The R&RA
funds research projects, research facilities, and education and training activities. The scientific
and academic community have voiced concerns about the imbalance between support for the life
sciences and the physical sciences. Research is multidisciplinary and transformational in nature,
and very often, discoveries in the physical sciences lead to advances in other disciplines. The
America COMPETES ACT authorized increased federal research support in the physical
sciences, mathematics, and engineering. The FY2009 request provided a 20.2% increase for the
Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) directorate. The MPS portfolio supports investments
in fundamental research, facilities, and instruments, and provides approximately 44.0% of the
federal funding for basic research conducted at colleges and universities. The R&RA includes
Integrative Activities (IA) and is a source of funding for the acquisition and development of
research instrumentation at institutions. The FY2009 request provided $276.0 million for IA. IA
also funds Partnerships for Innovation, disaster research teams, the Science and Technology
Policy Institute, and the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR).
The FY2009 budget provided $113.5 million for three funding mechanisms in the EPSCoR
jurisdictions—research infrastructure improvement grants, co-funding, and outreach.
Approximately 67.0% of the funding for EPSCoR would be for a combination of new awards and
research infrastructure improvement grants. The balance of funding would be in support of co-
funding (31.7%) and outreach activities (1.3%).
Table 10. National Science Foundation
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2008 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Enacted Request Draft Bill Reported Final
Research & Related Activities
Biological Sciences 612.0 675.1
Computer & Inform. Sci. & Eng. 534.5 638.8
Engineering 636.9 759.3
Geosciences 752.7 848.7
Math and Physical Sciences 1,167.3 1,402.7
Social, Behav., & Econ. Sciences 215.1 233.5
Office of Cyberinfrastructure 185.3 220.1
Office of International Sci. & Eng. 41.3 47.4
U.S. Polar Programs 442.5 491.0
Integrative Activities 232.3 276.0
U.S. Arctic Research Commission 1.5 1.5
Subtotal Res. & Rel. Act 4,821.5 5,594.0 5,554.0a 5,594.0a
Ed. & Hum. Resr. 725.6 790.4 840.3 790.4
Major Res. Equip. & Facil. Constr. 220.7 147.5 147.5 152.0
Agency Ops. & Award Mgmt. 281.8 305.1 305.1 300.6
National Science Board 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Office of Inspector General 11.4 13.1 13.1 13.1






FY2008 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Enacted Request Draft Bill Reported Final
Total NSFb 6,065.0 6,854.1 6,854.0 6,854.1
Sources: NSF FY 2009 Budget Request to Congress, available at
http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2009/index.jsp#; House Appropriations Committee-approved draft bill and
report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. Specific allocations for each directorate or for individual programs and activities are not yet available.
b. The totals do not include carry overs or retirement accruals. Totals may not add due to rounding
The Office of Polar Programs (OPP) is funded in the R&RA. The FY2009 request for addressing
the challenges in polar research was $491.0 million. NSF continues in its leadership role in
planning U.S. participation in observance of the International Polar Year. The NSF also serves in
a leadership capacity for several international research partnerships in the Arctic and Antarctic.
Increases in OPP in FY2009 are directed at research programs for arctic and antarctic sciences—
glacial and sea ice, terrestrial and marine ecosystems, the ocean and the atmosphere, and biology
of life in the cold and dark. In FY2006, responsibility for funding the costs of three icebreakers
that support scientific research in the polar regions was transferred from the U.S. Coast Guard to
the NSF. While the NSF does not own the ships, it is responsible for the operation, maintenance,
and staffing of the vessels. Since 2004, back-up icebreaking support has been needed because of
maintenance problems with the polar icebreakers and with the heavy ice conditions in certain
polar regions. It has been determined that there is still a need for back-up icebreaking services,
and as a result, the FY2009 request included an additional $9.0 million for contracting of back-up
vessels.
The FY2009 request for the Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR) was $790.4
million, $64.8 million (8.9%) above the FY2008 estimate. The EHR portfolio is focused on,
among other things, increasing the technological literacy of all citizens, preparing the next
generation of science, engineering, and mathematics professionals, and closing the achievement
gap in all scientific fields. Support at the various educational levels in the FY2009 request was as
follows: research on learning in formal and informal settings (includes precollege), $226.5
million; undergraduate, $219.8 million; and graduate, $190.7 million. In addition, the EHR
supports a portfolio of programs directed at expanding the participation of underrepresented
groups and diverse institutions in the scientific and engineering enterprise. These programs
totaled approximately $82.6 million in the FY2009 request.
The Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) account was funded at
$147.5 million in the FY2009 request, a decrease of 33.2% from the FY2008 estimate. The
MREFC supports the acquisition and construction of major research facilities and equipment that
extend the boundaries of science, engineering, and technology. NSF required that in order for a
project to receive support, it must have “the potential to shift the paradigm in scientific
understanding and/or infrastructure technology.” The FY2009 request supported three ongoing
projects: Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory ($51.4 million),
Atacama Large Millimeter Array ($82.3 million), and the IceCube Neutrino Observatory ($11.3
million). The request also provided $2.5 million to support design activities for a new start—the
Advanced Technology Solar Telescope.
The NSF states that all projects seeking funding in the MREFC move through a “progressive
sequence of increasingly detailed development and assessment steps” in order to be considered






for construction support.64 The FY2009 budget request imposed tighter standards and
requirements for receiving funding in MREFC. Included in the more stringent procedures was the
implementation of a “no cost overrun” policy for major projects. The cost estimates for projects
developed at the preliminary design phase must include adequate contingencies. In the absence of
such contingencies, any cost increases would result in reduction in scope for the project. Three
projects that appeared in the FY2008 request (Alaskan Regional Research Vessel, Ocean
Observatories Initiative, and the National Ecological Observatory Network) have to undergo
revised baseline budgets and cost contingencies. These projects are still supported by NSF, and
will be considered for inclusion in the next budget cycle following submission of final design
reviews and risk management plans.
Improving proposal funding rates and increasing grant size and duration have been long-term
priorities for NSF. A report on NSF’s grant applications found that the merit-review process had 65
become increasingly strained, for both program managers and principal investigators. Program
managers have faced increased workloads in overseeing the review of grants, and principal
investigators have found their chances of obtaining grants reduced. During the period FY2000 to
FY2006, the number of grant applications increased by 47.0%. However, the funding rate for
research grant applications decreased from 30.0% in FY2000, 27.0% in FY2002, and 21.0% in
both FY2006 and FY2008 (even as the average award size increased). There has been concern in
the scientific and education community that the decline in funding rates for grants may have a
deleterious affect on academic research infrastructure. With the FY2009 budget request, NSF
anticipated increasing the funding rate for grants to 23.0%.
The Senate-passed FY2008 Iraq war supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 2642) would have
provided, among other things, an additional $150.0 million for R&RA in the NSF. The current
FY2008 appropriation for R&RA is $4.822 billion. Due primarily to rising fuel costs, the
academic research fleet is experiencing a reduction in its research capacity. Report language
stated that $10.0 million of the supplemental for R&RA was to be directed, specifically, to the
academic research fleet. The Senate bill also would have provided a $50.0 million supplemental
for the EHR. The current FY2008 appropriation is $725.6 million. The additional funding was to
be used to support the following science and mathematics programs: Robert Noyce Scholarship
program ($20.0 million); Graduate Research Fellowships ($24.0 million); Graduate Teaching
Fellowships ($5.0 million); and Federal Scholarship for Service ($1.0 million). The Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252; H.R. 2642) includes $22.5 million for NSF R&RA and
$40.0 million for EHR.
The House Committee approved draft bill would provide $6.854 billion for the NSF in FY2009,
$789.1 million above the FY2008 enacted and the same as the President’s request. The R&RA
would receive $5.554 billion, a $722.7 million increase above the FY2008 level and $49.9 million
below the request. Additional funding in the House bill includes $840.3 million for the EHR and
$147.5 million for MREFC. The Senate-reported bill would provide $6.854 billion for the NSF,
the same as the House bill and the request. R&RA would be funded at $5.594 billion, $40.0
64
National Science Foundation, 2008 Facility Plan, NSF08-24, February 2008, Arlington, VA, p. 40.
65 National Science Foundation, Impact of Proposal and Award Management Mechanisms, Final Report, NSF07-45,
August 1, 2007, Arlington, VA, 58 pp.






million above the House bill and the same as the President’s request. The Senate-reported bill
would fund the EHR and the MREFC at $790.4 million and $152.0 million, respectively.

For related agencies, the FY2009 request included $784.0 million, or nearly $24.8 million less
than the enacted FY2008 level (a 3.1% decrease). As shown in Table 11, the Legal Services
Corporation would have absorbed the bulk of this decrease, as the FY2009 request only included
$311.0 million for the corporation, a reduction of $39.5 million (an 11.3% decrease), as compared
to the corporation’s enacted FY2008 level of funding.
The Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L.
110-329; H.R. 2638) included an FY2009 continuing resolution that funds science agencies at
FY2008 levels through March 6, 2009, or until a full-year appropriations bill is enacted.
Earlier in the year, the House Appropriations Committee-approved bill includes $883.1 million
for related agencies, an increase of 9.2% over the FY2008 enacted level. The Senate-reported bill
includes $869.4 million for related agencies, an increase of 7.5% over the enacted FY2008 level.
Both the House and Senate bills include $390.0 million for the Legal Services Corporation, an
increase of 11.3% over the FY2008 enacted level.
Table 11. Funding for CJS Related Agencies
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2008 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Commission, Office, or Corporation Enacted Request Draft Bill Reported Final
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 8.5 8.8 8.8 8.8
Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission 329.3 341.9 350.4 341.9
International Trade Commission 68.4 73.6 75.1 75.0
Legal Services Corporation 350.5 311.0 390.0 390.0
Marine Mammal Commission 2.8 2.4 3.2 2.4
National Veterans Business Development
Corporation 1.4 3.2
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 44.1 46.3 48.3 46.3
State Justice Institute 3.8 a 4.1 5.0
Total: Related Agencies 808.8 784.0 883.1 869.4
Sources: House Appropriations Committee Print on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764/P.L. 110-

161); Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009—Appendix; House Appropriations Committee-


approved draft bill and report; and S. 3182 and S.Rept. 110-397.
Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. Under the terms of its enabling legislation, the State Justice Institute is authorized to present its budget
request directly to Congress. Although the Bush Administration has not requested any FY2009 funding for
SJI, the institute has requested $5.4 million.







Established by the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (the
commission)
• investigates allegations of citizens who may have been denied the right to vote
based on color, race, religion, or national origin;
• studies and gathers information on legal developments constituting a denial of
the equal protection of the laws;
• assesses federal laws and policies in the area of civil rights; and
• submits reports on its findings to the President and Congress when the
commission or the President deems it appropriate.
The political independence of the commission continued to be an issue. In report language, the
House Appropriations Committee expressed concern that 36 of the 51 State Advisory Committees 67
were inoperative because their authorizing charters had expired. The House committee directed
the commission to give priority to reconstituting the State Advisory Committees and to make
appointments that reflect a balance of viewpoints and a diversity in membership, especially in
terms of gender, disability, party affiliation, and civil rights experience with affected
communities. Further, the committee stated that no one should be denied an opportunity to serve
on a State Advisory Committee because of race, age, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national
origin, disability, or political persuasion. The adequacy of funding for the agency was also a
subject of debate, as appropriations for the commission have been less than $10.0 million for
more than 10 fiscal years.
For FY2009, the Bush Administration requested $8.8 million for the U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights, the same amount requested for FY2008 and $300,000 above the FY2008 enacted level of
$8.5 million for the commission. For FY2009, both the House Appropriations Committee-
approved draft bill and the Senate Appropriations Committee-reported bill would have provided
$8.8 million for the commission, a 4% increase over FY2008 appropriations for the agency.

The EEOC enforces laws banning employment discrimination based on race, color, national
origin, sex, age, or disability. In recent years, appropriators have been particularly concerned
about the agency’s implementation of a restructuring plan, beginning in 2005, that included the
National Contact Center (NCC), field structure and staff realignment, and restructuring of
headquarters operations. The EEOC Commissioners responded to the concerns by voting on
December 20, 2007, to transfer receipt of customer calls from the NCC’s contractor to in-house
“information intake representatives” in its 53 field offices. At the same time, they voted favorably
66
This section was written by Garrine P. Laney, Analyst in Social Legislation, Domestic Social Policy Division.
67 H.Rept. 110-240, p. 130.
68 This section was prepared by Abigail Rudman, Information Research Specialist, Knowledge Services Group, and
Linda Levine, Specialist in Labor Economics, Domestic Social Policy Division.






on a one-year contract for an “interactive voice response system,” the digital telephone
technology system that currently handles customer calls.
The President’s FY2009 budget requested $341.9 million for the EEOC, which is an increase of
$12.6 million from the FY2008 enacted level of $329.3 million. Some $7.6 million of the
increase would go toward hiring 175 full-time equivalent positions (FTEs), of which 66 would be 69
allocated to the in-house customer service team. The other 109 FTEs, including investigators
and attorneys, would work at field offices and headquarters to help reduce the pending inventory
of charges. The budget also included $26.0 million for payments to state and local entities with
which the agency has work-sharing agreements to address workplace discrimination within their
jurisdictions (i.e., Fair Employment Practices Agencies, FEPAs, and Tribal Employment Rights
Organizations, TEROs). This reflected a decrease of $3.1 million from the FY2008 appropriation
of $29.1 million.
The House committee-approved draft bill would have provided $350.4 million to the EEOC in
FY2009, $21.1 million more than in FY2008. This amount included $28.0 million for FEPAs and
TEROs. The House bill also would have provided $3.6 million for call processing personnel and
information technology to support ongoing efforts to transition from a contractor-operated to an
in-house call center. The committee expressed concern about the accuracy of workload
projections; it requested that the commission compare the projections with those published in the
midyear annual review. The committee also directed the EEOC to report within 60 days after
enactment on the backlog of charges and the agency’s restructuring efforts.
The Senate-reported bill would have funded the EEOC at $341.9 million, an increase of $12.6
million from FY2008. On the basis of findings of the General Accountability Office (GAO), the
committee expressed concern that the EEOC’s mandate to promote equal opportunity in the 70
workplace may be compromised if steps are not taken to address the growing workload. The
committee directed the EEOC to implement the GAO recommendations within 60 days after 71
enactment (e.g., identify best practices for prioritizing and investigating charges).

The ITC is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that advises the President and Congress on the
impact of U.S. foreign economic policies on U.S. industries and, along with the Import
Administration Unit of ITA, is charged with administering various U.S. trade remedy laws. Its six
commissioners are appointed by the President for nine-year terms. As a matter of policy, its
budget request is submitted to Congress by the President without revision. For FY2009, ITC
69
Relatedly, the budget request contains another $580,000 to fund an in-house telephone technology system, which the
EEOC plans to have fully operational by February 1, 2009.
70 U.S. General Accountability Office, Sharing Promising Practices and Fully Implementing Strategic Human Capital
Planning Can Improve Management of Growing Workload, GAO-08-589, June 23, 2008.
71 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill, 2009, report to accompany S. 3182, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., S.Rept. 110-397 (Washington: GPO,
2007), pp. 108-109.
72 This section was written by M. Angeles Villarreal, Analyst in International Trade and Finance, Foreign Affairs,
Defense, and Trade Division.






requested $73.6 million, a $5.2 million increase (7.6%) over the FY2008 funding level of $68.4
million, for existing mandated investigative activity and related operations; a mandatory pay
increase; and information technology projects. The House committee-approved draft bill would
have provided $75.1 million, 9.8% over the FY2008 enacted level and 2.0% over the FY2009
request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $75.0 million, 9.6% over the FY2008
enacted level and 1.9% over the FY2009 request.

The LSC is a private, non-profit, federally funded corporation that provides grants to local offices
that, in turn, provide legal assistance to low-income people in civil (non-criminal) cases. The LSC
has been controversial since its incorporation in the early 1970s and has been operating without
authorizing legislation since 1980. There have been ongoing debates over the adequacy of
funding for the agency and the extent to which certain types of activities are appropriate for
federally funded legal aid attorneys to undertake. In annual appropriations bills, Congress
traditionally has included legislative provisions restricting the activities of LSC-funded grantees,
such as prohibiting any lobbying activities or prohibiting representation in certain types of cases.
Current LSC funding remains below the LSC’s highest funding level of $400.0 million in 74
FY1994 and FY1995.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161) included $350.5 million for the LSC
for FY2008. This amount is $1.9 million above the FY2007 appropriation ($348.6 million) for the
LSC and $39.6 million above the Administration’s FY2008 budget request for the LSC. The
FY2008 appropriation for the LSC included $332.4 million for basic field programs and required
independent audits; $12.5 million for management and administration; $2.1 million for client self-
help and information technology; $3.0 million for the Office of the Inspector General; and $500
,000 for loan repayment assistance (for legal aid lawyers).
For FY2009, the Bush Administration requested $311.0 million for the LSC. The
Administration’s budget request included $290.1 million for basic field programs and required
independent audits; $12.8 million for management and administration; $5.0 million for client self-
help and information technology; and $3.0 million for the Office of the Inspector General.
For FY2009, the House Appropriations Committee approved $390.0 million for the LSC. The
House committee-approved draft bill provided 11% more than the FY2008 LSC appropriation
and 25% more than the FY2009 request for the LSC. The House bill included $367.0 million for
basic field programs and required independent audits; $16.0 million for management and
administration; $3.0 million for client self-help and information technology; $3.0 million for the
Office of the Inspector General; and $1.0 million for loan repayment assistance.
For FY2009, the Senate Appropriations Committee also approved $390.0 million for the LSC.
The Senate committee-reported bill provided 11% more than the FY2008 LSC appropriation and
73
This section was prepared by Carmen Solomon-Fears, Specialist in Social Policy, Domestic Social Policy Division.
74 For additional information on the LSC, see CRS Report RL34016, Legal Services Corporation: Background and
Funding, by Carmen Solomon-Fears.






25% more than the FY2009 request for the LSC. The Senate bill provided the same amount as the
House draft bill. The Senate bill, however, included $369.0 million for basic field programs and
required independent audits; $13.0 million for management and administration; $3.8 million for
client self-help and information technology; $3.2 million for the Office of the Inspector General;
and $1.0 million for loan repayment assistance.

The Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) and its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine
Mammals provide oversight and recommend actions on domestic and international topics to
advance policies and provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
The Administration proposed $2.4 million for FY2009 for necessary expenses of the Marine
Mammal Commission, a decrease of $420,000 (-14.9%) from the FY2008 appropriation of $2.82
million for this independent agency. The House Committee on Appropriations recommended $3.2
million, $380,000 (13.5%) more than the FY2008 enacted level and $800,000 (33.3%) more than
the FY2009 request. The Senate Committee on Appropriations concurred with the
Administration’s request, recommending $2.4 million (S.Rept. 110-397).

The VBC was established under the Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development
Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-50). The corporation’s mission is to foster entrepreneurship and business
opportunities for veterans, including service-disabled veterans. The VBC provides veterans with
access to capital and business services, entrepreneurial education, surety bonding, insurance and
prescription coverage, as well as a veterans business directory. Congress provided the corporation
with $1.5 million in funding for each year, FY2006 and FY2007. The enacted FY2008 VBC
appropriation is $1.4 million. The Administration’s FY2009 budget request includes no funding
for VBC; neither does the Senate-reported bill. The House draft bill, however, includes $3.2
million, an increase of 127% over the FY2008 enacted level.

USTR, located in the Executive Office of the President (EOP), is responsible for developing and
coordinating U.S. international trade and direct investment policies. The USTR is the President’s
chief negotiator for international trade agreements. In 2006 and 2007, the Bush Administration
concluded FTAs with Peru, Colombia, Oman, Panama, and South Korea. In 2006 and 2007,
USTR obtained congressional approval of FTAs with Peru, Bahrain, the Dominican Republic,
75
This section was prepared by Eugene H. Buck, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy; Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
76 This section was written by William J. Krouse, Specialist in Domestic Security.
77 This section was written by M. Angeles Villarreal, Analyst in International Trade and Finance, Foreign Affairs,
Defense, and Trade Division.






and Central American countries. In its FY2009 Congressional Budget Submission, the USTR
stated the following as its priorities for FY2009:
• concluding several bilateral agreements,
• completing the Doha Round of the World Trade Organization (WTO)
negotiations,
• pursuing China’s compliance with its WTO obligations,
• litigating enforcement actions in the WTO,
• negotiating WTO accession agreements for key countries, and
• launching new negotiations as necessary to further the trade agenda.78
The President’s FY2009 request for USTR was $46.3 million, an increase of $2.2 million (4.9%)
over the FY2008 funding level of $44.1 million. The House committee-approved draft bill would
have provided $48.3 million, 9.4% over the FY2008 enacted level and 4.3% over the FY2009
request. The Senate-reported bill would have provided $46.3 million, 4.9% over the FY2008
enacted level and the same amount as the FY2009 request.

The State Justice Institute (SJI) is a nonprofit corporation that makes grants to state courts and
funds research, technical assistance, and informational projects aimed at improving the quality of
judicial administration in state courts across the United States. It is governed by an 11-member 80
board of directors appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Under the terms of
its enabling legislation, SJI is authorized to present its budget request directly to Congress, apart
from the President’s budget.
For FY2009, SJI requested an appropriation of $5.39 million, a 43.4% increase over $3.76 81
million appropriated for FY2008. The funding requested for FY2009, SJI said in its budget
request, would enable it “to continue identifying issues that impact all courts, fostering innovative 82
solutions, and sharing information on successful approaches nationwide.” The Bush
Administration, however, as in its budgets for the previous six years, did not request any 83
appropriated funds for the institute for FY2009. The House committee-approved draft bill
78
Office of United States Trade Representative, Congressional Budget Submission, Fiscal Year 2009.
79 This section was written by Denis Steven Rutkus, Specialist in American National Government, Government and
Finance Division.
80 By law, the President must appoint six state court judges, one state court administrator, and four members of the
public, no more than two of whom may be of the same political party.
81 See State Justice Institute Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Request, January 2008, at http://www.statejustice.org/PDF/
FY2009_Budget_Request.pdf, 22 p. (Hereafter cited as SJI 2009 Budget Request.) The amount requested for
FY2009, SJI has noted, is $1,629,000 above the level provided in the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L.
110-161), but $1,611,000 below the $7.0 million level as authorized by the State Justice Reauthorization Act of 2004
(P.L. 108-372). Ibid., p. 3.
82 Ibid., p. 17.
83 In the Appendix of the Budget of the United States Government for each fiscal year from FY2003 through FY2009, a
funding table for the State Justice Institute, and brief accompanying text, indicated that the proposed budget for each
year entailed no appropriated funds for SJI but did not provide an explanation for why no funding was requested.






provided $4.1 million, 9% above the FY2008 enacted level but 23.9% below SJI’s FY2009
request. The Senate reported bill provided $5.0 million, 33% above the FY2008 enacted level but

7.2% less than SJI’s FY2009 request.


For the past several fiscal years, SJI has been encouraged by congressional appropriators to
obtain funds, at least in part, from sources other than Congress. In the FY2008 appropriations
process, for instance, the House Appropriations Committee endorsed an approach of providing
some directly appropriated funds to SJI, but with the institute also seeking additional funding 84
from Department of Justice (DOJ) grant programs. The committee at the same time commended 85
SJI for its “recent successes in obtaining dollar-for-dollar matching funds for grants awarded.”
Table 12. CJS Appropriations by Account,
FY2008 Enacted and FY2009 Proposed
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2008 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Bureau or Agency Enacteda Requestb Draft Bill Reported Final
Department of Commerce (DOC)
International Trade Administration 405.2 420.4b 425.4 420.4
Bureau of Industry and Security 72.9 83.7b 83.7 83.7
Economic Development Administration 279.9 132.8b 282.8 232.8
Minority Business Development Agency 28.6 29.0b 31.5 29.0
Economic and Statistical Analysis 81.1 90.6b 89.1 90.6
Bureau of the Census 1,230.2 2,604.6b 2,604.6 3,151.0
National Telecommunications and b
Information Administration 36.3 19.2 40.9 59.2
Patent and Trademark Officec (1,915.5) (2,075.0) (2,087.0) (2,075.0)
Technology Administration — — — —
National Institute of Standards and
Technology 755.8 638.0b 816.9 813.5
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration 3,896.5 4,103.9b 4,252.6 4,445.9
84
Specifically, the committee commended SJI for “continuing to work with the [Justice Department’s] Office of
Justice Programs (OJP) on issues involving State courts,” and it encouraged SJIto continue to seek funds from OJP
grant programs.” U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related thst
Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2008, report to accompany H.R. 3093, 110 Cong., 1 sess., H.Rept. 110-240
(Washington: GPO, 2007), p. 137.
85 Ibid. In response to a directive from House-Senate conferees for the FY2006 appropriations act, SJI, in its FY2007
budget request, noted that it had adopted a 50% “cash match requirement” from its grantees. In its FY2009 budget
request, SJI said that prior to the implementation of its cash match requirement, state courts were unable to compete for
SJI grants. Despite having the money available for the requirement, SJI said, the courts “had neither the time nor the
personnel available who could apply for and execute grant projects.” With the cash match requirement in place,
however, SJI said, it now receives numerous grant applications from state courts, which are assisted by “court-support
organizations” which have the “expertise to apply for and execute court grants. SJI 2009 Budget Request, p. 16.






FY2008 FY2009 House Senate-FY2009
Bureau or Agency Enacteda Requestb Draft Bill Reported Final
Departmental Management 70.0 94.2b 79.3 76.2
DOC Subtotal 6,856.5 8,216.5b 8,706.9 9,402.4
Department of Justice (DOJ)
General Administration 1,794.8 1,952.1 2,014.2 1,928.4
U.S. Parole Commission 11.5 12.6 12.6 12.6
Legal Activities 3,584.0 3,829.7 3,841.9 3,864.7
National Security Division 73.4 83.8 83.8 83.8
Interagency Law Enforcement 497.9 531.6 521.9 511.7
Federal Bureau of Investigation 6,657.7 7,108.1 7,108.1 7,270.1
Drug Enforcement Administration 1,857.6 1,936.6 1,939.1 1,954.4
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms & Explosives 1,007.6 1,027.8 1,054.2 1,042.8
Federal Prison System 5,425.5 5,533.9 5,733.9 5,973.9
Office of Violence Against Women 400.0 280.0 435.0 415.0
Office of Justice Programs 2,282.0 792.7 2,694.1 2,721.1
DOJ Subtotal 23,591.9 23,088.9 25,438.8 25,778.6
Science Agencies
Office of Science and Technology 5.2 5.3 5.3 5.2
NASA 17,309.4 17,614.2 17,769.0 17,814.0
National Science Foundation 6,065.0 6,854.1 6,854.1 6,854.1
Science Agencies Subtotal: 23,379.6 24,473.6 24,628.4 24,673.3
Related Agencies
Commission on Civil Rights 8.5 8.8 8.8 8.8
Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) 329.3 341.9 350.4 341.9
International Trade Commission 68.4 73.6 75.1 75.0
Legal Services Corporation 350.5 311.0 390.0 390.0
Marine Mammal Commission 2.8 2.4 3.2 2.4
National Veterans Business Development
Corporation 1.4 3.2
U.S. Trade Representative 44.1 46.3 48.3 46.3
State Justice Institute 3.8 d 4.1 5.0
Related Agencies Subtotal 808.8 784.0 883.1 869.4
Total Appropriations 54,636.8 56,563.0 59,657.1 60,723.6
Sources: House Appropriations Committee Print on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764/P.L.. 110-
161); Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009—Appendix; House Appropriations Committee-
approved draft bill and report; and S. 3182 (S.Rept. 110-397).






Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. The amounts in the FY2008 enacted column will change as Congress has passed a Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-252; H.R. 2642) that provides additional FY2008 funding for some of the
departments and agencies funded under the jurisdiction of the House and Senate CJS Appropriations
subcommittees. In addition, the Administration has submitted FY2008 budget reprogrammings for
Department of Justice to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees that addresses funding
shortfalls for the Bureau of Prisons and other DOJ entities.
b. The amounts in the FY2009 request column reflect the original Administration submission. For a
comparison with the June 9, 2008 Department of Commerce revised request to account for the 2010
decennial census, see Table 4above.
c. The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is fully funded by user fees. The fees collected, but not obligated
during the current year, are available for obligation in the following fiscal year and do not count toward the
appropriation totals. Only newly appropriated funds count toward the annual appropriation totals.
d. Under the terms of its enabling legislation, the State Justice Institute is authorized to present its budget
request directly to Congress. Although the Bush Administration has not requested any FY2009 funding for
SJI, the institute has requested $5.4 million.






William J. Krouse, Coordinator Wendy H. Schacht
Specialist in Domestic Security and Crime Policy Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
wkrouse@crs.loc.gov, 7-2225 wschacht@crs.loc.gov, 7-7066
Thomas H. Neale, Coordinator Dana A. Shea
Specialist in American National Government Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
tneale@crs.loc.gov, 7-7883 dshea@crs.loc.gov, 7-6844
Celinda Franco Wayne A. Morrissey
Specialist in Crime Policy Information Research Specialist
cfranco@crs.loc.gov, 7-7360 wmorrissey@crs.loc.gov, 7-7072
Oscar R. Gonzales Daniel Morgan
Analyst in Economic Development Policy Analyst in Science and Technology Policy
ogonzales@crs.loc.gov, 7-0764 dmorgan@crs.loc.gov, 7-5849
Nathan James Christine M. Matthews
Analyst in Crime Policy Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
njames@crs.loc.gov, 7-0264 cmatthews@crs.loc.gov, 7-7055
M. Angeles Villarreal Eugene H. Buck
Specialist in International Trade and Finance Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
avillarreal@crs.loc.gov, 7-0321 gbuck@crs.loc.gov, 7-7262
Ian F. Fergusson Linda Levine
Specialist in International Trade and Finance Specialist in Labor Economics
ifergusson@crs.loc.gov, 7-4997 llevine@crs.loc.gov, 7-7756
Eugene Boyd Abigail B. Rudman
Analyst in Federalism and Economic Development Information Research Specialist
Policy arudman@crs.loc.gov, 7-9519
eboyd@crs.loc.gov, 7-8689
Edward V. Murphy Carmen Solomon-Fears
Specialist in Financial Economics Specialist in Social Policy
tmurphy@crs.loc.gov, 7-6201 csolomonfears@crs.loc.gov, 7-7306
Glenn J. McLoughlin Garrine P. Laney
Section Research Manager Analyst in Social Policy
gmcloughlin@crs.loc.gov, 7-7073 glaney@crs.loc.gov, 7-2518
Jennifer D. Williams Denis Steven Rutkus
Specialist in American National Government Specialist on the Federal Judiciary
jwilliams@crs.loc.gov, 7-8640 drutkus@crs.loc.gov, 7-7162






Area of Expertise Name Telephone E-Mail
Departments
Celinda Franco 7-7360 cfranco@crs.loc.gov
Department of Justice William J. Krouse 7-2225 wkrouse@crs.loc.gov
Department of Commerce Oscar Gonzales 7-0764 ogonzales@crs.loc.gov
Agencies and Policy Areas
Office of Justice Programs Nathan James 7-0264 njames@crs.loc.gov
Trade-related agencies: M. Angeles Villarreal 7-0321 avillarreal@crs.loc.gov
ITA, ITC, USTR, NIPLECC
BIS Ian F. Fergusson 7-4997 ifergusson@crs.loc.gov
EDA Eugene Boyd 7-8689 eboyd@crs.loc.gov
ESA Ted Murphy 7-6201 tmurphy@crs.loc.gov
MBDA Oscar Gonzales 7-0764 ogonzales@crs.loc.gov
Telecommunications, NTIA Glenn J. McLoughlin 7-7073 gmcloughlin@crs.loc.gov
Bureau of the Census Jennifer Williams 7-8640 jwilliams@crs.loc.gov
Patent and Trademark Office, NIST Wendy H. Schacht 7-7066 wschacht@crs.loc.gov
Office of Science and Technology Dana A. Shea 7-6844 dshea@crs.loc.gov
Policy
NOAA Wayne A. Morrissey 7-7072 wmorrissey@crs.loc.gov
NASA Daniel Morgan 7-5849 dmorgan@crs.loc.gov
NSF Christine M. Matthews 7-7055 cmatthews@crs.loc.gov
Marine Mammal Commission Eugene H. Buck 7-7262 gbuck@crs.loc.gov
Linda Levine 7-7756 llevine@crs.loc.gov Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission Abigail B. Rudman 7-9519 arudman@crs.loc.gov
Legal Services Corporation Carmen Solomon-Fears 7-7306 csolomonfears@crs.loc.gov
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Garrine P. Laney 7-2518 glaney@crs.loc.gov
State Justice Institute Denis Steven Rutkus 7-7162 srutkus@crs.loc.gov