Budget puts delayed federal paychecks back into fiscal 2000

Budget puts delayed federal paychecks back into fiscal 2000

CongressDaily

As part of what the White House characterizes as a "good government" effort to rid the budget process of "gimmicks," administration budget writers have shifted $10 billion in "advance" funding bumped into fiscal 2001 back to where it belongs-in fiscal 2000.

As a result, under President Clinton's fiscal 2001 budget proposal, thousands of federal employees scheduled to be paid a few days late-so their labor costs would show up on fiscal 2001 ledgers-will now get their checks on time, during the current fiscal year.

The strategy was designed to loosen the belt on a fiscal 2000 budget that both sides sought to fatten up as the budget process evolved last year. New spending agreed to by the White House and Congress last fall was in jeopardy of tapping the suddenly sacrosanct Social Security surplus, which is derived from payroll taxes.

The fiscal wiggling allowed budget negotiators to claim a minuscule surplus in the on-budget, non-Social Security account.

But with the economy thumping along, more revenues than expected poured into federal coffers during fiscal 2000, and money could be juggled back into the fiscal 2000 account without tapping funds intended for Social Security.

The $10 billion in shifted funds includes about $3.5 billion worth of late paychecks that were to be issued to Defense Department workers, according to Office of Management and Budget spokeswoman Linda Ricci.

Another $800 million or so will be spent in fiscal 2000 instead of fiscal 2001 to pay employees at the Labor Department, Health and Human Services Department, and at the Social Security Administration who also were to be paid a few days late.

And $1.3 billion in obligation delays of non-salary Defense spending will now be spent in fiscal 2000.

Ricci commented that there are times when use of advance funding is "appropriate." But the administration's fiscal 2001 budget attempts to correct some of last year's "excessive" use of the technique, she said.

NEXT STORY: TSP's C Fund takes a big dip