Yesterday, the House passed, by a vote of 241-178, an amended Senate legislative package (S. 2012) containing its broad energy policy overhaul. The Senate, which passed a more bipartisan bill, expressed concern about several of the many contentious elements the House added. The House included several controversial provisions including it’s stalled version to reauthorize America COMPETES.
The next step for the House’s energy bill is a conference with the Senate’s version of the legislation.
Speaker Ryan proposed to the regular Republican House Conference meeting new procedures on proposing amendments for legislation, and specifically appropriations bills. The new process requires Members to “notice” their amendments by submitting them for publication in the Congressional Record in advance of consideration on the House Floor in order to have them considered by the full House. The move effectively negates the “open rule” means of considering appropriations bills, which is the historical means of consideration of appropriations bills, and moves it to a modified open rule.
Return to the open rule process, which is admittedly somewhat of a melee, is something that newly-minted Speaker Boehner returned to as a means of Congress “returning to regular order”.
For each bill considered on the House Floor, the House Rules Committee determines how the bill will be considered (open rule, modified open rule, structured rule, or closed rule). Most House legislation is considered under a structured rule, which requires a Member to file their amendments with the House Rules Committee, and the committee determines which amendments will be considered.
Per tradition, the House considers appropriations legislation under an open rule, which means that any Member may offer any amendment that complies with the standing rules of the House (meaning it is germane, and respects and Budgetary constraints, like needing offsets) and the amendment will be debated for 5 minutes.
In practice, the open rule means that any Member of Congress can offer any amendment (germane or not, offset or not) as long as they are on the House floor to offer that amendment while the Clerk is reading the relevant section of the bill. There is no requirement to let any of their House colleagues know of their intent to offer an amendment nor what the amendment will do in anyway. This means that the consideration of House appropriations bills can be lengthy (multiple days long) and volumous (each day can wrap up between midnight and 3 am).
The shift in how appropriations bills are considered is a direct result of Democratic efforts to embarrass or cause image problems for House Republicans. The most recent example of this was the nearly-passed LBGT amendment to the FY2017 Veterans Affairs appropriations bill which would enforce an Executive Order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The amendment was set to pass with 217 votes in favor. However, House GOP leadership could be seen on the Floor persuading Republicans to change their votes to sink Maloney’s measure. The vote was held open for seven minutes until the amendment failed on a 212-213 vote.
The House endured similar embarrassment last year with the FY2016 Interior bill, as an amendment passed that would restrict the display of the Confederate flag in certain national cemeteries. That amendment passed late at night by voice vote and was vehemently opposed by many in the Southern-GOP delegation. Ultimately, the House never finished considering that bill and all other appropriations bills rather than risk their members taking potentially damming votes. Democrats had vowed to offer the amendment to ever other appropriations bill.
House Republicans will continue to try and play offense, rather than defense, as the appropriations process, hopefully, continues to move forward.
Open Rules: Under an open rule, any Member may offer an amendment that complies with the standing rules of the House and the Budget Act. Also included in the category of open rules are those special rules that are often referred to as ‘‘open plus.’’ These rules allow the offering of any amendment normally in order under an open rule plus the consideration of any amendments for which waivers of points of order have been granted by the special rule.
Modified Open Rules: This type of rule permits only amendments preprinted in the Congressional Record, puts a time-cap on consideration of amendments, or does both.
Structured Rules: This type of rule limits the amendments that may be offered to only those amendments designated in the special rule.
Closed Rules: Under a Closed Rule no amendments may be offered other than amendments recommended by the committee reporting the bill. However, the Rules Committee is prohibited under the rules of the House from reporting a special rule providing for consideration of a bill or joint resolution that denies the minority the right to offer amendatory instructions in a motion to recommit.
The full House Appropriations Committee will mark up the FY2017 CJS bill tomorrow at 10:30am EST, more details can be found here.
The Committee Report is here, and the legislative text can be found here.
Overall, the legislation contains $56 billion in total discretionary funding, an increase of $279 million over FY2016 and $1.4 billion above the President’s request for these programs. Big bumps were given to Department of Justice programs, which received $29 billion, an increase of $347 million above the FY2016 enacted level including large bumps given to the FBI, DEA, ATF, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review. Within this funding, priority is given to critical activities that protect the safety, rights, and property of individuals and families across the nation. The bill includes $103 million for programs to help stem this abuse – the full amount recently authorized by the House-passed Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Reduction Act of 2016. This includes funding for activities such as drug courts, treatment, and prescription drug monitoring.
Other highlights include:
National Science Foundation (NSF)
For NSF, the FY2017 bill would fund the NSF at $7.407 billion, $57 million less than FY2016 enacted. Under NSF, Research and Related Activities would receive $6.08 billion, a $46 million increase and Education and Human Resources would be level-funded at $880 million.
Included in the committee report is language of note on both Peer Review and Grant Abstracts.
“Peer review.—The Committee has long been supportive of NSF’s peer review process to identify and recommend funding for scientifically meritorious research. NSF’s ability to fund cutting-edge research helps keep the United States at the forefront of research across all scientific disciplines, which in turn builds the technological capabilities that underpin economic growth and prosperity.”
“Abstracts.—The Committee directs NSF to continue its efforts to ensure that award abstracts clearly explain in plain English the intent of the project and how the project meets both the intellectual merit and the broader impact review criterion. Improving the peer review process and project abstracts are critical to protecting NSF’s stellar scientific integrity. The abstracts serve as a public justification for NSF funding decisions by articulating how the project serves the national interest, consistent with the Foundation’s mission as established in the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1861 et seq). The Committee believes that abstracts should explain how a project increases economic competitiveness in the United States; advances the health and welfare of the American public; develops an American STEM workforce, including computer science and information technology sectors, that are globally competitive; increases public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology in the United States; increases partnerships between academia and industry in the United States; supports the national defense of the United States; or promotes the progress of science for the United States.”
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
For NASA, the bill would provide $19.5 billion, a $223 million increase from the FY2016 enacted level. The Science Directorate would receive $5.597 billion, an increase of $8 million. Space Grant would be level-funded at $40 million. Aeronautics would receive $712 million, an increase of $72 million and Space Technology would receive $739 million, a $52 million increase.
National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
The legislation contains $5.6 billion for NOAA, which is $185 million below the enacted level and $268 million below the President’s request. Funding is targeted to important priorities such as the National Weather Service, which receives $1.1 billion – $12 million above the President’s request.
The bill also includes full funding for the continuation of the current Joint Polar Satellite System weather satellite program and the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite program to help maintain and improve weather forecasting to warn communities about potentially devastating natural disasters.
To make these investments, the bill reduces funding in lower-priority NOAA activities such as climate research, ocean services, and others.
Programs of note include:
Also included was language of note on Extramural Research, NMFS Cooperative Research, OAR’s Independent Analysis, OAR’s Weather and Air Chemistry Research, OAR’s Labs and Cooperative Institutes, and language on Ocean Acidification.
“Extramural research.—The Committee believes that NOAA benefits from collaboration with academia and the private sector through cooperative institutes and competitive research. These relationships build broad community engagement, leverage external funding for mission-oriented research, strengthen the science within NOAA, and advance scientific knowledge.”
NMFS
“Cooperative research.—The recommendation includes $12,000,000 within Fisheries Data Collections, Surveys and Assessments for cooperative research, which shall be used to support external, independent data collection and other research. The Committee expects that all funding provided shall be used for cooperative fisheries research and not for NOAA activities or administrative overhead costs. NOAA shall submit a report no later than 90 days after enactment of this Act listing all cooperative research grants funded in fiscal year 2016, to include the amount, the fishery, the type of information collected, and the expected uses for that data. The Committee is concerned that cooperative research is not ingested into fishery stock assessments in a timely manner. The report shall address NOAA procedures and timeframes for making use of this independent fisheries research.”
OAR
“Independent analysis.—NOAA is encouraged to increase funding for academia to perform independent climate model evaluation studies and to enable the production of atmospheric data sets from satellite observations for such studies. Satellite observations of the atmosphere provide information that is critical in the interpretation of Earth-based observations and in the evaluation and improvement of climate model simulations.”
“Weather and Air Chemistry Research.—The Committee includes $118,158,000 for Weather and Air Chemistry Research, an increase of $15,000,000 above fiscal year 2016, and encourages NOAA to continue research efforts that lead to near-term, affordable, and attainable advances in observational, computing, and modeling capabilities to deliver substantial improvements in weather forecasting for the protection of life and property. NOAA shall substantially accelerate the transition of its research to operations in ways easily adopted by the operational forecasting community.”
“Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes.—The Committee recognizes the important role that the coordinated NOAA Laboratories and Cooperative Institutes play in fulfilling NOAA’s Mission Goals and Strategic Plan. To continue to fulfill NOAA’s mission, NOAA should enhance its support of advanced monitoring and predictive modeling to explore deep water issues and their effect on the U.S. coastline. The Committee encourages NOAA to expand the role Cooperative Institutes play in fulfilling this role, and to consider how additional Cooperative Institutes, or consortia partners, could strengthen NOAA’s ability to support this monitoring and modeling.”
“Integrated Ocean Acidification Research.—The Committee encourages NOAA, in coordination with the Office of Science and Technology Policy, to implement a program to competitively award prizes under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3719) to stimulate innovation to advance the understanding, research, or monitoring of ocean acidification or its impacts; or to develop management or adaptation options for responding to ocean acidification. In prize competitions, the Committee encourages NOAA to prioritize communities, environments, or industries that are in distress due to the impacts of ocean acidification.”
“Adaptation and mitigation for ocean acidification.—The Committee encourages NOAA to continue to develop ocean monitoring and modeling capabilities, as well as vulnerability assessments, necessary to support research on innovative methods to mitigate and adapt to ocean acidification, such as biological uptake and iron fertilization. As GAO noted in its 2014 report on ocean acidification, the Federal Government has yet to develop adaptation and mitigation strategies as required by the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act of 2009. The Committee encourages NOAA to actively pursue the research necessary to develop these strategies.”
This week, the House is expected to move the FY2017 E&W bill on the Floor while the House Appropriations Committee is expected to mark up FY 2017 CJS and T-HUD bills in full committee and FY 2017 Interior in subcommittee.
The House FY2017 E&W bill provides a total of $37.4 billion in funding subject to discretionary caps for FY 2017 for the Energy Department and federal water projects, $259 million more than comparable FY 2016 funding and $168 million more than requested. On a programmatic level, after factoring out rescissions and other scorekeeping adjustments, it provides a total of $37.7 billion to the departments and agencies funded by the measure, $350 million more than the current level and $88 million more than requested.
Compared with current funding, the measure increases funding for the Army Corps of Engineers by 2%, nuclear weapons activities by 4% and fossil fuels energy research by 2%. It decreases funding for nuclear nonproliferation programs by 6%, the Bureau of Reclamation by 10% and research on renewable-energy programs by 12%.
Democrats object to several policy provisions, including those that would prohibit funding for certain regulatory activities and those that would require that water in Northern California be diverted south for agricultural and other uses. The bill is expected to be considered under an open rule.
More information about the House FY2017 CJS and Interior bill will be posted as it is made available.
The House Appropriations Committee today released their FY2017 Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) appropriations bill that would provide $56 billion, which is a 0.5 percent increase from current spending, and $1.4 billion over the Administration’s request.
The bill, which will be marked up in subcommittee Wednesday, would give modest spending boosts to several law enforcement agencies including the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.
In science related topics, NASA would receive $19.5 billion, which is a $223 million increase and $1.2 billion above the President’s request. The bill includes $5.6 billion for NASA Science programs – $8 million above the 2016 enacted level and $295 million above the Administration’s request. This targets funding to planetary science, astrophysics, and heliophysics to ensure the continuation of critical research and development programs, while reducing funding for lower-priority research.
However, the NSF would see a slight funding dip; it will get $7.4 billion, which is $57 million below FY2016 andl and $150 million below the Administration’s request. That said, NSF would receive a $46 million increase for research and related activities to $680 million, including funding for programs that relate to STEM education. Offsets for the increase are in targeted reductions to equipment and construction costs.
The legislation contains $5.6 billion for NOAA, which is $185 million below the enacted level and $268 million below the President’s request. Funding is targeted to important priorities such as the National Weather Service, which receives $1.1 billion – $12 million above the President’s request. The bill reduces funding in “lower-priority” NOAA activities such as climate research and ocean services.
Of note, the legislation also includes several conservative policy provisions, including a prohibition on the transfer or release of Guantanamo detainees into the United States, language designed to protect gun rights, and anti-abortion rights provisions. All provisions nearly guaranteed to warrant a veto threat from the White House.
Read the text of the legislation here.