Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Congress is still working on government spending three months after the deadline ... again

Sen. Patrick Leahy and Sen. Richard Shelby

Chairman Patrick Leahy (left) and ranking members Richard Shelby lead the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Caroline Brehman-Pool/Getty Images

While the elections may seem like an end to a cycle of policymaking before a new Congress gets sworn in, the reality is that lawmakers are still trying to work their way through important legislation before the end of the year.

The biggest item on the agenda is a bill to fund the federal government and avoid a shutdown – an issue that was supposed to have been resolved before October but has slid into the holiday season.

In fact, in the past five decades, Congress has only completed the appropriations process on schedule three times.


If the system was working properly, the House and Senate Appropriations committees would develop 12 spending bills in line with the jurisdictions of their subcommittees. The chambers would then pass those twelve bills and resolve any differences before the government’s new fiscal year begins Oct. 1. That virtually never happens.

“The failure of Congress to pass individual appropriations spending bills is the result of the overall Congressional budget process being broken and routinely ignored,” said Michael Murphy, chief of staff for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, who explained that the breakdown in appropriating is one piece of a dysfunctional budget process.

The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 set a timeline that begins with the president introducing a budget on the first Monday in February, continuing through congressional passage of a budget by mid April and then the Appropriations committees completing their work by June 30, in time for the new fiscal year starting three months later.

This year, the House of Representatives passed six spending bills but the Senate did not pass any, meaning all twelve must be rolled into one massive bill known as an “omnibus.” In most years, even the omnibus is not passed by the end of the fiscal year. Instead, the lawmakers pass one or more “continuing resolutions” that extend funding temporarily while they work on the final bill or bills.

The government is currently operating under a continuing resolution that expires Dec. 15. Lawmakers have been negotiating a spending bill for the rest of the year but will likely require another CR to buy more time. Leaders may try to attach other priority legislation to the omnibus, such as a bill to reform how Congress counts electoral votes, in order to get a few more things done before the end of the year.

“Congress has not passed a real concurrent budget resolution since 2015, and has only passed all individual appropriations bills on time by the end of the fiscal year four times in the last 50 years,” Murphy said. “Polarization of Congress and the fact that Congress seems to act only upon a crisis deadline has contributed to this reality.”

The breakdown in the process results in a lack of government transparency and proper planning, according to Murphy.

“As a result, we continue to shirk responsibility for weighing the tradeoffs inherent in effectively managing the finances and programs of the federal government,” he explained. “The use of one or more CRs is problematic for government agencies who are unable to effectively plan for their programs given the constant uncertainty surrounding their funding levels.”

Many spending cycles begin with congressional leaders and Appropriations chairs announcing an intent to follow the process and pass the discretionary spending bills by the start of the fiscal year. However, that almost never happens. (“Discretionary” spending is that which Congress can set each year. “Mandatory” spending – such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid” – is required by other laws.)

Congress has only avoided the use of continuing resolutions three times since fiscal 1977, according to the Congressional Research Service. Often, the CR lasts until December, but Congress may use more than one and there have been occasionals when continuing resolutions have been needed into late winter and even the spring.

Returning to regular order requires a commitment from congressional leadership, Murphy said.

“Congress needs a sufficient number of leaders in both parties who will stand up and call for going back to basics, which includes coming up with an actual budget and passing it in both chambers by the required deadline of April 15 to begin the budget process,” he said. “At the same time, recognizing the process has failed to work for years, we need to undertake comprehensive budget process reforms that result in a more accountable and transparent process that can achieve fiscally responsible outcomes.”


Read More

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less
Towards a Reformed Capitalism
oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

Towards a Reformed Capitalism

Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

Keep ReadingShow less
Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

The Bring Our Families Home campaign brought together loved ones of Americans wrongly detained overseas to display portraits in the Senate Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, May 6.

(Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)

Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON – American journalist Reza Valizadeh visited his elderly Iranian parents in March 2024 for the first time in 15 years. Valizadeh’s stories for Voice of America and other U.S. government-funded outlets often criticized the Iranian regime. So before traveling, he sought and received confirmation that he would be safe from a high-ranking commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of Iran’s armed forces. However, in September that same year, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps arrested Valizadeh, and Tehran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced him to ten years in prison for “collaboration with a hostile government.”

In the Rotunda of the Senate Russell Building last week, the Bring Our Families Home campaign set up portraits of Valizadeh and 12 other Americans currently wrongfully detained overseas. The group, family members of illegitimately detained Americans, appealed to Congress to push for their safe return. Each foam poster board included the name, home state, and country of detainment. The display also included portraits of the 33 people released after advocacy by the James W. Foley Foundation.

Keep ReadingShow less
DHS Funding During the Shutdown
Getty Images, Charles-McClintock Wilson

DHS Funding During the Shutdown

When Congress failed to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this fiscal year in February, almost all of its employees began to work without pay. That situation changed, however, on April 3, when President Donald Trump issued a memorandum ordering the DHS secretary and director of the Office of Management and Budget to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS” to pay its employees and issue back pay.

Trump shifted money to avoid the political embarrassment that would be caused by the collapse of airport security screening through the actions of disgruntled agents and the disruption to air travel that would ensue. But it’s legally dubious.

Keep ReadingShow less