Introduction to the U.S. congressional budget process

Government Publications Review, Vol. 16, pp. 219-237, 1989

Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. 0277.9390189 $3.00 + .OO

Copyright 0 1989 Pergamon Press plc

INTRODUCTION TO THE U.S. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET PROCESS

ERIC HANSEN* Documents Center, Robert W. Woodruff Library for Advanced Studies, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA

Abstract - The formulation of the budget is one of the most important and time- consuming tasks of the U.S. Congress. As a result, the budget process also produces a great deal of published information. This article explains the important basic budget concepts, describes the major steps in the congressional budget process, and identifies the publications produced by the process. An annotated list of other important budget-related publications is included.

BASIC BUDGET CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY

The formulation of the budget is the single largest task facing the U.S. federal government. Virtually any action it undertakes is reflected in the budget in some way. It is here that political philosophy finds concrete expression through the determination of spending priorities.

The budget is not the product of any single government action nor is it embodied in a single document; it is the outcome of a long process. The preparation of the budget begins approximately 18 months before the date it takes effect. In April of each year, the executive branch begins preparing its budget proposal for presentation to Congress the following January. Congress, making whatever changes it deems appropriate, must enact a budget by October 1st the beginning of the fiscal year.

The congressional phase of budget preparation is far more open to public scrutiny than the executive, which only emerges into public view in January with the submission of the president’s budget proposal. Congress has enacted a set of elaborate procedures for the consideration of the budget and established a number of reporting requirements. The major steps in the congressional budget process and the documents it produces will be discussed in this article. Only the major documents associated with the congressional budget process or those that provide useful summaries of federal finances will be examined here. A vast amount of published material is produced by the budget process and it would be fruitless to identify every monograph, circular, or hearing that addresses some aspect of the budget. The standard documents reference tools can be used to locate such reports. However, a review of some basic budget concepts and jargon is needed in order to understand these publications.

Authorization-Appropriation-Obligation-Outlay

There are four distinct steps to federal spending: a) authorization, b) budget authority, c) obligation, and d) outlay. An authorization is an act of Congress that establishes or continues a

*Eric Hansen is a documents assistant in the Documents Center of the Robert W. Woodruff Library, Emory University, Atlanta, GA. He also holds an M.A. in philosophy.

219

220 E. HANSEN

$ Billions

New Authority Recommended *

To be spent in 1988

for 1988 731.8 3 Outlays in 1988

1,142.2 1,024.3

*

l Unspent Authority u

Enacted in Unspent Authority

* Prior Years

To be spent in for Outlays in

I) future Years 3 Future Years

1,W.l 8565

*

1,266.g *

Figure 1. Relation of budget authority to outlays - 19X8. Source: T/w Budget of r/w Unirrd Sftrre.\. Fi.w~/ yucrr 1988.

p. 6a-4

federal program [I]. It does not itself provide any funds for the program; but rather creates the

program. In order to spend money, a subsequent act of Congress must establish budget authority for the program. This enables the agency administering the program to incur debts that will be paid with federal government funds [2]. Budget authority usually takes the form of an appropriation, though it is frequently granted in the form of contract authority and borrowing authority. An appropriation does not represent a lump sum of cash set aside in the Treasury but rather represents an amount of indebtedness that an agency may incur [3]. An appropriation more closely resembles a line of credit advanced by the Treasury than a bank account owned by an agency. It is usually granted on a year-to-year basis, though sometimes multi-year and “no year” authority is made available. Budget authority that is not spent at the end of its period of availability expires unless Congress acts to extend it.

Obligations are the debts that an agency incurs for the goods and services it needs to run the program [4]. Outlays are the payments actually made and are frequently said to liquidate obligations [S]. It is at this point that debts are paid and cash or checks actually change hands.

Each of these categories provides a different perspective on the budget. Budget authority looks to the future; it represents money that may be spent by a program and is one indicator of the degree of commitment to that program. Obligations and outlays, on the other hand, look to the past and reflect commitments already made. Consequently, a decrease in budget authority in a given fiscal year need not result in an immediate decrease in obligations or outlays. The relation between budget authority and outlays is depicted in Figure 1. Total outlays will include money spent to

U.S. congressional budget process 221

liquidate outstanding obligations of past budget authority. Obligations and outlays are the best

indicators of the actual effect of government spending on the economy [6].

Budget Functions

Another concept that must be understood is that of a budget function. A budget function is defined as a national need or goal, and each function is designated by a three-digit code [7], for example, national defense is function 0.50. This functional category is not identical to the Defense Department budget, but rather runs across organizational lines. For instance, certain nuclear energy programs of the Department of Energy are also classified as national defense programs, as are, undoubtedly, the programs of such civilian agencies as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency. In general, functional categories are not identical to agency budgets. Programs administered by different agencies may be classified in the same budget function, and conversely the programs administered by a single agency may be distributed among several different budget functions. Consequently, if one is interested in spending for a certain purpose, such as defense, a report of federal spending by budget function may be a more useful figure than a report of agency spending. Appendix I lists the function classification codes.

Budget Deficit and Federal Debt

The budget deficit is the amount by which outlays exceed receipts for a given fiscal year [8]. Conversely, a budget surplus would be the amount by which receipts exceed outlays. If there is not an existing surplus in the treasury, then the government must borrow money from the public in order to make the necessary outlays. The resultant indebtedness increases the total federal debt, which itself can be thought of as the cumulative effect of many budget deficits. The elimination of the deficit will not eliminate the federal debt; it will only halt its growth.

Of-Budget Entities

One potentially confusing concept is the off-budget federal entity. The financial operations of such an entity are excluded by law (usually the authorizing legislation) from the budget totals (receipts, outlays, budget authority, and deficit) reported in the President’s budget. They have also been excluded from the budget totals of the congressional budget resolution. Off-budget receipts and spending are, however, included in the computation of the total federal deficit and public debt [9]. Off-budget status is essentially an accounting device, a way of portraying budget data that has no effect on the federal government’s overall financial operations. Consequently, a distinction is sometimes made between budget or on-budget operations, off-budget operations, and total federal operations. One should keep in mind that the Congress can change the status of a program at any time and this will be reflected in a corresponding change in the budget and off-budget figures. Such changes in status will not affect the total federal figures [lo].

Congress usually awards off-budget status to programs whose funding levels must, in its view, be determined by their own needs, independently of the effect these funding decisions have on total federal spending [I 11. Off-budget status is a means of protecting a program’s budget from being tampered with in order to meet a more general fiscal goal such as deficit reduction.

The significance of off-budget status is in part psychological. As noted above, off-budget status is merely an accounting device; it does not provide a program with any legal protection. Congress can tamper with off-budget programs as with any of its other creations. Nonetheless, off-budget status is a good indication that Congress seriously intends to protect a program from general budget pressure, and in the context of the congressional budget process, off-budget status possesses some

222 E.HANSEN

additional weight. Because off-budget receipts, outlays, and budget authority are not included in the aggregate levels set by the budget resolution, Congress cannot meet its outlay and deficit ceilings by tampering with the funding of off-budget programs.

Off-budget status has been a source of controversy. Supporters have usually argued along the lines set out above, that the funding of certain programs, such as Social Security, must be insulated from the pressure of general financial concerns. Opponents have argued that it is misleading to

speak of a budget that excludes a large portion of federal spending and that the on-budget/ off-budget distinction provides a distorted picture of federal finances [ 121. Each side can take some satisfaction in recent developments. In 1985, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill (PL 99-177) moved all off-budget entities on-budget; at the same time it moved Social Security off-budget [ 131.

SOURCES OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The following publications all provide useful background information about the budget process and discuss the basic concepts in greater detail:

Congressional Quarterly’s Understanding the Federal Budget Process This is an excellent guide to the budget process. It discusses the basic concepts, introduces the key players, and provides a detailed analysis of the budget timetable. The intended audience is congressional staff, lobbyists, and anyone who needs to keep track of the formulation of the budget.

The Federal Budget Process: Procedures and Strategies in Congress and the Executive Branch This is a more detailed version of Congressional Quarterly’s guide listed immediately above. Of particular interest is its discussion of the formulation of the budget in the executive branch.

Zwirn, Jerrold, Congressional Publications: A Research Guide to Legislation, Budgets, and Treaties

Chapter 10 provides a good discussion of the budget process and basic budget concepts. It also describes the major publications produced by the budget process.

U.S. General Accounting Office, A Glossary of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process and Related Accounting, Economic, and Tax Terms. (GAl.2:B85/2/981)

This publication, compiled by the General Accounting Office, defines all the important terms that appear in budget documents.

U.S. General Accounting Office, Principles of Federal Appropriations Law. (GA l.l4:F3 1) This is an exhaustive account of the law defining the form and governing the use of appropriations. It discusses the legal limitations on the purpose and timing of appropriations, how obligations are recorded, and other topics relating to the management of federal funds.

U.S. Congress, House, Budget Committee, The Congressional Budget Process. (Y4.B85/ 3:C76/6/date)

This committee print issued by the House Budget Committee provides a detailed discussion of the budget timetable and major publications produced by the budget process established by the congressional Budget and Impoundment


Control Act of 1974 (PL 93-344), which initiated the current budget procedures.

The latest edition (1986) also explains the changes made by Gramm-Rudman- Hollings (PL 99-177).

U.S. Congress, Senate, Budget Committee, Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and the Congressional Budget Process. (Y4.B85/2:S.prt.99-119)

This committee print explains the recent changes made in the budget process by PL 99-177.

Oleszak, Walter J, Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process. Chapter three provides a good discussion of the congressional budget process.

Collender, Stanley E, Guide to the Federal Budget. An excellent introduction to the budget process, this work provides a real-life account of the process and discusses not only the process as it is supposed to work but also how it has worked in the past. There is also a careful explanation of how to read some of the more important budget publications. It is revised annually.

Budgeting for America: The Politics and Process of Federal Spending This work discusses the fiscal policy of the initial years of the Reagan administration and places them in the context of the political and economic developments of the post-war period.

BUDGET PROCESS AND TIMETABLE

At present, the congressional budget process is in a state of transition. It was revised extensively in 1985 by PL 99-177, popularly known as Gramm-Rudman-Hollings. Major portions of this law were subsequently declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (Bowsher v. Synar), and some additional changes were made by PL 100-l 19. The following account is current as of January 1988. In this section the budget process as it existed from 1975 through 1985 will be described and the documents that it produced will be reviewed. In the following section, the changes brought about by Gramm-Rudman-Hollings will be outlined.

The Budget Process 1975-1985

The congressional budget process was established in 1974 by the congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act (PL 93-344). The immediate cause lay in disputes between the Nixon administration and Congress over the impoundment of funds appropriated by Congress. The more fundamental reason for the enactment of the law lay in a recognition that Congress needed to reassert some control over federal spending and consider funding decisions in the context of the entire budget. Previously, Congress had made its spending decisions in a piecemeal fashion, heedless of the consequences any single spending decision had on the overall budget [ 141. Under the 1974 budget act, Congress must commit itself to target levels for revenue, budget authority, outlays, budget deficit, and public debt, and consider individual authorization and appropriation bills in light of these levels.

The budget resolution, a concurrent resolution, is the heart of the budget process. Concurrent resolutions are used to express the sense of Congress on a specific question and to regulate procedural matters affecting both houses. Concurrent resolutions must be passed by both houses but are not signed by the President and do not have the force of law [ 151. Consequently, the concurrent resolution on the budget does not itself provide legal authority to tax and spend. It does provide a framework within which Congress can conduct its budget deliberations. As such it has

224 E.HANSEN

a major impact on what does become law, for the spending and revenue levels it establishes in its final form place binding restrictions on congressional budget action. It is out of order to consider legislation that conflicts with the funding levels of the budget resolution. Therefore, if a proposed spending bill is inconsistent with the resolution it must be amended to conform to it [16].

A budget resolution sets out the levels of federal revenue, budget authority, budget outlays, budget deficit, and public debt. It further subdivides the spending totals among the 21 functional categories [ 171. Section 30 1 (c)6 of the PL 93-344 requires that projections of the budget aggregates and the functional spending totals for the next four fiscal years be included in the committee report accompanying the budget resolution; in practice these projections have been included in the resolution itself [ 181.

Originally the budget act required Congress to pass two budget resolutions. Neither house was allowed to consider any authorization or spending legislation before the passage of the first budget resolution [ 191. The levels set by the first budget resolution were targets that were meant to guide consideration of the spending and revenue legislation before Congress. They did not place binding restrictions on congressional budget action, that is, spending legislation that violated the levels of the first budget resolution was not subject to a point of order.

By September 15th, after Congress completed action on spending bills, it has to pass the second budget resolution. The levels of the second resolution were binding in that it was not in order for Congress to consider any legislation that exceeded the spending levels or fell short of the revenue levels set by this second resolution [20]. However, Congress was permitted to revise the levels of the second resolution by passing a third resolution [21].

If enacted legislation sets spending above, or revenues below, the levels established by the second resolution (or, under the new procedures, the initial resolution), then the resolution had to direct one or more committees to propose changes in the spending or revenue legislation that lay in the jurisdiction so that enacted levels of spending and revenue are consistent with the budget resolution. These proposals are then packaged in a reconciliation bill which must pass both houses

1221. Since 1982 Congress has included in the first budget resolution an “automatic binding budget

resolution” provision that provided the spending and revenue levels of the first resolution become binding if Congress failed to enact a second budget resolution [23]. This streamlined the process somewhat, but still left Congress the option of adopting a second resolution if it so chose.

The following is a review of the major steps in the budget process prior to the passage of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings (i.e., pre-1986) and the publications associated with them; in addition to these there are a great many other publications produced in the course of budget deliberations. The legislative material - the authorizing and appropriation bills and the associated reports and hearings - can be identified with the standard legislative research tools.

The 1974 budget act established a new fiscal year, one that starts October 1 and ends September 30. Thus fiscal year 1985 started October 1, 1984 and ended September 30, 1985. Appendix III presents the budget timetable as it existed prior to 1986.

Not once since the adoption of PL 93-344 has Congress adhered to every required deadline. Yet this ideal schedule serves as a good guide to the publications arising from the budget process.

Major Budget Documents

Congressional Budget O&e Five-Year Budget Projections (Y 10.13:date) This had been released as soon as possible after October 1, pursuant to section 308 (c) of PL 93-344. Now it is issued on or before February 15. Though the title has varied from year to year, these projections are usually identified as “five-year budget projections” or “baseline budget projections.” The purpose


of such projections is to provide a benchmark against which to measure the President’s budget proposal and to provide an estimate of the budgetary effects of continuing present policy. This latter function should not be confused with the current services estimates included in the President’s budget (see below). Though both have a similar purpose, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) budget projections and the President’s estimates compiled by the Office of Management and Budget frequently are based on different assumptions and consequently disagree. Indeed, the 1974 Budget Act established the CBO in order to provide Congress with an independent source of budget information.

Current Services Budget (PrEx2.8/5:date) Pursuant to sec. 605(a), the President must submit his current services budget on or before November 1.5. Since 1979 the current services budget has been submitted with the President’s budget proposal in January. Like the Congres- sional Budget Office’s budget projections, the current services budget provides an estimate of the budgetary effects of continuing current policy for the next five years. However, each set of estimates is produced independently of the other and they are frequently based on different assumptions.

JEC Evaluation of the Current Services Budget By December 31 the Joint Economic Committee (JEC) must submit its analysis of the current services estimates as required by section 605(b) of PL 93-344. This report serves two purposes. One is to assess the validity of the estimates themselves, the other is to discuss their use in policy analysis.

President’s Budget Proposal Ideally, the President submits his budget proposal in the beginning of January; in fact it usually appears much later. This is probably the single most detailed document produced in the budget process. It contains a statement of the President’s policy and covers in detail its implementation in the budget. Proposed budget authority and outlays for each agency and its offices are presented along with an object class analysis of proposed funding. Comparative figures for the preceding fiscal year and estimates for the current year are also provided. In addition, any special studies are appended to the budget.

The budget figures presented herein for the fiscal year under consideration represent the President’s proposal and inevitably there will be major changes in the course of budget deliberation. Figures for previous fiscal years, however, are reliable reports of past budget activity. The President’s budget consists of the several documents reviewed below:

Budget of the United States Government (PrEx2.8:date). The contents of this publication have changed over time. Currently it provides estimates of budget authority and outlays for the upcoming fiscal years, assuming enactment of the President’s policies. It also reports budget authority and outlays for the preceding fiscal year and estimates for the current fiscal year. For current, preceding, and upcoming fiscal years it reports receipts by source, and budget authority and outlays by function and by agency. It also reports off-budget authority and outlays for each function and agency. In addition, it includes discussion of budgetary effect of enacted legislation. Special Analyses, Budget of the United States (PrEx2.8/5:date). This has been

226 E.HANSEN

issued with the budget since 1967. It reports on special topics related to the budget, such as federal borrowing and debt, federal credit programs, receipts, and outlays of various funds in the budget. It also includes the current services estimates. The United States Budget in Brief (PrEx2.8i2:date). This provides a brief statement of the President’s proposal for the upcoming fiscal year. In the back there are several historical tables covering receipts by source and outlays by function and by agency. Budget ofthe U.S. Government, Appendix (PrEx2,8:date/app.). This is a more detailed report of budget authority and outlays for preceding, current, and upcoming fiscal years. It reports funding of each program for each agency. It includes an object classification of obligations, and a personnel summary. Historical Tables, Budget of the United States Government (PrEx 2.8/8:date). This is a new publication added to the President’s budget in 1985. Many of the tables date from 1940, some from 1934. It covers receipts by source, outlays and budget authority by function and subfunction, outlays for capital investment, research and development, payments to individuals, grants-in-aid, and finances of Social Security and Medicare.

Committee Hraritlgs

After the submission of the President’s budget, the various committees of the House and Senate conduct hearings on the budget and consider the authorizing legislation needed for proposed spending. The legislative process is the same for authorization bills as it is for other legislation. At this stage of the process the budget committees also hold hearings on the budget resolution.

Views und Estimates

Pursuant to sec. 301(c) of the budget act, all of the authorizing committees of Congress are required to submit to the budget committees of their house estimates of the amount of new budget authority and outlays that will become effective in the next fiscal year [24]. These estimates had been issued in March but now must be issued in February as required by the revised budget law. Since fiscal year 1977, the House Budget Committee has routinely published these reports in a single volume (Y4.B85/3:C76/4/date). The Senate Budget Commit- tee started compiling the estimates of the Senate committees with the fiscal year 1986 budget. publishing them in its report accompanying the budget resolution 1251.

First Bu Idget Resolutiotl April I5 had been the deadline for the reporting of the first concurrent resolution of the budget. This resolution is drafted in mark-up sessions of the budget committees. In these sessions the committees make decisions only on the aggregate and functional totals for budget authority, outlays, direct loan obligations and primary loan guarantees, the recommended level of revenues, and the appropriate level of public debt. Although in setting these levels the committees may make many assumptions about individual programs, these assumptions are not formally recognized in the budget resolution. Apart from the committee reports accompanying the budget resolution, the mark-up produces no published documentation [26]. From April 1.5 to May 15 the House and Senate


consider the first resolution, which had to be passed by May 15. The conference report assigned to the various committees the amounts of budget authority and outlays for which they have responsibility. Under the Gramm- Rudman-Hollings revisions only one budget resolution is required and it must be reported by April 1 and passed by April 15.

CBO Budget Options Report (Y 10.13:date) This report was scheduled for April 1 but has frequently appeared earlier. It is required by sec. 202(f) of the budget act and is meant to present alternative fiscal strategies and estimates of tax expenditures under existing law.

Appropriations and Spending Bills These were to be enacted between May 15 and the seventh day after Labor Day. Now Congress must complete action on appropriations bills by June 30.

Second Budget Resolution

This resolution superseded and revised the first budget resolution and was to be passed by September 15. The spending, revenue, deficit, and debt ceilings presented here were legally binding ceilings, though Congress could choose to revise these with another subsequent resolution. Starting in fiscal year 1983, Congress attached to the first budget resolution provisions to the effect that the first resolution becomes binding on October 1 if it failed to enact a second resolution. This was the automatic second budget resolution provision. It streamlined the budget process but left Congress the option to revise the budget resolution with another resolution.

Reconciliation Process Section 310 established the reconciliation process, which is the means of enforcing the spending and revenue levels established by the budget resolution. When enacted legislation set spending levels above or revenue levels below those of the second budget resolution, the enacted legislation had to be adjusted to conform to the levels set by the budget resolution. Reconciliation language directs one or more committees to make changes in existing legislation that either reduces spending or increases revenues. If only one committee is directed to make changes, it must report a reconciliation bill that incorporates the required changes. If more than one committee is involved, each committee must transmit its recommendations to the budget committee of its house, which then assembles the recommendations in a reconciliation bill. This bill was to be passed by September 25. Now reconciliation must be completed by June 15. Even before the passage of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, with the de-emphasis and virtual elimination of the second budget resolution, reconciliation was usually used to enforce the levels of the first budget resolution.

With the conclusion of the reconciliation process, work on the budget is completed. On October 1 the fiscal year begins, the following February the Congressional Budget Office issues its annual report. the President submits his budget proposal, and the entire process begins again.

GRAMM-RUDMAN-HOLLINGS

The budget process was extensively revised by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit

228 E.HANSEN

Control Act (PL 99-177), popularly known as ‘“Gramm-Rudman-Hollings,” after its authors. The automatic spending-cut provisions of this law were subsequently declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. However, the Court’s ruling was fairly narrow and left much of the law intact. The law was amended recently by PL 100-I 19, which created new automatic spending-cut procedures

that appear to satisfy the Supreme Court’s objections.

Deficit Ceilings

Gramm-~udman-Hollings was meant to balance the federal budget. Until it was passed, there was no limit on the deficit level Congress could set. One might say that, just as the budget resolution sets levels for federal spending and budget deficit, Gramm-Rudman-Hollings sets a limit on the level of deficit permitted by the budget resolution. In its present form the law sets ceilings on the federal budget deficit for fiscal years 1986 through 1993, the deficit ceiling in 1993 being zero dollars [27]. The law also established a sequestration procedure to enforce these ceilings. If the budget deficit should exceed the applicable ceiling by $10 billion ($0 in fiscal year 1993), the President would be required to order spending cuts that eliminated all spending in excess of the ceiling. Half the cuts must be made in defense spending, the other half in non-defense spending [28]. The law requires that in each of these two categories all programs must have their budgets reduced by a uniform percentage, though the President is permitted to deviate from uniform percentage reductions in military accounts as long as the difference is made up by adjusting other military accounts (291.

Sequestration

The sequestration process consists of two parts that are identical in their main elements. The process starts on August 15 (October 10 in FY 1988) when the Congressional Budget Office issues its initial “snapshot” to the deficit [30]. Then, on August 20 (October 15 in FY 1988), the CBO is to issue its full report on the deficit. This is followed, on August 25 (October 20 in FY 1988), by the deficit report of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The President then issues a report as an initial spending reduction order which is to take effect on October 1. This initial order withholds spending authority. If the OMB finds that no spending reductions are needed, the President must state this in his order. This process is repeated on October 10 (November 15 in FY 1988), when the CBO issues its second deficit report showing any changes in spending and revenue. On October 10 (November 20 in FY 1988), the OMB issues its final deficit report and the President orders the permanent cancellation of spending authority. Congress has the option of revising the spending cuts with a joint resolution that it must introduce within 10 days after the spending cuts go into effect [3 11.

These sequestration procedures proved to be the most controversial aspect of the law, and, as originaliy enacted, were ruled unconstitutional. Initially, the CBO and the OMB were to issue a joint deficit report to the Comptroller General (the head of the General Accounting Office) on August 20. Paying due regard to the CBOiOMB report, the Comptroller General transmitted his own report on the deficit to the President on August 25. This report became the Presidential sequestration order. This sequence was to be repeated on October 5, with the issuance of second CBOlOMB report, followed by the final report of the Comptroller General, October 10. The final sequestration order, as revised, was to become effective on October 15 [32].

The Supreme Court decided in Bowsher v. Synar that sequestration violated the principle of separation of powers. The difficulty lay in this, that the President’s sequestration order is in effect a rubber-stamp transmittal of a report of the Comptroller General that estimates the deficit and calculates the spending reduction according to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings formulae. The Court


found that, because the Comptroller General can be removed by Congress, and thus is to some extent under congressional control, Congress had in effect voted itself Executive powers. The Court did not object to automatic spending cuts, nor did it object to the delegation of authority, It ruled only that this authority could not be delegated to the Comptroller General [33].

Congress anticipated the Supreme Court’s ruling and included in PL 99-177 alternative sequestration procedures that replaced the Comptroller General’s sequestration report with the joint resolution reported by a Temporary Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction [34]. This procedure was used only once, to reaffirm the fiscal year 1986 sequestration order and is now superceded by the 1987 revisions [35].

New Timetable

Gramm-Rudman-Hollings also revised the budget timetable in a number of ways and most of these changes are unaffected by the Supreme Court ruling. The law eliminated the requirement of a second budget resolution, thus formalizing recent practice. Appendix IV presents the new budget timetable resulting from Gramm-Rudman-Hollings.

Fiscal Year 1986 Sequestration Publications

All of the relevant reports pertaining to fiscal year 1986 were issued. It is worth reviewing them, not only for their intrinsic interest but also as a guide to the kind of information that is likely to be produced under the revised budget procedures.

OMBICBO Deficit Estimate (Federal Register vol. 5 1, no. 10) On January 15, the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget submitted a joint report to the Comptroller General that presented their estimates of the deficit for fiscal year 1986. It was composed of two parts. The first presented the deficit estimates and discussed the methods used to compute them, and also provided an estimate of the funds that could be sequestered. The second part consisted of detailed sequestration recommendations by budget account number. Pursuant to the PL 100-l 19 amendments to the budget process, this report will be compiled by the CBO alone and transmitted to the OMB. It will appear in its initial form on August 20 and in its final form

on October 10.

Comptroller General’s Report (S.Doc. 99-23) On January 21 the Comptroller General submitted his deficit estimates to the President. Though he was required by the law to pay due regard to the estimates of the CBO and the OMB, the Comptroller General’s report was meant to be an independent estimate of the deficit. This estimate served as the basis of the President’s sequestration order. In addition, the Comptroller General’s report also included changes in the detailed table of budget reductions presented in the joint CBO/OMB report. The joint CBO/OMB report, as changed and ratified by the Comptroller General, constituted the President’s sequestration order. This report will now be compiled by the Office of Management and Budget and will appear in its initial form on August 25 and its final form on October 15.

Presidential Sequestration Order (H. Dot . 99- 160; S . Dot . 99-24) Since the Comptroller General found that the deficit for fiscal year 1986

230 E.HANSEN

exceeded the limit set by Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, the President was required to issue a sequestration order. The total amount to be withheld in fiscal year 1986 was limited by the law to $11.7 billion. The reductions in individual budget accounts were based on the calculations of the joint CBO/OMB report as revised by the Comptroller General. The President had no authority to make any changes of his own; he was in effect transmitting instructions to the various departments and agencies. The sequestration order was issued on February 1. This order was later invalidated by the Supreme Court’s July 7 ruling. However, Congress reaffirmed the cuts made by the sequestration order on July 17.

GAO Compliance Report (GA l.l3:OCG-86-2) The General Accounting Office (GAO) is required to review the President’s sequestration order to see that it complies with PL 99-177 and to confirm that agencies did undertake the spending reductions required by the order. This report will continue to appear since the Supreme Court did not object to this oversight role of the GAO.

OTHER PUBLICATIONS RELATING TO THE BUDGET

There is a large amount of published information on the budget that is not specifically required by the budget act. Below is a list of such publications and a brief description of their contents. This list is not exhaustive, but is limited to the major publications produced by those agencies charged with monitoring federal fiscal activities.

U.S. Federal Reserve System Board of Governors. Annual Statistical Digest. (FR 1.59:date) This title reports outlays by function for each month of the calendar year covered.

U.S. Treasury Department. Treasury Bulletin. (T1.3:date) This publication reports receipts by source for the last five years and for the last 12 months and budget outlays by agency for the last five years and last 12 months. It also reports obligations by agency and by object class cumulatively through the last elapsed quarter of the fiscal year. Outlays are reported by agency for the preceding five years and preceding 12 months. The contents vary for different years.

U.S. Treasury Department. Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the U.S. Government. (Tl.Y2:date)

This title reports receipts and outlays by agency, major office, and major program. Gross and net outlays are reported for current month, fiscal year to date, and comparable period of preceding fiscal year.

U.S. Treasury Department. Monthly Statement of the Public Debt of the U.S. (Tl.513:date) This title reports a summary of public debt outstanding, public debt subject to debt limit, detail of public debt outstanding by security type, and statement of guaranteed debt of U.S. government agencies.

U.S. President of United States. Economic Report of the President. (Pr38.9:date) This work reports federal budget receipts, outlays, surplus, and deficit, in some


instances as far back as 1929. In some tables data for recent years are reported

by quarters.

U.S. Treasury Department. United States Government Annual Report. (T l.l/3:date) Herein is the most detailed statement of appropriations and outlays by agency, office, and program.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Object Class Analysis. (AS1 microfiche 104-9) This report covers federal obligations for 26 categories of goods and services for each branch of government, executive department, and independent agency.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Current Budget Estimates. (AS1 microfiche 104-17) This annual report revises the estimates in the President’s January budget submission. The revisions are based on reestimates of previous fiscal year outlays and policy changes made since the submission of the president’s budget. This report is usually issued in March or April and is revised by the Mid-Session

Review of the Budget (see below).

U .S. Office of Management and Budget. Mid-Session Review of the (FY) Budget. (PrEx2.31:date) This report updates the information in the President’s January budget submission and supersedes the preceding Current Budget Estimates. It includes adjusted economic assumptions, reestimates of the budget figures initially presented, effects of recently enacted legislation, and specific policy changes announced since the submission of the President’s budget.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Balances of Budget Authority. (AS1 microfiche 104-8) This publication reports obligated and unobligated budget authority for the preceding three fiscal years by agency, program type, program and covers both trust funds and federal funds.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Federal Government Finances. (AS1 microfiche 104- 12) This is a report of receipts by source with projections for the next four fiscal years. Outlays by function and agency and activity. It also reports controllability of budget outlays. All tables are historical, some going back to the 1940s.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. (PrEx2.20:date) This document provides descriptions of virtually all the federal programs that provide assistance to individuals, organizations, and governments in the United States. It is useful in identifying such programs by subject and recipient category and it also provides figures for obligations for the preceding, current, and succeeding fiscal years. These figures sometimes differ from those in the Combined Treasury Statement or the President’s budget statement, in which case the Department of the Treasury or presidential documents should be taken as authoritative. Program descriptions also include the budget account identification code, which can be used for identifying the identical program in other documents, for example, the Combined Treasury Statement or the Appendix to the President’s budget. This is helpful because the names of programs can vary slightly from one document to the next. The codes are explained in Appendix III of the Catalog.

232 E. HANSEN

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Supplement to Special Analysis. (PrEx2.2:Sp3/supp.) This report is required by the Federal Capital Investment Program Information Act (PL 98-501) and is published as a supplement to special analysis D, “Federal Investment and Operating Outlays. ” It projects federal investment outlays by major program area and assesses public civilian investment needs.

U.S. Congressional Budget Office. An Analysis of the President’s Budgetary Proposals for Fiscal Year ( ) (Y10.2:B85/8/date)

This report is not required by the budget act but has routinely been requested by the House or Senate Appropriations Committee. The Congressional Budget Office here evaluates the economic assumptions and budget estimates used in the

President’s budget submission and presents alternative estimates.

U.S. Congress. Senate. Appropriations, Budget Estimates, etc. . , This title contains a compilation of the texts of appropriations legislation passed by Congress in a single session. It also includes tabular presentations of total budget authority by agency and office, and by agency and office by individual act, for the session it covers. Note that this report covers a Congressional sessiorl and not a fiscal year. It is unlikely that a single volume will include all the appropriation legislation for a given fiscal year since not all legislation pertaining to a fiscal year is likely to be enacted in a single session of Congress.

NOTES I ~ General Accounting Office, Glosscq qf Terms Used in the Federol Budget Proce.ss cmd Related Accounting. Economic.

and Tax Terms (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 198 I ). 39-40. 2. General Accounting Office, 41. 3. General Accounting Office, 42. 4. General Accounting Office, 68. An appropriation normally precedes an obligation. However, with contract and

borrowing authority this relation is reversed. In these cases. an agency first incurs an obligation that must subsequently be funded by Congress with an appropriation. See p. 42.

5. General Accounting Office, 9. 6. The Treasury Bulletin suggests that obligations alone are the best measure of this effect:

The obligational stage of government transactions is a strategic point in gauging the impact of the Government’s operations on the national economy, since it frequently represents for business firms the government commitment stimulates business investment, including inventory purchases and employment of labor. Disbursements may not occur for months after the government places its order, but the order itself usually causes immediate pressure on the private economy. (Headnote to Table FO-I)

7. General Accounting Office. Glossrrry of Terms, 61. 8. General Accounting Office, 44. 9. Office of Management and Budget, Budget ofrhe United Srcrtes Government, FY 1987 (Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office, 1986). 6a-7. The finances of off-budget entities are reported in Chapter IV of the Appendix to the budget.

IO. The President’s budget and other documents frequently revise historical data in accordance with the currently prevailing off-budget designations.

I I House Budget Committee. Socicr/ Security, Medicare, and the Un$ed Budger, report prepared by David Koitz, 99th Cong., 1st sess. 1985, Committee Print, l-2.

12. House Budget Committee. 47. 13. For a good discussion of off-budget status see “Perspectives on the Budget,” pt. 6a of Budget of the United States.

For the relation between Social Security and the budget and the general significance of off-budget status, see Social Securit.v, Medicare, nnd rhe Unified Budget. One should not confuse the non-sequesterable status of certain programs under Gramm-Rudman-Hollings with off-budget status. These are different concepts.

14. House Budget Committee. The Congressional Budget Process: A General Explanntion. 99th Gong., 1st session, 1985, Committee Print 2, 3.

15. Walter J. Oleszak, Congressiomll Procedure5 ctnd the Policy Process, 2nd ed. (Washington. DC: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1984). 253.

16. This provision is not self-enforcing. A member of Congress must actually raise a point of order to prevent such legislation from being considered.

17.

18.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.

26.

27.

28.

29. 30.

31. 32. 33.

34. 35.


PL93-344. sec. 301(a) Text in The Congressionml Budget Proces, 1985 ed., 73-123. Citations to PL93-344 are to this text unless otherwise noted. PL 93-344, sec. 30 1 (dl6. Section 30 1 (d)6 was redesignated 30 1 (cl6 after the passage of PL 99- 177. See revised text in the 1986 edition of The Congres~ionul Budger Process. PL 93-344. sec. 303(a). PL 93-344, sec. 3 11 (a). The Congressional Budget Process, 1985 ed.. 13. PL 93-344, sec. 310(a). (cl. With the passage of PL 99-177. sec. 310(c) has been redesignated 310(b). The Congressional Budget Process, 1985 ed., 13. This section has been redesignated 301(d). Some congressional committees publish their views and estimates separately. These can be identified with the CISllndex. For a detailed discussion of the mark-up procedures of the House and Senate budget committees, see Stanley Collender. The Guide to the Federal Budget Process, Fiscnl 1987 (Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press, 1986). 33-35. PL 99-177. sec. 201(a), as amended by PL 100-119, sec. 106(a). See also “Doubtful Congress Clears Gramm- Rudman Fix,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 45 (September 26. 1987): 2311. PL 99-177, sec. 25 1 (al (3) (B). See also Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 45 (September 26, 1987): 23 11. There is a large category of programs that are exempt from budget cuts, see sec. 255 and PL 100-l 19. sec. 104. PL 99.177, sec. 252(c) as amended by PL 100-1 19, sec. 102. PL 99-177, sec. 251(a) as amended by PL 100-I 19, sec. 102. Note that the deficit ceiling of Gramm- Rudman-Hollings requires a reduction in outlu~~, yet the only instrument available to reduce these outlays is budget nurhorirx for the fiscal year in question. Because many programs spend a fiscal year’s budget authority over several years, sequestration can create serious budgeting problems. For example, defense procurement programs “spend out” over many years. Consequently a $19.1 billion dollar reduction in fiscal year 1987 defense spending authority was required to reach a $9.5 billion dollar reduction in outlays for that fiscal year (Congressiotud Quarterly Weekly Reporf, 44 (August 23. 1986): 1946). This kind of inefficiency was intended by the authors of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings in the hopes that the idea of across the board budget cuts would be so horrible that Congress would do anything to avoid triggering sequestration. PL 99-177, sets. 251 and 252 as amended by PL 100-l 19, sec. 102. PL 99-177, sec. 251(b), (cl. Bowsher v. S~mar, (U.S. Supreme Court, 1986). See also Elder Witt. “Court Sees Fatal Gramm-Rudman Flaw In Power Given To Comptroller General,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 44 (July 12, 1986): 1560. PL 99-177, sec. 274(f). Elizabeth Wehr, “Senate Panel OKs Debt Increase; Congress Ratifies Automatic Cuts,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 44 (July 19, 1986): 1604. Congress barely avoided sequestration in fiscal year 1987 by passing its own deficit reduction bill on October 17, 1986, see Congressional Quarfer1.y Weekly Reporf, 44 (October 25, 1986): 2709.

APPENDIX I

Functional Classification Codes

Function 050: National Defense 051: Department of Defense - Military 053: Atomic Energy Defense Activities 054: Defense-Related Activities

Function 150: International Affairs 151: Foreign Economic and Financial Assistance 152: International Security Assistance 153: Conduct of Foreign Affairs 154: Foreign Information Exchange Activities 155: International Financial Programs

Function 250: General Science, Space, and Technology 25 1: General Science and Basic Research 253: Space Flight 254: Space Science, Applications, and Technology 255: Supporting Space Activities

Function 270: Energy 271: Energy Supply 272: Energy Conservation 274: Emergency Energy Preparedness 276: Energy Information, Policy, and Regulation

Function 300: Natural Resources and Environment 301: Water Resources

234 E. HANSEN

302: Conservation and Land Management 303: Recreational Resources 304: Pollution Control and Abatement 306: Other Natural Resources

Function 3%: Agriculture 35 I: Farm Income Stabilization 352: Agricultural Research and Services

Function 370: Commerce and Housing Credit 37 1: Mortgage Credit and Thrift Insurance 372: Postal Service 376: Other Advancement of Commerce

Function 400: Transportation 40 I : Ground Trans~~ation 402: Air Transportation 403: Water Transportation 407: Other Transportation

Function 450: Community and Regional Development 45 I : Community Development 452: Area and Regional Development 453: Disaster Relief and Insurance

Function 500: Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services 501: Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education 502: Higher Education 503: Research and General Education Aids 504: Training and Employment 505: Other Labor Services 506: Social Services

Function 550: Health 55 1: Health Care Services 552: Health Research 553: Education and Training of Health Care Work Force 554: Consumer and Occupational Health and Safety

Function 570: Medicare 572: Medicare

Function 600: Income Security 601: General Retirement and Disability Insurance 602: Federal Employee Retirement and Disability 603: Unemployment Compensation 604: Housing Assistance 605: Food and Nutrition Assistance 606: Other Income Security

Function 650: Social Security 651: Social Security

Function 700: Veterans Benefits and Services 701: Income Security for Veterans 702: Veterans Education, Training, and Rehabilitation 703: Hospital and Medical Care for Veterans 704: Veterans Housing 705: Other Veterans Benefits and Services

Function 750: Administration of Justice 751: Federal Law Enforcement Activities 752: Federal Litigative and Judicial Activities 753: Federal Correctional Activities 754: Criminal Justice Assistance

Function 800: General Government 80 1: Legislative Functions 802: Executive Direction and Management 803: Central Fiscal Operations 804: General Property and Records management 805: Central Personnel Management 806: Other General Government 809: Deductions of Offsetting Receipts

Function 850: General Purpose Fiscal Assistance 85 I : General Revenue Sharing 852: Other General Purpose Fiscal Assistance


Function 900: Net Interest 901: Interest on the public Debt 902: Interest Received by Trust Funds 908: Other Interest

Function 920: Allowances Function 950: Undistributed Offsetting Receipts

95 I : Employer Share Employee Retirement 953: Rents and Royalties on the Outer Continental Shelf

APPENDIX II

Checklist of Budget Publications

I. Joint Ecomonic Committee. Analrsis of the Current Services Budget Contained in the President’s Budget for [FYI. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (Y4.Ec7/1 1:date)

These are the current title and Superintendent of Document classification number for this report. It has a confusing publication history. For fiscal years 1976 through 1979 it was issued as a committee print (Y4,Ec7:Se6/2/date). For the period 1979 through 1984 (FY 1980-1985) this report was included in the [date] Joint Economic Reporr, which is published as a Senate report. In 1985 (FY 1986) it appears that this report was not issued. In 1986 (FY 1987) it was again published separately as a committee print (Y4,Ec7:Se6/5). In 1987 (FY 1988) the class number was changed to that indicated above.

2. U.S. Congressional Budget Office. An Ann/wis of the President.5 Budgetary Proposals for Fiscal Yew ( 1.

Washington, DC. (Yl0,2:B85/8/[fiscal year]) 3. U.S. Federal Reserve System Board of Governors. Annurd Statistical Digest. Washington, DC. (FR I .59:date) 4. U.S. Congress. Senate. Appropriations, Budget Estimntes, etc. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

This compilation is published as a Senate document. Its number can be identified with the CIS/fndex for 1970 to the present and the CIS Serial Set Index for years prior to 1970. Prior to the 68th Congress it was entitled Appropriations,

New Offices, etc. For the 68th Congress it was entitled Appropriations, Estimates, etc. 5. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Balances of Budget Authori?. Washington, DC. (ASI microfiche 104-8) 6. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Budget of the United Smtes Government. Washington. DC: Government

Printing Office. (PrEx2,8:[fiscal year]) The President’s budget proposal has been issued under this Superintendent of Document classification number since 1962. Earlier classes are: FY 1955-61 Pr34.107:[fiscal year] FY 1947-54 Pr33.107:[fiscal year] FY 194146 Pr32,107:[fiscal year] FY 1923-40 T51.5:[fiscal year] The Budget has also been published as a House document.

7. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Budget of the U.S. Government, Appendix. (PrExZ.R:[fiscal yearliapp.) This has been published as a separate document since I95 I. Prior to 195 1 it was included in the main budget document.

8. U.S. General Accounting Office. Budget Reductions for Fiscal Year 1986. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (S.doc. 99-23)

This report was published as a Senate document and as a General Accounting Office report (GA 1.13:OCG86- I ). Due to the Supreme Court ruling it will no longer be issued.

9. Budgetingfor America: The Politics and Process of Federal Spending. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1982.

10. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (PrExt.ZO:date)

I 1. U.S. General Accounting Office. Compliance Report for Fiscal Year 1986: Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office. (GA I. 13:OCG-86-2)

12. U.S. Congress. House. Budget Committee. The Congressional Budget Process. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (Y4.B85/3:C76/6/date)

13. Oleszak, Walter J. Congressional Procedures and the Polio, Process, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1984. 14. Zwim, Jerrold. Congressional Publications: A Research Guide to Legislation, Budgets, and Treaties. Littleton, CO:

Libraries Unlimited, 1983 15. Congressional Quarterly’s Understanding the Federal Budget Process. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly

Inc., 1986. 16. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Current Budget Estimates. Washington, DC. (ASI microfiche 104-17) 17. President of United States. Economic Report of The President. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

(Pr38.9:date) 18. The Federal Budget Process: Procedures and Strategies in Congress and the Executive Branch. Washington. DC:

Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1986. 19. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Federal Government Finances. Washington, DC. (AS1 microfiche 104-12)

236 E. HANSEN

20.

21.

22. 23.

24.

25.

26.

27. 28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34. 35. 36.

37.

38.

U.S. General Accounting Office. A Glossa? of Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process and Related Accounting, Economic, and Tax Terms. 3rd. ed. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1981. (GA 1.2:B85/2/981) U.S. Connress. Senate. Budget Committee. 99th Congress, 1 st session. Gramm-Rudman-Nollings and the Congressi&al Budget Process.-Washington. DC: Government Printing Office, 1986. (Y4.B85/2:S.prt.99-119) Collender, Stanley E. Guide to the Federal Budger. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press, 1987. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Hisron’caf T&es, Budget of the United Srates Government. (PrEx 28/8:[fscal year]) U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Mid-Session Review of the (FY) Budget. Washington, DC. (PrEx2.31:date)

For fiscal years 1975 through 1981 this report is available in the ASI microfiche collection (ASI 104-7). For subsequent fiscal years it is available in paper. For fiscal years 1982 through 1985 it was classed as PrEx2,2:B85/4/date. For fiscal years 1986 to date it is classed as PrEx2.31:date.

U.S. Treasury Department Monthly Treasuv Statement ofReceipts and Outlays of the U.S. Government. Washington, DC: Govemment Printing Office. (T 1512:date) U.S. Treasury Department. monthly Statement #the Public Debt ofrhe U.S. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (TI .5/3:date) U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Object Class Analysis. Washington, DC. (ASI microfiche 104-9) U.S. General Accounting Office. Principles of Federal Appropriations Law. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 1982. (GA l.l4:F31) U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Report to the Senate and House Committees on the Budget as Required by Public Law 93-344. Washington, DC. (Y10.13:date)

a.) This report includes the *‘baseline budget projections” fo~ulated by the Congressional Budget Office. When the report is issued in multiple parts, the projections are usually included in part 1, entitled “Economic and Budget Outlook (FY).” For fiscal years 1977 through 1978 this report was published separately and classed as Y10.2:B85/2/[fiscal year]. The fiscal year 1981 report was classed as Y10.16:981. For fiscal years 1979 through 1980 and 1980 to present it has been included in this report. b.) The budget options report is usually published as part 2 of this report when it is issued in multiple parts. In fiscal years 1977 and 1978, it was classed as Y10.2:B85/3/[fiscal year]. The fiscal year 1979 report was classed as Y 10.2:BS5/9/pts.

U.S. Congress. House and Senate. Seque.~tration Orderfcw Fiscal Year 1986. Washington, DC: Govemment Printing Office. (H.Dac.99-160 and S.Doc.99-24)

The sequestration order was published both as a House and as a Senate document. The order, without the detailed tables, also appeared in the Federal Register (~01.51, no.23)

U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Sequestration Report for Fiscal Year 1986: A Summary. Washington, DC. (Y10.18:986)

This appears to be the permanent classification for the summary of the joint Office of Management and Budge~Congressional Budget Office report. The full report is published in the January 15, 1986 Federal Register (~01.51. no.10). Its location can be identified with the CIS Federal Register index. The Supreme Court had no objection to the involvement of the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget in the sequestration process, and this report will continue to appear. It will be issued twice, an initial report appearing on August 20 and a revision on October 5.

U.S. Congress. Budget Committee. Social Securi@ Medicare, and the Unified Budget. 99th Congress. 1st session. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1985. (Y4.B85/2:S.prt.99-83) U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Special Annl~ses, Budget of rhr United States (PrEx2,8/5:[fiscal year])

Since fiscal year 1979. the current services estimates have been included in the special analyses accompanying the President’s budget. The first current services estimates, for fiscal year 1976, were published as a committee print of the Joint Economic Committee (Y4.Ec7:Se6/976), The estimates for fiscal years 1977 and 1978 were published as Congressional documents (H.Doc. 94-306 and S.Doc. 95-4, respectively)

U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Supplertienf to Special Ana(vsis. Washington, DC. (PrEx2,2:Sp3isupp.) U.S. Treasury Department. Treasury Bulletin. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (T 1.3:date) U.S. Office of Management and Budget. The United States Budget in Brid(PrExZ.S12:[fiscal year]) This report has received various classifications. For 1958 through 1961 it vvas Pr34.107/2:[fiscal year]; for 1955 through 1957 it was classed Pr34,lOZ:B85/2/~fiscal year]. U.S. Treasury Department. Unired States Government Annurtl Report. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (T I I i3:date)

This repnn has been published under this title since 1984. From 1940 through 1983 it was entitled Treasuo Combined Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the U.S. Government (T63.113:date).

U.S. Congress. Senate. “Views and Estimates of Senate Committees.” The views and estimates of the Senate committees are more difficult to locate than those of the House. The Senate did not compile these reports in a single volume until fiscal year 1986. when the Senate Budget Committee printed them in its report accompanyin the budget resolution. It appears that the Budget Committee will continue this practice. Individual Senate committees occasionally publish their views and estimates as committee prints. The Senate Appropriations Committee has routinely published its views and estimates separately, and until 1983 its report was classed Y4,Ap6/2:B85/5/date. The Environment and Public Works, Finance. and Indian Affairs committees have also published views and estimates separately. Starting in 1983 all Senate committee prints have been assigned Senate committee print (“S.prt.“) numbers and consequently these reports receive different numbers


each year. The CIYIndex or CISIAnnual may be used to locate specific issues. 39. U.S. Congress. House. Budget Committee. Views and Estimates of the Committees of the House and the Joint

Committees. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. (Y4.B85/3-[fiscal year]) This Superintendent of Documents class was assigned to the House views and estimates starting with the FY 1987 reports. For fiscal years 1977 through 1986 the Sudocs class was Y4.B85/3:H81/[liscal year]. Some House committees have also published their views and estimates separately. Most recently these have been.

Appropriations (Y4.Ap6/1-lO:[fiscal year]) Education and Labor (Y4.Ed8/1-1 l:[date]) Interior and Insular Affairs (Y4.h18/14-1 l:[fiscal year]) Veterans Affairs (Y4.V64/3-lO:[fiscal year]) Ways and Means (Y4.W36: 104/[date])

The CIWIndex and CISIAnnual are useful for locating these reports. ‘Congressional committee budget estimates reports” is the relevant subject heading.

APPENDIX III

The Congressional Budget Timetable 1975-1985 (Fiscal Years 1976-l 986)

October 1 October-

December October 10 December 3 1 January March 15 April 1 April 15 May 15

May 15- September

August September 15 September 25 October 1

Previous fiscal year begins

Congressional Budget Office five year budget projections report (29a) President submits current services budget (33) Joint Economic Committee reports analysis of the current services budget to the budget committees (1) President submits his budget proposal 15 days after Congress convenes (6, 7, 23, 33, 34, 36) All committees submit views and estimates to their budget committees (38, 39) Congressional Budget Office submits report on budget options to the budget committees (29b) Deadline for budget commmittees to report first budget resolution Congress completes action on first budget resolution; deadline for committees to report authorization

bills

Congress enacts appropriations and spending bills Budget committees prepare second budget resolution and report Congress completes action on second budget resolution Congress completes action on reconciliation bill or resolution Fiscal year begins

Numbers in parentheses refer to entries in Appendix II

APPENDIX IV

The Congressional Budget Timetable as Revised by Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and PL lOO- 119

January February 15

February 25 April 1

April 15 May 15 June 10 June 15 June 30 August 15 August 20 August 25

October 1 October 10 October 15

November 15

On or before the first Monday after January 3 the President must submit his budget Congressional Budget Office submits report on budget options to budget committees

All commmittees submit views and estimates to their budget committees Senate Budget Committee reports budget resolution; no deadline is specified for the House Budget

Committee Congress completes action on the budget resolution Annual appropriations bills may be considered in the House House Appropriations Committee reports last annual appropriation bill Congress completes action on reconcilation Congress completes action on annual appopriations bills Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget issue deficit “snapshot” Congressional Budget Office transmits its deficit report to the Office of Management and Budget Office of Management and Budget transmits its deficit report to the President; President issues OMB

report as his initial sequestration order Initial sequestration order takes effect; fiscal year begins Second CBO deficit report transmitted to OMB Final OMB deficit report transmitted to President; President issues final sequestration order, effective

immediately Comptroller General issues sequestration compliance report

Introduction to the U.S. congressional budget process

Documents

Transcript of Introduction to the U.S. congressional budget process