Final Decisions on FY 2011 Appropriations Bills Delayed Until Spring

Share This

Publication date: 
29 December 2010

President  Obama signed a bill last week to continue funding for almost all federal programs  at FY 2010 levels until March 4, 2011.     This action was taken because the current Congress could not reach  agreement about FY 2011 spending, putting off final decisions about appropriations  bills until after the new Congress convenes.   In looking ahead to what are expected to be contentious funding debates,  the President reiterated his support for science and technology. 

Two  plans to finish the FY 2011 appropriations cycle failed.  The first option was a House-passed bill that  would have continued current FY 2010 spending until September 30, 2011.

The  second option was an almost 2,000 page omnibus bill drafted by Senate  Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-HI) and Ranking Member Thad  Cochran (R-MS) that was a compilation of the twelve appropriations bills.  The bill was never considered on the Senate  floor, in part because of objections that it included $8 billion for over 6,000  earmarks. 

With  time running out, Congress approved a new Continuing Resolution that provides  funding at current spending levels through March 4.  The 14-page law contains 21 changes or “anomalies”  from existing legislation.  One of the  most significant is an increase of $624 million for the National Nuclear  Security Administration and its activities related to the New START treaty that  was ratified by the Senate last week.   

Cochran  released a statement on this Continuing Resolution, saying “The fact that we  are again fighting a year-end battle over how to fund the government is  extremely disappointing to me  . . . .  While it is our only option at this point, a continuing resolution is not the  best means of funding government operations.   It is an inefficient mechanism and will constrain the Defense Department  and other agencies in carrying out their missions.  Continuing resolutions also deny Congress the  kind of thoughtful oversight and detailed guidance that regular appropriations  bills provide.”

Cochran  looked ahead to 2011 in this statement, adding “I hope that those who opposed  how the omnibus bill was crafted and presented will work with me and Chairman  Inouye in the next Congress to find a way to consider the appropriations bills  individually and in a timely manner.”While  eleven of the twelve FY 2011 appropriations bills were approved by Senate  appropriators, none were ever voted on by the full Senate.  The House passed two of its spending bills.

The  new Congress will write the final FY 2011 appropriations bills.  A December 20, 2010 Fact Sheet issued by the Republicans  on the House Appropriations Committee cites “the Republican plan to reduce  spending to fiscal year 2008 levels – which would save the taxpayers nearly  $100 billion compared to the President’s FY 2011 request.” Many of the upcoming budget battles in  January, February and early March of next year will revolve around how levels  of federal funding should change.

President  Obama was looking ahead to these debates in a December 22 press briefing.  It is notable that several times during this 34-minute  briefing he discussed R&D funding.   The first instance was in his opening remarks:

“I’m  also disappointed we weren’t able to come together around a budget to fund our  government over the long term.  I expect  we’ll have a robust debate about this when we return from the holidays - a  debate that will have to answer an increasingly urgent question - and that is  how do we cut spending that we don’t need while making investments that we do  need -- investments in education, research and development, innovation, and the  things that are essential to grow our economy over the long run, create jobs,  and compete with every other nation in the world.  I look forward to hearing from folks on both  sides of the aisle about how we can accomplish that goal.”

The  President continued to cite research and development in his response to several  questions:

“I  think that we’re still going to have disagreements in terms of spending  priorities.  It’s vital for us to make  investments in education and research and development -- all those things that  create an innovative economy -- while at the same time cutting those programs  that just aren’t working.  And there are  going to be debates between the parties on those issues.”


“And  I think we are past the crisis point in the economy, but we now have to pivot  and focus on jobs and growth.  And my  singular focus over the next two years is not rescuing the economy from  potential disaster, but rather jumpstarting the economy so that we actually  start making a dent in the unemployment rate and we are equipping ourselves so  that we can compete in the 21st century.   And that means we’ve got to focus on education, that means we have to  focus on research and development, we have to focus on innovation.  We have to make sure that in every sector,  from manufacturing to clean energy to high-tech to biotech, that we recognize  the private sector is going to be the driving force.  And what the government can do is to make  sure that we are a good partner with them, that we’re a facilitator; that in  some cases, we’re a catalyst, when it’s a fledgling industry.”

And  finally,

“If  we say that education is going to be the single most important determinant for  our children’s success and this country’s success in the 21st century, we can’t  have schools that are laying off so many teachers that they start going to four  days a week, as they’ve done in Hawaii, for example.  We’ve got to make sure that young people can  afford to go to college.  If we want to  keep our competitive edge in innovation, well, we’ve got to invest in basic  research - the same basic research that resulted in the Internet, the same  basic research that invited - that resulted in GPS.  All those things originated in research  funded by the government.”