Circulation. 1996;93:1944-1945
(Circulation. 1996;93:1944-1945.)
© 1996 American Heart Association, Inc.
Shorthand Guide to the Congressional Budget Mess
Richard S. Hamburg, MPA;
Scott D. Ballin, JD
From the American Heart Association Office of Public Affairs, Washington,
DC.
Correspondence to Scott D. Ballin, JD, Office of Public Affairs, AHA, Ste 810, 1150 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington, DC 20036.
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
What do the balanced
budget, Medicare, tax cuts, and healthcare
reform all have in common?
During the 104th Congress, each has
been addressed under the proposed
omnibus budget reconciliation
legislation.
Many readers may be lost when it comes to understanding the workings of
the arcane federal budget process. Trying to untangle the web to
ascertain how much money has been allocated the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) can be deeply confusing. The following may be useful as
preparation for the fiscal year 1997 process.
 |
The Budget and the Budget Reconciliation Process
|
|---|
Early each year, the President submits a budget to Congress,
basically
an outline of the administration's fiscal policy. The
Congress
then authors a budget resolution containing targets for the
deficit,
revenues, and spending totals for 20 government functions for
a
5-year period.
In addition, the Federal Budget Act provides for a process called
budget reconciliation under which Congress conforms tax and spending
legislation to the levels set forth in the budget resolution. Changes
recommended by committees pursuant to reconciliation instructions are
incorporated into a reconciliation bill or resolution. In recent years,
the reconciliation measure also has served as a vehicle for attaching
authorizing legislation.
Congressional Quarterly refers to the reconciliation process
as one "in which tax laws and entitlement programs are changed, or
reconciled to achieve deficit-reduction targets set in the
congressional budget resolution."
Prior to 1995, passage of the most recent budget reconciliation bill
was in 1993. It contained a controversial mix of tax increases and
spending cuts, totaling $433 billion over 5 years.
In late 1995, House and Senate leaders pushed for a
constitutional balanced budget amendment. Although the proposal passed
the House, it narrowly failed in the Senate. The budget reconciliation
bill then became the vehicle for balancing the budget over a proposed
7-year period. The foundation of the legislation was a package of
measures that included a proposed $245 billion in tax cuts, balanced by
$270 billion in Medicare savings and $182 billion in Medicaid savings,
representing half of the proposed $894 billion, 7-year
proposed balanced-budget plan.
 |
The Appropriations Process
|
|---|
Budget reconciliation should not be confused with the
appropriations
process, in which 13 annual appropriations bills fund
programs
within limits established by authorizations. The legislation
gives
legal authority to spend or obligate money from the Treasury.
Of
particular importance to the American Heart Association is
the Labor,
Health and Human Services (HHS), and Education Appropriations
Bill,
containing over a quarter-trillion dollars for programs
that
include funding for the Department of Health and Human
Services,
including the NIH, and the Department of Education.
Last year, the Congress even approved a set of recisions, cuts in
spending from the previous fiscal year. Over $10 billion in recisions
were signed into law, including $79 million in funding for the NIH.
 |
The Continuing Resolution
|
|---|
Much attention has focused during the 104th Congress on the
threat
of "government shutdown" necessitated by a failure of
Congress
to approve all 13 regular appropriations measures on time. Six
of
13 appropriations bills had not been signed into law by December
15,
two and one-half months after the statutory deadline for
passage of
appropriations measures. A 3-week shutdown of departments
lacking new
appropriations then ensued, followed by the passage
of a number of
continuing resolutions, which were, in effect,
temporary emergency
funding for affected federal agencies. In
1995, rather than the
continuing resolution simply serving as
a temporary funding measure,
the leadership in the Congress
held the continuing resolution hostage
on a number of occasions
in order to convince the President to approve
a balanced budget
plan. As is already the case with budget
reconciliation and
appropriations, the continuing resolution is clearly
now a political
tool as well.
 |
What Does This Mean to Cardiovascular and
Stroke Funding?
|
|---|
Caught in this tangled governmental web is funding for biomedical
research.
Last year, the process began with the introduction of the
President's
fiscal year 1996 budget for the NIH, which included a 4%
increase
in funding. Later that year, despite the threat of massive
cuts
to the Labor/HHS Appropriations Bill, the House approved a 5.7%
increase
for NIH and the Senate a 2.7% increase. Unfortunately, not
only
did the full Congress fail to secure passage of a final Labor/HHS
bill,
but the legislation was not even brought to the Senate floor
for
a vote.
Subsequently, each of the Continuing Resolutions passed by the Congress
and signed into law by the President contained funding at the lesser of
the House and Senate proposed levels, in no case less than 75% of
fiscal year 1995 funding levels. Finally, in January, the Congress
passed year-long Continuing Resolutions for certain agreed-upon
critical departments and programs, including the NIH, which will be
funded at the House-passed level for fiscal year 1996,
$11.939 billion or 5.7% above fiscal year 1995.
 |
What to Expect in 1996
|
|---|
The budget and appropriations process has left a bad taste
in
the mouths of American taxpayers. We can only hope that during
this
election year the process will run far more smoothly. As
reported in
Circulation (March 1, 1996), the AHA is strongly
weighing in
on Capitol Hill with a new research funding initiative
that includes
the formation of a National Coalition for Heart
and Stroke Research,
collection of survey data on public attitudes
about federal heart and
stroke research, and expansion of its
grassroots network. For more
information, contact the AHA Office
of Public Affairs at (202)
822-9380.