GovernmentExecutive.com

With the possible exception of the members and staff of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, no one seems to care that Congress may pass an omnibus appropriation bill that spends close to $400 billion instead of the seven separate fiscal 2004 bills that should be debated and adopted one at a time.

Actually, "should" is not precisely correct from a legal standpoint. The Constitution says only that no money may be spent unless it is appropriated; it doesn't specify the number of appropriations that must be enacted.

But by creating appropriations committees with 13 subcommittees and giving each exclusive jurisdiction over different agencies, departments, and programs, Congress has established at least the expectation that there will and should be 13 separate appropriations each year.

History and tradition also dictate that there be separate appropriations. Like today's House Armed Services Committee and Ways and Means Committee, the subcommittees of the appropriations committees used to be full committees that were completely independent of each other. Producing an appropriation bill each year was their primary responsibility.

After the multiple appropriations committees were combined to form a single committee, the independence of each of the former committees was maintained when they became subcommittees. In fact, this was one of the most distinguishing and jealously guarded characteristics of the House and Senate appropriations committees. No other subcommittees in either chamber had as much autonomy from the full committee as the appropriations subcommittees, and each wanted and expected to get their bill enacted as stand-alone legislation. Indeed, to a great extent their power depended on their ability to produce and get enacted a separate appropriation bill each year.

These are the primary reasons why the appropriations committee members and staffers don't like omnibus bills. The question, though, is whether it should matter to any of the rest of us if one or multiple appropriations are enacted.

On one hand, the answer is absolutely not. Other than federal employees, most people outside the Beltway have no idea whether one or more appropriations are adopted. They start to pay attention only when, as happened in 1995 and 1996, many appropriations are not adopted and the government functions on which they rely are no longer available.

On the other hand, the true value of separate appropriations is that the amount of congressional scrutiny, involvement and representation is greatly increased. Representatives and senators who are not members of the appropriation subcommittee that drafts a bill really get their best chance to influence what's in it when the legislation is debated on the floor. They also have the maximum amount of leverage when they can threaten to withhold their vote and stop the bill from passing because it either includes something they don't like or lacks what they think their constituents want.

But that doesn't happen when, like this year, multiple appropriations are lumped together into a single bill that funds almost all domestic agencies and departments. The amount of time available to members to debate this mammoth bill is far more limited than it would be if they were debating each component separately.

The length of the debate is also usually limited because the omnibus appropriation is considered just as one or both chambers is about to recess or adjourn. Amendments are also often -- if not always -- limited for the same reason.

The text of an omnibus bill often is not available until just before the debate begins. Sometimes the complete text is not available at all and members have to work from a summary. Other times the number of copies of the bill is extremely limited.

A member of Congress' ability to represent her or his constituents is further limited when an omnibus appropriation is considered because they have far less freedom to vote against the whole bill if one part includes something they find objectionable. This is especially true these days, when the narrow majorities in both chambers mean the leadership cannot afford to lose many votes and still maintain control of the process.

All of these things are true this year. The omnibus appropriation will limit debate, input and the political choices available to the majority of members of both houses on many of the spending decisions that will most affect their constituents. For these reasons alone we should all be concerned about what is being decided.

But we should also care because lawmakers' repeated failure to pass all (or even most) annual appropriation bills calls into question something much larger -- Congress' credibility on any budget-related deadline or commitment.

After all, the deadline for Congress passing budget resolution conference reports have almost always been ignored or evaded. When they existed, annual deficit reduction targets were habitually missed. And Congress' self-imposed requirements for separate annual appropriations seem to be just as routinely disregarded.

So omnibus appropriations are really much more significant than they seem at first glance. Rather than being just a way for Congress and the White House to deal with a time crunch at the end of a session, it is really an indication of how appalling the federal budget debate has become.

Question Of The Week

Last Week's Question. Most people who answered last week's question knew what a "technical adjustment" looked like, but they had trouble explaining it. Formally, a technical adjustment is a change in the baseline caused by something other than new legislation being enacted or the economy performing differently than had been anticipated. In practice, however, the term is used whenever any estimate changes for a reason other than a legislative policy change or the economy is better or worse than expected. It could be a mathematical error in the original estimate, more people than expected showing up to claim benefits, or an agency getting grants out faster than was historically the case. It could also be the result of a contracting officer at the Defense Department switching from decaf to regular coffee (and getting more contracts out the door as a result) or an initial estimate that purposely low-balled the cost or overstated the revenues.

The winner of the "I Won A 2003 Budget Battle" mouse pad, who was selected at random from all those who submitted the correct answer, is Matthew Helman, a legislative aide in the Massachusetts State House of Representatives.

This Week's Question. If recent history is any indication, this weekend will be among the busiest shopping days of the year as we all start thinking seriously about holiday gifts for the first time and head to the mall. That should include that federal budget person on your list. So... the question: What would be the ideal gift this year for director of the Office of Management and Budget?

Click here to send in your response, which must be received by 5 p.m. PST on Saturday, Nov. 29, 2003. You must include a mailing address so we can send you the mouse pad if you win. Note to government employees: Because of security procedures at many offices and facilities, your home address will be the best way to make sure the mouse pad actually gets to you.

"Fiscal Year 2005 Federal Budget Game Show" Briefing Set For Jan. 27

National Journal and Government Executive will again team up as the budget debate is beginning to present the latest in their annual series of half-day executive briefings on what you should expect. This latest briefing -- "The Fiscal Year 2005 Federal Budget Game Show" -- will be conducted by "Budget Battles" columnist Stan Collender in his usual very informative and highly entertaining style and will be held in Washington the week before the Bush 2005 budget will be released. Will the budget debate put the economy in "Jeopardy" or will the debate look like Congress is spinning a "Wheel of Fortune" for some programs?

Substantial discounts are available for registrations received by Jan. 1, 2004, and for groups of more than four. The full agenda and registration information will be online soon. Those who can't wait can download this form and pre-register by mail or fax.