« PreviousContinue »
03d Congress, 1st Session - - - - - - - Senate Document No. 93–109
NINETY-THIRD CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
I.—APPROPRIATIONS MADE DURING THE FIRST SESSION OF THE NINETY-
II.-PERMANENT APPROPRIATIONS.–FEDERAL FUNDS (pp. 1055–1068)
V.—CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF REGULAR AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIA-
VI. AMOUNT OF LOANS AUTHORIZED BY APPROPRIATION OR OTHER ACTS, CON-
VII.-AUTHORIZATIONS FOR APPROPRIATIONS (pp. 1109–1115)
IX. —COMPARISON OF BUDGET ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATIONS BY SESSIONS
X.—TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS BY SESSIONS OF CONGRESS (pp. 1247–1249)
PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTIox of THE CoMMITTEE on APPROPRIAT10Ns of THE SENATE AND House of
W. PROCTOR JONES
1. The Legislative Appropriation Act approved June 7, 1924, provided: “In lieu of the data relating to offices created and omitted and salaries increased and reduced, the statement shall hereafter contain such additional information concerning estimates and appropriations, as the committees may deem necessary.” * Such data had been tabulated in previous volumes of this work for each session of Congress from the Fiftieth to the Sixty-seventh, inclusive, covering the fiscal years 1889 to 1924, inclusive.
2. This compilation contains laws affecting or making appropriations which were enacted during the first session of the 93d Congress, with the exception of private relief acts containing appropriations. Such private acts have been omitted from this compilation but a summary thereof containing the number of the act, the beneficiaries, and the amount appropriated is included. Appropriations for four activities excluded from their regular bills due to lack of authorizing legislation are provided through continuing appropriations as follows: (1) Public Law 93–52, as amended, provides financing for the National Commission on Productivity through December 22, 1973; and (2) Section 502 of Public Law 93–245 (Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1974) provides funding for the Cabinet Committee on Opportunities for Spanish-Speaking People and Salaries and Expenses and Manpower Training Services under the Department of Labor, Manpower Administration, through June 30, 1974.
3. This volume also contains various comparative tabulations showing for the session,
and by fiscal years, and in both detailed and summarized form, the Presidential
budget estimates (requests) for “appropriations” and certain other types of requests involving the appropriation of obligating and spending authority.
4. While required by the Constitution as a necessary prerequisite to the withdrawal of any money from the Treasury, through long usage the term “appropriation” acquired a definite, technical word-of-art meaning in relation to many details and summaries in the annual budget of the President, in the making available of obligational and spending authority, and in tabulations and summarizations of congressional fiscal actions. If o: proposition did not “appropriate” within the concept thus imparted to the term, then it was not added in the “appropriation” totals. If it did so “appropriate”, it was added in. Thus, in congressional tabulations generally a “reappropriation” (extension) of a balance of a Fo appropriation was not added in even though it provided obligational and spending authority beyond what would in its absence have been the case. An “authorization to expend from debt receipts” (sometimes called “public debt borrowing authority”) was not counted as an “appropriation” even though it conveyed both authority to obligate and authority to expend. An authorization to enter into contracts in advance of an appropriation (“contract authorization”), being authority to of: the Government but not to ea'pend money, was not added in the general “appropriation” totals. But a subsequent “appropriation, to liquidate” that contract authorization—an authority to expend money but not to create additional obligations—was counted as an “appropriation”.
Furthermore, historically, prior to fiscal year 1969 the general budgetary and congressional appropriation totals were arranged and presented so as to give greater emphasis and prominence to those, dealing with Federal, or Federally-owned funds, as distinct from trust funds which the Government theoretically holds in a fiduciary capacity. Although prior to the fiscal year 1938 (75th Cong., 1st sess.) such trust funds were relatively insignificant in the total appropriations picture, they subsequently came to loom large, and while separately tabulated and noted in volumes of this work previous to the 90th Congo, 2d sess., they were not included in the aggregate totals of “approopriations”generally emphasized and cited. (See note, table X, involumes prior to the 90th Cong, 2d sess.). But in subsequent volumes, including this volume, they are incorporated in general appropriation totals. on anno Title 31 U.S.C., section 2, dealing with the national budget system, provides that the term “appropriations” includes, in appropriate context “* * * funds and authorizations to e obligations by contract in advance of appropriations, or any other ity making funds available for obligation or expenditure.” ubo- - |- to so pecial Wote-A further significant departure in what is now included in several general summary tabulations which was not so included in these volumes prior to the 90th Cong., 2d sess., has to do with obligational or spend: ing authority conveyed in acts other than the regular annual and supplemental “appropriation” acts. Copies of such acts, and certain specific tabulations related to them, usually appear in one way or another in such prior volumes, but the amounts were not cranked directly into a number of the overall summary tabulations as has been done in volumes beginning with the 90th Cong., 2d sess. This especially affects tables VIII, IX, and X. To retain some consistency of ready identity as between amounts relating to the regular annual and supplemental “appropriation” acts and amounts relating to “appropriations in legislative acts”, there is a breakout along these lines in of of these three tables (in some years, the “legislative act” amounts are quite significant, relatively. And sometimes, it is not easy or possible to nail down with absolute precision the amounts involved in the “budget estimates” or the amounts “appropriated”). A new, unified budget concept recommended by the President's Commis- . sion on Budget Concepts in its report of October 10, 1967, was embraced by the President, and the Budget for 1969 incorporated most of its basic features. The object was to secure usage, as nearly as may be practicable, of a single concept of appropriations, receipts, expenditures, lending, and debt in order to promote public and o understanding of Federal fiscal and budget actions and matters. The various comparative tabulations and summaries in this volume conform generally to the new o: in-respect to “appropriations.” (For a more detailed exposition of the new concept, see the Report of the Commission, especially in relation to “appropriations,” pp. 6, 12, 16,76, 95, and 100; Special Analysis A, the Budget for 1969; and hearings of February 8, 1968, before the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, on the Budget for 1969, p.40 and following.) Thus, in lieu of the terms “Estimates” and “Appropriations” used in volumes previous to the 90th Cong., 2d sess., subsequent volumes, including this volume, use the terms “Budget estimates of new (obligational) authority” and “New budget (obligational) authority appropriated.” In broad terms, by far the major single difference between aggregate general totals in this volume in contrast to those in volumes previous to the 90th Cong., 2d sess., is the inclusion, in this volume, of trust funds (virtually all of which, incidentally, in any session or year, flow automatically from permanent-type enactment of previous sessions that thus do not require action in bills of the current session). And even under the new concept, in . but a relative handful of instances the new budget
(obligational) authority requested and appropriated is in the old, conventional “appropriation” form as previously used and understood. Specifically, “new budget (obligational) authority” is derived by— Appropriations (as herein above described) excluding appropriations to liquidate contract authorization; plus Reappropriations; plus Contract authorizations; plus Authorizations to spend from debt receipts. It must be noted that there are, within the Government, certain inter-fund and intragovernmental payments between accounts that get counted in both laces. Principal examples: Interest on E. debt securities held by trust }. governmental contributions to employee retirement trust funds; general fund contributions to various insurance programs. And under the new unified concept, certain “proprietary receipts from the public” are offset against budget authority for budget summary presentation purposes. This situation can complicate if a simple addition of Federal fund totals and trust fund totals is made without reckoning with this “deduct” problem. [Note.—The aggregate “deduct” figure of $37,257,990,000 used in several of the summary tables in this volume is the amount relating to fiscal 1974 shown in the Budget for 1975 on page 287.]
COMMITTEES ON APPROPRIATIONS
MILTON R. YOUNG, North Dakota
ELFORD A. CEDERBERG, Michigan
NINETY-THIRD CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman
WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Washington
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.”
JAMIE L. WHITTEN, Mississippi
1 Majority members elected January 4, 1973. Minority members elected January 12, 1973. * Majority and minority members elected January 24, 1973, except as indicated.
* Resigned December 7, 1973.