Print Email. Comments 0. Please enter the text displayed in the image. Moreover, and except as provided below with respect to NDIA's right and ability to delete or remove a posting or any part thereof , NDIA does not endorse, oppose, or edit any opinion or information provided by you or another user and does not make any representation with respect to, nor does it endorse the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other material displayed, uploaded, or distributed by you or any other user.
Moreover, it is a policy of NDIA to take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other applicable intellectual property laws. If you become aware of postings that violate these rules regarding acceptable behavior or content, you may contact NDIA at I have read the legal notice.
With regard to a specific appropriations act, for example, funding levels may have been keyed to the lesser of the amounts provided in the House-passed or Senate-passed versions of the act. Beginning with FY, however, Congress largely abandoned the use of formulaic references to establish funding levels. Instead, the full text of some or all of the covered regular appropriations acts usually was incorporated into the full-year continuing resolution, thereby increasing its length considerably.
Secondly, the number of regular appropriations acts covered by full-year continuing resolutions increased significantly during the FYFY period. For the period covering FYFY, the number of regular appropriations acts covered by continuing resolutions for the full fiscal year ranged from one to eight averaging four. Beginning with FY and extending through FY, the number of covered acts ranged from 5 to 13 averaging 9. In the above respect, P.
Title IV extends through the end of the fiscal year the expiration of P. This full year continuing resolution extended through the end of the fiscal year the expiration date of P. This full year continuing resolution extended through the end of FY the expiration date of P. During the th Congress, the House and Senate appropriations subcommittee jurisdictions were not entirely parallel.
As a result, the forms in which the initial pieces of appropriations legislation were considered differed between the chambers. Continuing resolutions have been a significant element of the annual appropriations process during the last 15 fiscal years, covering FYFY While the average number of such measures enacted per year was about 6 6. Duration in days is measured, in the case of the initial continuing resolution for a fiscal year, from the first day of the year October 1.
For subsequent continuing resolutions for a fiscal year, duration in days is measured from the day after the expiration of the preceding continuing resolution.
The fifth continuing resolution for FY did not change the expiration date of January 31, , established in the preceding continuing resolution. During these last 15 fiscal years, Congress provided funding by means of a continuing resolution for an average of over four months Taking into account the total duration of continuing resolutions enacted for each fiscal year, the period for which continuing appropriations were provided ranged from 21 days to days.
On average, each of the 92 continuing resolutions enacted lasted for almost 29 In the first four instances FYFY , the expiration date in the final continuing resolution was set in the first quarter of the fiscal year, on a date occurring between October 21 and December The expiration date in the final continuing resolution for the next three fiscal years FYFY , however, was set in the following session on a date occurring between January 10 and February While the expiration dates in the final continuing resolutions for five of the next eight fiscal years FY, FY, FY, FY, and FY were in the first quarter of the fiscal year on a date occurring between December 8 and December 31, the final continuing resolution for FY carried an expiration date of March 11, The final continuing resolutions for FY and FY provided funding through the remainder of the fiscal year.
Figure 1 presents a representation of both the number and duration of continuing resolutions for FYFY As the figure shows, there is no significant correlation between these two variables. For example, six continuing resolutions were enacted for both FY and FY, but the same number of measures lasted for a period of 57 days for FY and only 21 days for FY The largest number of continuing resolutions enacted for a single fiscal year during this period—21 for FY—covered a period lasting 82 days, at an average duration of 3.
The smallest number enacted—two each for FY and FY—covered days and 79 days, respectively, at an average duration of 81 days and 40 days per act. Figure 1 also shows considerable mix in the use of shorter-term and longer-term continuing resolutions for a single fiscal year. For example, for FY, 21 continuing resolutions covered the first 82 days of the fiscal year.
The first 25 days were covered by a series of four continuing resolutions lasting between five and eight days each. The next 10 days, a period of intense legislative negotiations leading up to the national elections on November 7, , were covered by a series of 10 one-day continuing resolutions. The next 31 days were covered by two continuing resolutions, the first lasting 10 days and the second lasting 21 days. The first of these two continuing resolutions was enacted into law on November 4, the Saturday before the election, and extended through November 14, the second day of a lame-duck session.
The second continuing resolution was enacted into law on November 15 and expired on December 5, which was 10 days before the lame-duck session ended. The remaining five continuing resolutions, which ranged in duration from one to six days, covered the remainder of the lame-duck session and several days beyond as the final appropriations legislation passed by Congress was being processed for the President's approval.
Table 3 provides more detailed information on the number, length, and duration of continuing appropriations acts enacted for FYFY As indicated previously, this represents the period during which the congressional budget process as established by the Budget Act has been in effect, that is, since the change in the start of the fiscal year from July 1 to October 1.
Note : Each segment of a bar for a fiscal year represents the duration in days of one continuing resolution. The left-most segment represents the first continuing resolution, effective beginning on October 1 the start of the fiscal year. Duration in days is measured, in the case of the initial continuing resolution for a fiscal year, from the first day of the year through the expiration date. Duration in days is measured, in the case of the initial continuing resolution for a fiscal year, from the first day of the year October 1 through the expiration date.
In several instances, as appropriate, the number of days reflects an extra day in a leap year every fourth year beginning with calendar year Several continuing resolutions provided continuing appropriations for mixed periods of time.
For example, three continuing resolutions— P. See also the discussion of actions for FY under footnote "j. Title IV 95 Stat. Title I 98 Stat. Title I Stat. Section c of P. A total of 13 continuing resolutions were enacted for FY and one was vetoed during a period of heightened confrontation over budgetary legislation between Congress and President Bill Clinton. Two funding gaps occurred, the first in mid-November and the second from mid-December until early January The continuing resolutions for this year may be divided into two categories depending on whether their coverage generally was comprehensive or selective.
But like almost every household, organization, or business, your government functions best when it can plan for the long term. Federal agencies generally try to budget several years in advance. This helps ensure, among other things, that agencies can negotiate better deals when they enter into contracts. An ill-timed CR can make these best-laid plans go awry. That disrupts your timeline for construction, which disrupts your timeline for purchasing equipment, which disrupts your timeline for hiring.
Now, you need to redo all of your price estimates and timelines, and hope Congress follows through next time they try to pass an appropriations bill. Fortunately or unfortunately agencies have gotten used to CR uncertainty, and typically make Plan Bs in case CRs disrupt their plans.
But even this sort of contingency planning is problematic. For example, a United States Government Accountability Office GAO report exposed several instances where CRs disrupted agency operations—delaying contract awards, deferring hiring and training, unnecessarily increasing redundant work, and costing taxpayers more money in the long-term.
This all can sound abstract, but the impacts are very real. In one case cited by GAO, an agency delayed awarding a contract during a CR period in order to reserve money for more pressing needs. As bad as CRs can be, they are far better, less expensive, and less disruptive than government shutdowns.
So if the choice is shutdown or CR, a CR is almost always the better option.
0コメント