House Appropriations Research Articles

ACCIDENT BOARD TAKES ANOTHER HIT

ONCE AGAIN, THE CHEMICAL Safety & Hazard Investigation Board (CSHIB) has been rocked by charges of mismanagement. time the source is a federal inspector general's (IG) report and a House appropriations subcommittee hearing, both of which blasted the board. The board came to the hearing hat in hand, even cutting its $9 million budget proposal for next year by $1.15 million. It also promised to report to the subcommittee every 90 days on reform called for by the IG. This will be a very critical year for the chemical safety board, warned Rep. James T. Walsh (R-N.Y.), following the April 18 hearing. Walsh is chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD & Independent Agencies, which has authority over the board's funding. We have been as patient as can be expected as CSHIB has been experiencing significant growing pains, Walsh told the board. I am not sure, however, how much longer ...

Academic Earmarks and the Returns to Lobbying

Despite a large literature on lobbying and information transmission by interest groups, no prior study has measured returns to lobbying. In this paper, we statistically estimate the returns to lobbying by universities for educational earmarks (which now represent 10 percent of federal funding of university research). The returns to lobbying approximate zero for universities not represented by a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee (SAC) or House Appropriations Committee (HAC). However, the average lobbying university with representation on the SAC receives an average return to one dollar of lobbying of $11-$17; lobbying universities with representation on the HAC obtain $20-$36 for each dollar spent. Moreover, we cannot reject the hypothesis that lobbying universities with SAC or HAC representation set the marginal benefit of lobbying equal to its marginal cost, although the large majority of universities with representation on the HAC and SAC do not lobby, and thus do not take advantage of their representation in Congress. On average, 45 percent of universities are predicted to choose the optimal level of lobbying. In addition to addressing questions about the federal funding of university research, we also discuss the impact of our results for the structure of government.

Rejoinder to David Mosso’s Comments on “The Fatal Defect in the Federal Accounting System” (PB&F 20:4)

David Mosso is an intelligent, knowledgeable, fair-minded person. His comments about expense accounting are accurate. As chairman of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB), he naturally is optimistic about the eventual acceptance of its expense accounting system. He agrees that the House Appropriations Committee’s requirement that budget submissions be on an obligation basis is a serious obstacle, but he hopes that legislation requiring expense-based reports for other congressional committees will provide the needed impetus. Unfortunately, experience does not support this optimism. The Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 required the submission of expense-based reports to Congress as soon as practicable, but as of 2001, this has not happened. Mr. Mosso doesn’t accept my assertion that a balance sheet for the federal government is useless. Although I agree that the balance sheet is an anchor used to keep the accounts accurate and honest, the same anchor has been used in the accounting system for many years by accountants and auditors even though it is not published. The accounts must balance. But this is not a reason for publishing a balance sheet. A federal balance sheet implies that the assets of the federal government named therein are the government’s actual assets. This implication is incorrect. The reported assets are a small fraction of the actual assets. There is no evidence that this information is useful, either at the federal level or at the agency or lower levels. In 50 years of using information from agency accounting systems, I have never used a balance sheet for the federal government or for one of its agencies. Records of financial assets published by the Treasury Department are useful. Records of the cost and location of individual assets are essential for control purposes; such records have been maintained

May 2, 2002, Statement by David A. D'Alessio, MD, AFMR Secretary-Treasurer, to House Appropriations Subcommittee Regarding FY 2003 NIH and AHRQ Budgets

May 2, 2002, Statement by David A. D'Alessio, MD, AFMR Secretary-Treasurer, to House Appropriations Subcommittee Regarding FY 2003 NIH and AHRQ Budgets

The President's Legislative Influence from Public Appeals

Despite scholars' long-standing appreciation of modern American presidents' plebiscitary powers, no study offers evidence that public appeals systematically facilitate influence, and some research indicates they can actually decrease presidential bargaining power. Our analysis resolves this disparity, developing a theoretical perspective of plebiscitary appeals and testing it on data from the nationally televised addresses of Presidents Eisenhower through Clinton. perspective suggests that appeals should generate influence, but that this influence depends on presidents strategically choosing issues to promote to the public. In particular, a president will promote issues on which his position is popular, but for which Congress would not otherwise enact his preferred policy. To test this perspective, analyze a simultaneous-equations model of the causes and policy consequences of presidential appeals over budgetary policy. results support the hypotheses, establishing the effectiveness of public strategies and conditions to which this effectiveness is limited. n July 27, 1981, less than forty-eight hours before the House was scheduled to vote on President Reagan's proposed income tax reduction of over 25 percent, the president promoted his proposal in a nationally televised address. Speaker of the House Thomas P. (Tip) O'Neill, Jr. surmised that prior to the address, we [the Democrats] had this won.' Yet following Reagan's speech, a number of Democrats switched positions, opting to vote with the president. Why did these members abandon their party? As described by an aide to Representative Beverly Byron, one of the Democrats that switched positions, Byron's office was inundated with calls in support of Reagan's proposal the morning after his speech. Offices across the Hill gave similar reports.2 In the end, the tax cut won by a vote of 238 to 195. Fifteen years later, with the partisanship of the presidency and House reversed (the Senate was again Republican), President Clinton promoted his budget proposals to the public following a breakdown in negotiations with Congress. Ultimately, these efforts helped enable Clinton to achieve his policy goals. As recounted by a Chief Clerk of the House Appropriations Committee, The Republicans pushed their agenda too far, and Clinton was able to capitalize on the situation with the public ... the next

Capitol Hill Update Fall 2000

Capitol Hill Update Fall 2000

Stream gages threatened by lack of funding

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) is hoping that members of the House of Representatives take a careful look at a list it is now circulating that names dozens of specific stream gages that have been scheduled to be constructed, reactivated, or hardened against failure, but that could be delayed if Congress does not appropriate sufficient funding. Forewarned are dozens of congressmen, including those whose districts encompass the Sacramento River at Sacramento, California; Cowskin Creek at Highway 54 at Wichita, Kansas; the Red River at Grand Forks, North Dakota; and the Potomac River at Harpers Ferry, West Virginia.The Clinton Administration has requested a fiscal year 2001 increase of $4 million to USGS' $90 million annual budget for stream gages. The Survey funds about half of the cost of the network, with cost‐sharing partners providing the rest. However, a recent House Appropriations Subcommittee mark‐up would result in the loss of about 115 gages, which is about 2% of the 7000 gages in the USGS network, according to a brief prepared by the USGS budget office. The subcommittee provides $1.7 million for water activities under the USGS Real Time Hazards Initiative, but fails to cover $2.3 million in pay raises and anticipated uncontrollable costs, the brief indicates.

The Republican Revolution and the House Appropriations Committee

This study applies the theory of "conditional party government" to the interaction between the Republican party and the Appropriations Committee in the 104th House, seen in the context of developments since the 96th Congress. As expected by the theory, we find that the relatively homogenous preferences of the Republican contingent in the House led them to adopt new institutional arrangements to enhance the powers of their leaders, which in turn were used to advance the party's policy goals. Given that the leadership decided to use Appropriations as one of the vehicles of major policy change, they and the Conference sought to monitor the committee's actions, and to influence it to behave as they wanted. The leaders used their enhanced powers over incentives and with regard to the agenda to advance the party cause. Both leaders and the Conference sought to block policy shifts away from what they wanted, but facilitated changes in the desired direction. Finally, we expected to see evidence of the increasing applicability of the theory over time, culminating in the developments of the 104th Congress, and this expectation was borne out.

The Fatal Defect in the Federal Accounting System

For many years, the federal accounting system has focused on obligations. Beginning in 1949, several blue‐ribbon committees recommended changing the focus to expenses. Focusing on expenses provides more useful information than focusing on obligations for both planning and control purposes. Unfortunately, the House Appropriations Committee continues to make appropriations on an obligation basis. The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has developed a system that focuses on both expenses and obligations that was supposed to be operational in 1997 but in fact will not be operational until 2003 at the earliest. Even then, users will not pay much attention to the expense focus if funds continue to be appropriated on an obligation basis.

Constituency Characteristics and the "Guardian" Model of Appropriations Subcommittees, 1959-1998

In this paper I examine the composition of ten House Appropriations subcommittees from 1959-1998 and explore the extent to which these subcommittees are comprised of members who have specific constituency needs for the benefits supplied by programs under their jurisdiction. Congressional scholars have suggested several different patterns for the constituency bias of these panels, and I study whether we can confirm or reject portions of the and models of Appropriations subcommittee composition. Using extensive data on the district characteristics of all legislators for nearly 40 years, along with a Monte Carlo simulation technique for examining difference in medians, I find that several Appropriations subcommittees are composed of members with disproportionately high need for the benefits under their control. I also find that while there was a shift toward more advocacy on these panels in the early 1960s, there have been few changes in this trend since. The Republican takeover of Congress in 1995 only marginally altered the group of subcommittees that attracted high need members. The findings of this study lend some credence to distributive notions of congressional committee composition. esearch on the Appropriations committees in Congress has primarily focused on two questions which are at the core of positive theories of legislative structure: what kind of members are assigned to these panels and what role do these committees play in the policy process? Recent scholarship has emphasized partisan explanations for the composition and functions of Appropriations committees and subcommittees (Aldrich and Rohde 1996; Kiewiet and McCubbins 1991). However, the conventional wisdom concerning the composition of Appropriations has varied considerably over time. At different periods members have been considered budget cutting guardians of the federal treasury, reelectionminded claimants on government funds, or point-people for the pursuit of a partisan agenda. I focus here on the question of Appropriations subcommittee composition and leave the issue of legislative outputs aside for the moment. I first examine how well the differing perceptions of Appropriations members map onto the existing theories of legislative structure. Then, to test the primary conflict between the guardian and claimant theories, I study the composition of ten House Appropriations subcommittees from 1959 to 1998 and explore the extent to which these subcommittees are comprised of members whose constituents demand the benefits supplied by programs under their jurisdiction.' Unlike most previous studies of Appropriations subcommittees (or even full authorizing committees) that have analyzed the question of committee preferences by examining ideology scores (ADA,

Science supporter John Porter to leave Congress.

SCIENCE POLICYOne of the strongest congressional supporters of biomedical research, Representative John Porter (R-IL), announced last week that he will not run for reelection next year. He is the third strong advocate for biomedicine who will soon leave a high-profile position. Porter, chair of the House appropriations subcommittee that drafts the annual funding bill for the National Institutes of Health, made the surprise announcement on 12 October after 21 years on Capitol Hill.

Varmus to leave NIH in December to run Sloan-Kettering...

Varmus to leave NIH in December to run Sloan-Kettering...

TIGHT TIMES FOR FEDERAL RESEARCH

The last year of the current millennium is shaping up—to quote Britain's Queen Elizabeth II—as an annus horriblus for federal science funding. Just before Congress vacated Washington, D.C., on its annual August recess, the House Appropriations Committee—declaring that it had no choice—voted to slash funding for the National Aeronautics & Space Administration 7% below current levels to $12.7 billion. Funding for the Environmental Protection agency would drop 4% to $7.31 billion, and the National Science Foundation's budget would be essentially frozen at $3.65 billion. According to presidential science adviser Neal F. Lane, the House decimated a presidential budget request that called for substantial increases in civilian R&D funding. Specifically, the White House charges that the House has eliminated funding for 14,000 researchers and science and mathematics teachers across the nation by cutting $275 million from the NSF budget. The House committee gave NSF $8.5 million more in 2000 that the agency...

Fighting Fire With Water: Partisan Procedural Strategies and the Senate Appropriations Committee

While White (1989) thoroughly examined the House Appropriations Committee after the congressional reforms of the 1960s and 1970s, we begin to offer an updated picture of the counterpart committee in the Senate. We find that there has been considerable change in the behavior of appropriators in the postreform era. Specifically, partisanship within the Senate has increased substantially, but even more interesting is the rise of partisanship within the Appropriations Committee itself. Table motions have become an increasingly partisan device used by the majority party to inhibit minority amending challenges. Indeed, table motions have clearly become the preferred strategy to defend appropriations legislation from attacks on the floor. In spite of the partisan conflict within the Appropriations Committee, we continue to find that committee members retain considerable institutional advantages in relation to nonmembers in affecting funding decisions on the Senate floor.

U.S. science budget

Science agency budgets were slashed July 30 by the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee, which voted significant cuts to the proposed fiscal year 2000 budgets of NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and other agencies.While the funding levels may change in early September when the Senate takes up the appropriations bill for NASA, EPA, and NSF— which funds the Veterans Administration (VA), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and independent agencies—Congress appears to be trying to maintain budgetary caps established in 1997. A separate House appropriations bill covering the Commerce Department cut research funding at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) by 10%.

House Panel Cuts Space Science, NSF Budgets

On 26 July, a House appropriations subcommittee cut $1.4 billion, or more than 10%, from NASA9s 2000 budget, threatening future Mars missions and the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF), scheduled for launch in 2001. In the same bill, the subcommittee proposed a $25 million cut (a reduction of 0.7%) in the current budget of the National Science Foundation, with an $8.5 million (0.3%) increase for research. A few days later, though, the full House appropriations committee added back $400 million to NASA9s budget, rescuing SIRTF and the Mars missions, yet leaving NASA9s total appropriation about 7% below the current level.

Making Amend(ment)s

The battle over a law that requires federally funded scientists to hand over raw data to anyone who files a request has shifted back to Congress. This spring, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) collected more than 8,000 comments on its proposal for implementing the 8-month-old measure, many from scientists worried that it would hinder research by threatening patient confidentiality and proprietary collaborations with companies. In response to that concern, House appropriations committee members James Walsh (R-NY) and David Price (D-NC) plan to offer an amendment to OMB's funding bill that would put a 1-year hold on the law pending a study on its effects.

Congress Is Giving Superfund Another Look

Having escaped the miasma of impeachment, scandals, and resignations, the 106th Congress is finally—five months after it was sworn in—getting down to business: legislative business, that is. Money bills to fund the federal government hold center stage as the House Appropriations Committee starts moving bills to the floor for action, but there's a lot going on in the wings as well. As just one example, last week the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works abruptly scheduled and held two days of hearings on a Superfund reauthorization bill that had been introduced May 20. The bill, S. 1090, focuses on areas where bipartisan consensus is available this year, explains its chief sponsor, Environment & Public Works Committee Chairman Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.). The bill exempts small businesses and contributors of very small amounts of hazardous wastes from liability for the costs of cleaning up abandoned hazardous waste sites. The bill also limits the liability ...

Introduction to evaluation of interactive health communication applications

Virtually all aspects of society have been altered in some way by advances in computer and communication technologies. In 1997, the information technology industry was the single largest industry in the United States in terms of sales and accounted for 33% of the growth in GDP in 1996.1,2 An estimated 41.5 million U.S. adults were active users of the Internet in 1997,3 and more than 43% of Internet users have used it to research health information.4 At the same time that these new technologies have emerged, consumers seem to be demanding increasing access to a wide range of information, including health information, and social support as a vehicle for recovering from illness. Consumer demand for health information and the availability of new media technologies have spurred substantial interest in interactive health communication (IHC), the interaction of an individual—consumer, patient, caregiver, or professional—with or through an electronic device or communication technology to access or transmit health information or receive guidance and support on a health-related issue.5 Using this definition, IHC encompasses technology-mediated health communication and does not include direct communication such as face-to-face clinician-patient counseling. The panel chose the term IHC because it focuses on the content rather than on the technology that facilitates IHC. The panel uses the term IHC applications to refer to the operational software programs or modules that interface with the end user. This includes health information and support Web sites and clinical decision-support and risk assessment software (which may or may not be online), but does not include applications that focus exclusively on administrative, financial, or clinical data, such as electronic medical records, dedicated clinical telemedicine applications, or expert clinical decision-support systems for providers. Some of these latter applications, however, are integrated with health communication functions. The panel uses the term IHC technologies to refer to the hardware and infrastructure technologies that run or disseminate IHC applications, such as networks, computers, telecommunications equipment and the like. IHC applications are increasingly accessible to the public through the Internet and non-networked technologies, such as stand-alone computers and kiosks.6,7 Their major functions are to: (1) relay information, From the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, US Department of Health and Human Services (Eng), Washington, DC; University of Wisconsin-Madison (Gustafson), Madison, WI; Dartmouth Medical School (Henderson), Dartmouth, NH; Oregon Health Sciences University (Jimison), Portland, OR; and San Diego State University and the University of California, San Diego (Patrick), San Diego, CA. Address correspondence to: Thomas R. Eng, VMD, MPH, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, HHS, 200 Independence Avenue, SW, Room 738G, Washington, DC 20201. Address reprint requests to: Mary Jo Deering, PhD, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20201. Other panel members and staff: Linda Adler, MPH, MA, National Member Technology Group, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA; Farrokh Alemi, PhD, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH; David Ansley, Consumer Reports, Yonkers, NY; Patricia Flatley Brennan, RN, PhD, FAAN, School of Nursing and College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI; Molly Joel Coye, MD, MPH, The Lewin Group, San Francisco, CA; Mary Jo Deering, PhD, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC; Albert Mulley Jr, MD, MPP, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; John Noell, PhD, Oregon Center for Applied Science, Inc. and Oregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR; Thomas C. Reeves, PhD, University of Georgia, Athens, GA; Thomas N. Robinson, MD, MPH, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA; and Victor Strecher, PhD, MPH, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI. For example, less than one year after free Medline searches became available on the Web, the number of searches increased 10-fold, and 30% of users were members of the general public (Testimony of Dr. Donald A.B. Lindberg, Director, National Library of Medicine to the House Appropriations Sub-Committee on Labor, HHS and Education, March 18, 1998. Accessed on April 6, 1998. Available from: URL: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/staffpubs/od/budget99.html For example, a search for the keyword “health” on the World Wide Web using common search engines yielded more than 16 thousand indexed Web sites (www.yahoo.com) and 20 million matching Web pages (altavista.digital.com) on October 28, 1998.

Science societies ask Congress for more funds for NSF

Last week, for the first time, leaders of organizations representing a quarter of a million scientists—Paul H. L Walter ( center ), president of the American Chemical Society; Ralph G. Yount ( left ) president of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology; and Andrew M. Sessler ( right ), president of the American Physical Society—presented common testimony before the House Appropriations Committees Subcommittee on VA, HID & Independent Agencies. They united to urge Congress to increase the National Science Foundations budget by 10% to $3.8 billion for fiscal 1999. The sciences have become almost totally interdependent, testified Walter. Our progress in treating AIDS and our understanding of its pathology would never have occurred without critical advances in chemistry, biology, and physics, and, yes, mathematics, engineering, and computer science as well. NSF is the only federal agency that has the program breadth needed to see that all the disciplines remain vibrant and healthy. ...