Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Trump Administration Reform and Reorganization Plan: Discussion of 35 'Government - Wide' Proposals

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This memorandum provides a brief summary and some preliminary analysis of the Donald J. Trump Administration's recent proposals to restructure and reform agencies, programs, and operations in the executive branch. Specifically, the memorandum covers the 32 proposals characterized by the Trump Administration as 'Government-wide.' The 32 proposals include several sub-proposals, which, when enumerated separately as they are in this memorandum, bring the total to 35. The analysis of each proposal includes, to the extent possible, a discussion of statutes that might be involved in the proposed changes, and whether some changes might be achieved through administrative action. The memorandum includes research and writing of analysts and information professionals from across the Congressional Research Service (CRS)."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Hogue, Henry B.; Brass, Clinton T.

  2018-07-25
• Funding Gaps and Government Shutdowns: CRS Experts [November 28, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In the event of a funding gap, the potential impacts of a government shutdown would depend on a program's or agency's specific circumstances and, furthermore, how relevant law is interpreted. Table 1 provides names and contact information for CRS [Congressional Research Service] subject matter experts on policy concerns and legal issues relating to funding gaps and the processes and effects that may be associated with a government shutdown. Policy areas that are identified in Table 1 include [1] agencies and programs funded by specific regular appropriations bills; [2] cross-cutting shutdown issues; [3] domestic social policy-related programs and agencies; [4] foreign affairs, defense, and trade-related programs and agencies; [5] general government-related programs and agencies; and [6] resources, science, and technology-related programs and agencies."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2017-11-28
• Military Base Closures and Affected Defense Department Civil Service Employees [July 22, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "As a step in the 2005 round of the base realignment and closure (BRAC) process, the Department of Defense (DOD) has announced recommendations to close or realign a number of U.S. military installations. DOD estimated that the recommended realignments and closures would eliminate approximately 18,000 civilian positions and significantly restructure support functions. If the President and Congress proceed with implementation of the BRAC process, there will likely be several implications and options for affected DOD civil service employees, relating to reductions in force (RIFs); several types of transition assistance; DOD's National Security Personnel System (NSPS); and labor-management relations. This report will be updated if major changes occur in the BRAC process regarding DOD civil service employees."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Schwemle, Barbara L.; Brass, Clinton T.

  2005-07-22
• Sequestration at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): Air Traffic Controller Furloughs and Congressional Response [May 7, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. [Public Law] 112-25) provided for automatic reductions to most federal discretionary spending if no agreement on deficit reduction was reached by the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. Such reductions, referred to as sequestration, went into effect on March 1, 2013, which was the extended deadline for a deficit reduction agreement established under the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA; P.L. 112-240). In general, sequestration requires agencies to reduce spending for certain suballocations of funds--programs, projects, and activities--within nondefense discretionary accounts by 5.3% in FY2013. To implement the sequester-related reductions, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) began to furlough personnel, including air traffic controllers, on April 21, 2013. In the wake of concerns about the adverse effects of furloughs on air travel, the Senate passed S. 853, the Reducing Flight Delays Act of 2013 (RFDA), on April 25, 2013, by unanimous consent. The bill provided new authority to the Secretary of Transportation to transfer up to $253 million to FAA's 'operations' account from other FAA accounts, including discretionary grants-in-aid for airports. The next day, the House agreed to H.R. [House Resolution] 1765 under suspension of the rules. Under agreement, H.R. 1765, being identical in content to S. 853, was presented to the President on April 30, 2013, and was enacted on May 1, 2013, becoming P.L. 113-9. FAA halted furlough actions even before the bill was signed by President Obama. This report provides a brief overview of FAA's implementation of the sequester in April 2013, as it relates to air traffic control operations and staff furloughs. It then considers the congressional response, including the potential impact of the funds transfers authorized under P.L. 113-9 on FAA's Airport Improvement Program (AIP)."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Elias, Bartholomew; Brass, Clinton T.; Kirk, Robert S.

  2013-05-07
• Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the Appropriations Process: FAQs Regarding Potential Legislative Changes and Effects of a Government Shutdown [October 2, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Congress has yet to complete legislative action on any of the 12 regular appropriations bills to fund the routine operations of federal agencies for FY2014, which began on October 1, 2013. Moreover, lawmakers have been unable to agree on a continuing appropriations bill, or continuing resolution (CR), to provide funding for part or all of the new fiscal year. As a result, the federal government has begun a shutdown of programs that lack budget authority to continue operations in FY2014, except in certain circumstances. Congress is deeply divided over implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the health reform law enacted in March 2010. Some lawmakers opposed to the ACA have advocated the use of the appropriations process to eliminate funding for the law or to delay its implementation. On September 20, 2013, the House approved an FY2014 CR (H.J.Res. [House of Representatives Joint Resolution] 59) to provide temporary funding for the federal government until December 15, 2013. H.J.Res. 59, as passed by the House, incorporated language that would prohibit the use of any federal funds to carry out the ACA. The Senate amendment to H.J.Res. 59 did not incorporate the House ACA defunding language. The House then proposed changes to the Senate amendment to delay the ACA's implementation, but the Senate rejected those changes. With the two chambers unable to reach agreement on H.J.Res. 59 by October 1, 2013, the government commenced a partial shutdown of its operations."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Redhead, C. Stephen; Tollestrup, Jessica; Liu, Edward C. . . .

  2013-10-02
• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant Legislation in the 114th Congress [June 7, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In May 2016, the House Ways and Means Committee approved six bills related to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant. The bills include separate demonstration projects of social impact partnerships and subsidized employment, as well as four bills altering specific provisions of TANF. The TANF block grant funds grants to states, tribes, and territories for providing benefits, services, and activities to broadly address both the effects and root causes of childhood economic and social disadvantage. It was created in the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193), which culminated decades of debate over how to change public assistance programs for needy families with children. Most TANF policy dates back to the 1996 welfare law, as a full reauthorization of the block grant has never been enacted."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Falk, Gene; Keegan, Natalie; Brass, Clinton T.

  2016-06-07
• Obama Administration Agenda for Government Performance: Evolution and Related Issues for Congress [January 19, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This memorandum responds to congressional interest in the Barack Obama Administration's agenda for government performance, how the agenda has evolved, and related issues for Congress. Specifically, the memorandum discusses milestones in the agenda's development, including the Administration's statements of plans and commitments regarding how it would work with Congress and agencies."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2011-01-19
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [April 23, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack appropriated funding, they experience a funding gap. Under the Antideficiency Act, they must cease operations, except in certain emergency situations or when law authorizes continued activity. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on interim or full-year funding measures occasionally has caused government shutdowns, the longest of which lasted 21 days, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. Government shutdowns have necessitated furloughs of several hundred thousand federal employees, required cessation or reduction of many government activities, and affected numerous sectors of the economy. This report discusses the causes, processes, and effects of federal government shutdowns, including potential issues for Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2013-04-23
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [March 11, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack appropriated funding, they experience a funding gap. Under the Antideficiency Act, they must cease operations, except in emergency situations. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on interim or full-year funding measures occasionally has caused government shutdowns, the longest of which lasted 21 days, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. Government shutdowns have necessitated furloughs of several hundred thousand federal employees, required cessation or reduction of many government activities, and affected numerous sectors of the economy. This report discusses the causes, processes, and effects of federal government shutdowns, including potential issues for Congress. For questions concerning the impact of a shutdown on a specific agency or program, congressional operations, or judicial operations, see the contact information contained in the 'Key Policy Staff' table at the end of this report. For background on funding gaps, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RS20348, Federal Funding Gaps: A Brief Overview, by Jessica Tollestrup."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2011-03-11
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [February 18, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack appropriated funding, they experience a funding gap. Under the Antideficiency Act, they must cease operations, except in emergency situations. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on interim or full-year funding measures occasionally has caused government shutdowns, the longest of which lasted 21 days, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. Government shutdowns have necessitated furloughs of several hundred thousand federal employees, required cessation or reduction of many government activities, and affected numerous sectors of the economy. This report discusses the causes, processes, and effects of federal government shutdowns, including potential issues for Congress. For questions concerning congressional operations, see the contact information contained in the 'Key Policy Staff' table at the end of this report."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2011-02-18
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [September 25, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack appropriated funding, they experience a funding gap. Under the Antideficiency Act, they must cease operations, except in certain emergency situations or when law authorizes continued activity. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on interim or full-year funding measures occasionally has caused government shutdowns, the longest of which lasted 21 full days, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. Government shutdowns have necessitated furloughs of several hundred thousand federal employees, required cessation or reduction of many government activities, and affected numerous sectors of the economy. This report discusses the causes, processes, and effects of federal government shutdowns, including potential issues for Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2013-09-25
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [August 6, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack appropriated funding, they experience a funding gap. Under the Antideficiency Act, they must cease operations, except in certain emergency situations or when law authorizes continued activity. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on interim or full-year funding measures occasionally has caused government shutdowns, the longest of which lasted 21 days, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. Government shutdowns have necessitated furloughs of several hundred thousand federal employees, required cessation or reduction of many government activities, and affected numerous sectors of the economy. This report discusses the causes, processes, and effects of federal government shutdowns, including potential issues for Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2013-08-06
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [September 08, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack funding after the expiration of full-year or interim appropriations, the agencies and programs experience a funding gap. If funding does not resume in time to continue government operations, then, under the Antideficiency Act, an agency must cease operations, except in certain situations when law authorizes continued activity. The criteria that flow from the Antideficiency Act for determining which activities are affected are complex. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on full-year or interim funding measures occasionally has caused shutdowns of affected federal government activities. The longest such shutdown lasted 21 full days during FY1996 [Fiscal Year 1996], from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. More recently, a funding gap commenced on October 1, 2013, the first day of FY2014, after funding for the previous fiscal year expired. Because funding did not resume on October 1, affected agencies began to cease operations and furlough personnel that day. A 16-full-day shutdown ensued, the first to occur in over 17 years."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2014-09-08
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [May 5, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack funding after the expiration of full-year or interim appropriations, the agencies and programs experience a funding gap. If funding does not resume in time to continue government operations, then, under the Antideficiency Act, an agency must cease operations, except in certain situations when law authorizes continued activity. The criteria that flow from the Antideficiency Act for determining which activities are affected are complex. [...] This CRS [Congressional Research Service] report is intended to address questions that arise frequently related to the topic of government shutdowns. However, the report does not closely track developments related to the appropriations process for a given fiscal year."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.; Brudnick, Ida A.; Glassman, Matthew . . .

  2017-05-05
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [September 27, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack appropriated funding, they experience a funding gap. Under the Antideficiency Act, they must cease operations, except in emergency situations. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on interim or full-year funding measures occasionally has caused government shutdowns, the longest of which lasted 21 days, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. Government shutdowns have necessitated furloughs of several hundred thousand federal employees, required cessation or reduction of government activities, and affected all sectors of the economy. This report discusses the causes, processes, and effects of federal government shutdowns, including potential issues for Congress. For background on funding gaps, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RS20348, 'Federal Funding Gaps: A Brief Overview', by Robert Keith. This report will be updated annually."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2010-09-27
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [September 8, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This CRS [Congressional Research Service] report is intended to address questions that arise frequently related to the topic of government shutdowns. However, the report does not closely track developments related to the appropriations process for a given fiscal year. For links to CRS resources related to annual appropriations, see the 'CRS Appropriations Status Table,' at http://crs.gov/pages/ AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2014-09-08
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [November 30, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack funding after the expiration of full-year or interim appropriations, the agencies and programs experience a funding gap. If funding does not resume in time to continue government operations, then, under the Antideficiency Act, an agency must cease operations, except in certain situations when law authorizes continued activity. The criteria that flow from the Antideficiency Act for determining which activities are affected are complex. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on full-year or interim funding measures occasionally has caused shutdowns of affected federal government activities. The longest such shutdown lasted 21 full days during FY1996, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. More recently, a funding gap commenced on October 1, 2013, the first day of FY2014, after funding for the previous fiscal year expired. Because funding did not resume on October 1, affected agencies began to cease operations and furlough personnel that day. A 16-full-day shutdown ensued, the first to occur in over 17 years."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.; Brudnick, Ida A.; Keegan, Natalie . . .

  2017-11-30
• Shutdown of the Federal Government: Causes, Processes, and Effects [December 10, 2018]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When federal agencies and programs lack funding after the expiration of full-year or interim appropriations, the agencies and programs experience a funding gap. If funding does not resume in time to continue government operations, then, under the Antideficiency Act, an agency must cease operations, except in certain situations when law authorizes continued activity. Funding gaps are distinct from shutdowns, and the criteria that flow from the Antideficiency Act for determining which activities are affected by a shutdown are complex. Failure of the President and Congress to reach agreement on full-year or interim funding measures occasionally has caused shutdowns of affected federal government activities. The longest such shutdown lasted 21 full days during FY1996, from December 16, 1995, to January 6, 1996. More recently, a relatively long funding gap commenced on October 1, 2013, the first day of FY2014, after funding for the previous fiscal year expired. Because funding did not resume on October 1, affected agencies began to cease operations and furlough personnel that day. A 16-full-day shutdown ensued, the first to occur in over 17 years. Subsequently, two comparatively brief shutdowns occurred during FY2018, in January and February 2018, respectively."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.; Brudnick, Ida A.; Keegan, Natalie . . .

  2018-12-10
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [January 4, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The gross federal debt, which represents the federal government's total outstanding debt, consists of two types of debt: (1) debt held by the public and (2) debt held in government accounts, also known as intragovernmental debt. Federal government borrowing increases for two primary reasons: (1) budget deficits and (2) investments of any federal government account surpluses in Treasury securities, as required by law. Nearly all of this debt is subject to the statutory limit. The federal debt limit currently stands at $16,394 billion. Treasury has yet to face a situation in which it was unable to pay its obligations as a result of reaching the debt limit. In the past, the debt limit has always been raised before the debt reached the limit. However, on several occasions Treasury took extraordinary actions to avoid reaching the limit and, as a result, affected the operations of certain programs. If the Secretary of the Treasury determines that the issuance of obligations of the United States may not be made without exceeding the public debt limit, Treasury can make use of 'extraordinary measures.' Some of these measures require the Treasury Secretary to authorize a debt issuance suspension period."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Levit, Mindy R.; Brass, Clinton T.; Nicola, Thomas J.

  2013-01-04
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [February 11, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The federal government's statutory debt limit is currently $14,294 billion (P.L. 111-139).1 On January 6, 2011, Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner issued a letter to Congress stating that the debt limit would be reached sometime between March 31 and May 16, 2011. Treasury has subsequently revised these estimates saying they now expect to reach the debt limit sometime between April 5, 2011, and May 31, 2011, due to an upward revision to projected receipts and a downward revision in projected debt to be issued to government trust funds. […] This report examines the possibility of the federal government reaching its statutory debt limit and not raising it, with a particular focus on government operations. First, the report explains the nature of the federal government's debt, the processes associated with federal borrowing, and historical events that may influence prospective actions. It also includes an analysis of what could happen if the federal government may no longer issue debt, has exhausted alternative sources of cash, and, therefore, depends on incoming receipts or other sources of funds to provide any cash needed to liquidate federal obligations.3 Finally this report lays out considerations for increasing the debt limit under current policy and what impact fiscal policy could have on the debt limit going forward."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nicola, Thomas J.; Nuschler, Dawn; Shelton, Alison M. . . .

  2011-02-11
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [May 31, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The gross federal debt, which represents the federal government's total outstanding debt, consists of two types of debt: (1) debt held by the public and (2) debt held in government accounts, also known as intragovernmental debt. Federal government borrowing increases for two primary reasons: (1) budget deficits and (2) investments of any federal government account surpluses in Treasury securities, as required by law. Nearly all of this debt is subject to the statutory limit. The federal debt limit currently stands at $16,394 billion. Treasury has yet to face a situation in which it was unable to pay its obligations as a result of reaching the debt limit. In the past, the debt limit has always been raised before the debt reached the limit. However, on several occasions Treasury took extraordinary actions to avoid reaching the limit and, as a result, affected the operations of certain programs. If the Secretary of the Treasury determines that the issuance of obligations of the United States may not be made without exceeding the public debt limit, Treasury can make use of 'extraordinary measures.' Some of these measures require the Treasury Secretary to authorize a debt issuance suspension period. After a lengthy debate over the debt limit in the summer of 2011, the enactment of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) on August 2, 2011, provided for an increase in the debt limit to its current level. Secretary Geithner has stated that the current debt limit will likely be reached before the end of the year and the use of extraordinary measures could likely stave off an increase in the debt limit until early 2013."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Levit, Mindy R.; Brass, Clinton T.; Nicola, Thomas J. . . .

  2012-05-31
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [June 3, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The gross federal debt, which represents the federal government's total outstanding debt, consists of two types of debt: (1) debt held by the public and (2) debt held in government accounts, also known as intragovernmental debt. Federal government borrowing increases for two primary reasons: (1) budget deficits and (2) investments of any federal government account surpluses in Treasury securities, as required by law. Nearly all of this debt is subject to the statutory limit. The federal debt limit currently stands at $14,294 billion. Treasury has yet to face a situation in which it was unable to pay its obligations as a result of reaching the debt limit. In the past, the debt limit has always been raised before the debt reached the limit. However, on several occasions Treasury took extraordinary actions to avoid reaching the limit and, as a result, affected the operations of certain programs. If the Secretary of the Treasury determines that the issuance of obligations of the United States may not be made without exceeding the public debt limit, Treasury can make use of 'extraordinary measures.' […] The need to raise (or lower) the limit during a session of Congress is driven by previous decisions regarding revenues and spending stemming from legislation enacted earlier in the session or in prior years. Nevertheless, the consideration of debt-limit legislation often is viewed as an opportunity to reexamine fiscal and budgetary policy. Consequently, House and Senate action on legislation adjusting the debt limit often is complicated, hindered by policy disagreements, and subject to delay."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nicola, Thomas J.; Brass, Clinton T.; Levit, Mindy R. . . .

  2011-06-03
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [April 27, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The gross federal debt, which represents the federal government's total outstanding debt, consists of two types of debt: (1) debt held by the public and (2) debt held in government accounts, also known as intragovernmental debt. Federal government borrowing increases for two primary reasons: (1) budget deficits and (2) investments of any federal government account surpluses in Treasury securities, as required by law. Nearly all of this debt is subject to the statutory limit. The federal debt limit currently stands at $14,294 billion. Treasury has yet to face a situation in which it was unable to pay its obligations as a result of reaching the debt limit. In the past, the debt limit has always been raised before the debt reached the limit. However, on several occasions Treasury took extraordinary actions to avoid reaching the limit and, as a result, affected the operations of certain programs. If the Secretary of the Treasury determines that the issuance of obligations of the United States may not be made without exceeding the public debt limit, Treasury can make use of 'extraordinary measures.' Some of these measures require the Treasury Secretary to authorize a debt issuance suspension period. [...] It is extremely difficult for Congress to effectively influence short-term fiscal and budgetary policy through action on legislation adjusting the debt limit. The need to raise (or lower) the limit during a session of Congress is driven by previous decisions regarding revenues and spending stemming from legislation enacted earlier in the session or in prior years. Nevertheless, the consideration of debt-limit legislation often is viewed as an opportunity to reexamine fiscal and budgetary policy."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Levit, Mindy R.; Brass, Clinton T.; Nicola, Thomas J.

  2011-04-27
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [July 27, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The gross federal debt, which represents the federal government's total outstanding debt, consists of two types of debt: (1) debt held by the public and (2) debt held in government accounts, also known as intragovernmental debt. Federal government borrowing increases for two primary reasons: (1) budget deficits and (2) investments of any federal government account surpluses in Treasury securities, as required by law. Nearly all of this debt is subject to the statutory limit. The federal debt limit currently stands at $14,294 billion. Treasury has yet to face a situation in which it was unable to pay its obligations as a result of reaching the debt limit. In the past, the debt limit has always been raised before the debt reached the limit. However, on several occasions Treasury took extraordinary actions to avoid reaching the limit and, as a result, affected the operations of certain programs. […] It is extremely difficult for Congress to effectively influence short-term fiscal and budgetary policy through action on legislation adjusting the debt limit. The need to raise (or lower) the limit during a session of Congress is driven by previous decisions regarding revenues and spending stemming from legislation enacted earlier in the session or in prior years. Nevertheless, the consideration of debt-limit legislation often is viewed as an opportunity to reexamine fiscal and budgetary policy. Consequently, House and Senate action on legislation adjusting the debt limit often is complicated, hindered by policy disagreements, and subject to delay."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Levit, Mindy R.; Brass, Clinton T.; Nicola, Thomas J. . . .

  2011-07-27
• Reaching the Debt Limit: Background and Potential Effects on Government Operations [November 21, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The gross federal debt, which represents the federal government's total outstanding debt, consists of two types of debt: (1) debt held by the public and (2) debt held in government accounts, also known as intragovernmental debt. Federal government borrowing increases for two primary reasons: (1) budget deficits and (2) investments of any federal government account surpluses in Treasury securities, as required by law. Nearly all of this debt is subject to the statutory limit. The federal debt limit is currently suspended through February 7, 2014. Treasury has yet to face a situation in which it was unable to pay its obligations as a result of reaching the debt limit. In the past, the debt limit has always been raised before the debt reached the limit. However, on several occasions Treasury took extraordinary actions to avoid reaching the limit which, as a result, affected the operations of certain programs. If the Secretary of the Treasury determines that the issuance of obligations of the United States may not be made without exceeding the public debt limit, Treasury can make use of 'extraordinary measures.' Some of these measures require the Treasury Secretary to authorize a debt issuance suspension period."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Nuschler, Dawn; Nicola, Thomas J.; Brass, Clinton T. . . .

  2013-11-21
• Interim Continuing Resolutions (CRs): Potential Impacts on Agency Operations [October 14, 2011]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Continuing appropriations acts, often known as continuing resolutions (CRs), have been a component of the annual appropriations process for decades. When Congress and the President do not reach final decisions about one or more regular appropriations acts by the beginning of the federal fiscal year, October 1, they often enact a CR. Two general types of CRs are used. An 'interim' CR provides agencies with stopgap funding for a period of time until final appropriations decisions are made, or until enactment of another interim CR. A 'full-year' CR provides final funding amounts for the remainder of a fiscal year in lieu of one or more regular appropriations acts. 'Anomalies' may be included in an interim CR to prevent what parties to CR negotiations perceive as major problems that would be caused if an otherwise uniform approach were used to provide funding and impose related restrictions. The President, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and agencies often are involved with Congress in the process of formulating, negotiating, and implementing interim CRs. An implication of their involvement is that they may influence the potential impacts of interim CRs. […] Related issues for Congress may include use of anomalies to manage impacts, congressional access to information and views from agencies and their employees, and the assumptions that are used when assessing potential impacts. More extensive analysis on this subject is available in CRS [Congressional Research Service] Congressional Distribution Memorandum, 'Potential Impacts of Interim Continuing Resolutions (CRs) on Agency Operations and the Functioning of the Federal Government', coordinated by Clinton T. Brass (available on request). This report will be updated annually or more frequently as events warrant."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2011-10-14
• Changes to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA): Overview of the New Framework of Products and Processes [February 29, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On January 4, 2011, the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) became law. The acronym 'GPRA' in the act's short title refers to the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA 1993), a law that GPRAMA substantially modified. When GPRA 1993 was enacted, it was regarded as a watershed for the federal government. For the first time, Congress established statutory requirements for most agencies to set goals, measure performance, and submit related plans and reports (hereafter, 'products') to Congress for its potential use. After a four-year phase-in period for GPRA 1993 and 13 years of the law's full implementation, GPRAMA makes substantial changes. Among other things, GPRAMA continues three agency-level products from GPRA 1993, but with changes; establishes new products and processes that focus on goal-setting and performance measurement in policy areas that cut across agencies; brings attention to using goals and measures during policy implementation; increases reporting on the Internet; and requires individuals to be responsible for some goals and management tasks. In making these changes, GPRAMA aligns the timing of many products to coincide with presidential terms and budget proposals. The law also includes more central roles for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an entity that often seeks to advance the President's policy preferences. GPRAMA also contains more specific requirements for consultations with Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.

  2012-02-29
• Crosscut Budgets in Ecosystem Restoration Initiatives: Examples and Issues for Congress [January 22, 2008]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In the last 30 years, the United States has devoted enormous effort and committed billions of dollars toward restoring large ecosystems such as the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes. These ecosystem restoration initiatives generally address multiple objectives that go beyond restoring the ecosystem, such as water conveyance and levee stability. Consequently, these initiatives involve many stakeholders conducting and implementing a variety of restoration activities and other projects. Coordinating and overseeing the implementation and funding of such projects and activities can be challenging, and sometimes controversial. To address the complexity of organizing, managing, and implementing ecosystem restoration initiatives, some agencies involved in restoration initiatives have implemented 'crosscut budgets'. […] The variability in the design and implementation of crosscut budgets for ecosystem restoration initiatives generates several design questions. For example, some believe that funding amounts should be portrayed in relation to progress toward achieving restoration goals. Other issues include determining what programs to include or exclude in a crosscut budget, assigning accountability, and coordinating projects in an ecosystem restoration initiative. Crosscut budgets can help address coordination and organizational issues in restoration initiatives. Some contend that expanding their breadth to track progress or evaluate success in restoration initiatives may make them more effective. Others, however, suggest that if crosscuts become too unwieldy and complex, or are not designed to address the needs of specific audiences and stakeholders, they may not communicate information in an effective and timely manner."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.; Sheikh, Pervaze A.

  2008-01-22
• Bush Administration Policy Regarding Congressionally Originated Earmarks: An Overview [September 4, 2008]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In January 2008, the President announced he would veto future appropriations bills that did not cut the number and funding of Administration-identified earmarks by half, relative to FY2008. The President also issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13457, which directed that agencies 'should not' fund non-statutory earmarks, except under some conditions. These are the latest in a series of developments that began in January 2007, when the President proposed that Congress should (1) cut the number and funding of congressionally originated earmarks by at least half for FY2008 appropriations, relative to FY2005, and (2) place them only in statutory text, not report language. In January 2007, the Administration issued its own definition of earmark, whose language (and perhaps meaning) evolved over time in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memoranda. A final definition appears to have been established in E.O. 13457, but its meaning probably is informed by the evolution and contents of previously articulated definitions. Later, OMB established an 'Earmarks' website, containing a database of Administration-identified earmarks, to track congressional action. Potential related issues for Congress involve, generally, roles and responsibilities for Congress, the President, agencies, and the public in the U.S. political system; defining, identifying, and overseeing earmarks; the executive order; the 'Earmarks' website and database; and potential representational consequences. This report emphasizes analysis of E.O. 13457. For a legal analysis of E.O. 13457, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL34373, 'Earmarks Executive Order: Legal Issues', by Thomas J. Nicola and T.J. Halstead."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.; Hatch, Garrett Leigh; Petersen, R. Eric

  2008-09-04
• Military Base Closures and Affected Defense Department Civil Service Employees [March 7, 2006]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "As a step in the 2005 round of the base realignment and closure (BRAC) process, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission (commonly referred to as the BRAC Commission) recommended on September 8, 2005, that a number of domestic U.S. military installations be closed or realigned. Overall, the BRAC Commission estimated that the recommended closures or realignments would result in a net decrease of 15,874 federal civilian jobs at the Department of Defense (DOD). On September 15, 2005, the President approved the commission's recommendations and transmitted them to Congress. Congress rejected H.J.Res. 65 (a resolution of disapproval of the BRAC Commission recommendations) on October 27, 2005. The BRAC Commission recommendations took effect on November 9, 2005, and are required to be implemented by 2011. […] This report will be updated if major changes occur in the BRAC process regarding DOD civil service employees. Implementation of NSPS [National Security Personnel System] is discussed in CRS Report RL31954, 'DOD's National Security Personnel System: Statute, Regulations, and Implementation Plans', coordinated by Barbara Schwemle."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Brass, Clinton T.; Schwemle, Barbara L.; Shimabukuro, Jon O.

  2006-03-07