GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1951 HEARINGS 1.5. Congress. Senate. BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS EIGHTY-FIRST CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON H. R. 7786 CARD DIVISION AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE SUPPORT YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1951, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 98 GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1951 WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 1950 UNITED STATES SENATE, Washington, D. C. The committee met at 2 p. m., pursuant to call, in room F-37, the Capitol, Hon. Kenneth McKellar, chairman, presiding. Present: Senators McKellar, Hayden, Thomas, O'Mahoney, Maybank, Ellender, Hill, Kilgore, Robertson, Bridges, Gurney, Ferguson, Wherry, Cordon, Saltonstall, Young, and Knowland. Chairman MCKELLAR. The committee will come to order. Gentlemen, this is an executive meeting; but I have been asked by one Senator to permit a budget officer to attend. Senator BRIDGES. He is Colonel Moore of the Army. Chairman MCKELLAR. I am sure he will regard the proceedings as confidential. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. It is so ordered. The committee has before it chapters X-A and XI of the General Appropriation Act for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1951. We have as our witness this afternoon Mr. Frederick J. Lawton, Director, Bureau of the Budget. Mr. Lawton, you may submit your statement for the record and then make such comments as you wish; or would you prefer to read your statement? CHAPTERS X-A AND XI-GENERAL PROVISIONS STATEMENT OF FREDERICK J. LAWTON, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET Mr. LAWTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read this brief covering statement first. Chairman McKELLAR. Very well, sir. Mr. LAWTON. In compliance with the request of the subcommittee, I am submitting for the record a factual explanation of each section of the general provisions in title XI of the General Appropriation Act, 1951, as passed by the House. SECTIONS 1111 AND 1114 OF CHAPTER XI With respect to all of the sections except two, these explanations were prepared by the Bureau of the Budget. However, with respect to section 1111, which amends the Antideficiency Act, and section 1114, limiting the filling of vacancies, the explanations are those of fered in debate on the floor of the House. In both instances those explanations appeared to be factually correct and seem to represent the best evidence of the intention of the House. LACK OF AUTHORITATIVE EXPLANATION OF CHAPTER X-A There appears to be no authoritative explanation available for chapter X-A, relating to general reductions in appropriations and contract authorizations. That chapter raises numerous questions which would have to be answered eventually by the Comptroller General if it were to become law. We have made as much of a study of the chapter as was possible within the time allowed, and I shall be glad to point up to the committee some of the numerous questions which it poses. DISCUSSION OF SEVERAL SECTIONS IN CHAPTER XI SECTIONS 1101 TO 1109 Sections 1101 to 1109 have appeared in substantially the same form in prior appropriation acts, usually in the independent offices appropriation act. They represent nothing new and contain nothing which is presently in controversy. SECTION 1110 Section 1110 would require that all transfers from one appropriation to another be made by check, thus substituting one method for the several procedures which are currently in use. While this results in a somewhat inflexible rule by requiring the use of a check in every case, it appears to be generally desirable and should result in simplifying accounting procedure by eliminating the use of warrants in connection with transfers between appropriations. Also, section 1110 would limit the availability for obligation of funds transferred from one agency to another for the furnishing of supplies or the rendering of services. Under existing law, annual appropriations which are transferred for that purpose are available to the performing agency for obligation for two full years after the year for which the appropriation is made. If this section were enacted, the performing agency would be in the same position as the ordering agency; that is, the funds transferred would not be available for obligattion after the fiscal year for which they were appropriated. We have assumed that the provisions of this section will not apply to any transactions entered into prior to the effective date of the section. For orders placed thereafter for services to be performed by another agency, difficulties would result in certain instances where the services ordered might require the employment of personal services or the ordering of supplies by the performing agency in a subsequent fiscal year. If, however, the section is not applied retroactively, it is believed that such difficulties could be resolved by financing the order from successive annual appropriations of the ordering agency as they become available, or by securing specific authority for the continuation of appropriation availability for more than one fiscal year where that procedure may be justified in particular in stances. Balanced against the administrative difficulties which might result from this section is the fact that the present law, permitting annual appropriations to continue available to the performing agency for obligation for a maximum of 3 years, tends to increase the problem of maintaining control of appropriated funds. On the whole, the question of extended availability of appropriations in the case of such transfers is one of policy for the Congress, and we have no objection to the section as it now stands in the House bill. Senator ROBERTSON. May I ask a question? Whose control are you referring to at the end of the first paragraph on page 3? Do you refer there to the control by the agency? That paragraph states, in part, 66* * * tends to increase the problem of maintaining control of appropriated funds." I assume the change was made so that Congress could better control the appropriated funds? Mr. LAWTON. It was. The provision is that the funds have to be used by the agency to which they are transferred within the same year that they are transferred. Senator ROBERTSON. That is what I thought. SECTION 1111, REVISING ANTIDEFICIENCY ACT Mr. LAWTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to proceed with a further statement, if there are no other questions on these first 10 sections. That further statement is with respect to section 1111 which is the revision of Antideficiency Act. Chairman MCKELLAR. Are there any questions on the first 10 sections? Apparently there are not. Will you proceed, Mr. Lawton? Mr. LAWTON. Section 1111 is a revision of the Antideficiency Act, substantially in accord with that proposed by the Bureau of the Budget and the General Accounting Office in a joint report made by them at the request of the Senate Appropriations Committee on June 5, 1947. The principal difference is that section 1111 provides for apportionment of all funds of Government corporations, whereas the joint report just mentioned would have provided for apportionment only of corporate funds available for administrative expenses. In general, the section is a modernization and clarification of the present Antideficiency Act, the apportionment provisions of which were originally enacted in 1905. The principal effects of the revised section are as follows: (1) It makes all appropriations subject to apportionment, except certain specified classes which may be exempted by the apportioning authority. Among the items which could be exempted are receipts from industrial and power operations. By a floor amendment, specific exemption was granted for corporations which obtain funds for making loans (other than paid-in capital) without legal liability on the part of the United States. Senator FERGUSON. Do you object to being interrupted? |