House Appropriations Research Articles

House Appropriations adds $500 million to SUPTRS block grant

House Appropriations adds $500 million to SUPTRS block grant

Maryland universities receive $2.5 million in funds for MH training

Four Maryland universities will receive more than $2.5 million in federal funding to beef up the number of mental health professionals available to schools, National Public Radio reported on May 16. The University of Maryland, Baltimore; Johns Hopkins University; Bowie State University and Loyola University Maryland each will receive federal grants from the U.S. Education Department ranging from $377,000 for Loyola to $825,000 for UMD‐Baltimore. The funds stem from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, legislation signed into law nearly a year ago. The five‐year program gives out funds to tackle mental health crises in schools and has already awarded $286 million across 48 states and territories. “Disruption in schools due to COVID‐19, economic anxiety, job losses, and learning challenges have exacer‐bated pre‐existing mental health challenges,” said House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D‐Conn.). “Our youth need help, and this is a burden that teachers, administrators, and parents cannot alleviate on their own. These grants will expand the program's reach, helping to move us closer to my goal of ensuring every child goes to a school that has a qualified mental health professional on staff.”

How to Be an Epistemic Trespasser

How to Be an Epistemic Trespasser

Recovery set‐aside in approps bill for SAPT BG

Last week, the House Appropriations Committee released the draft fiscal year 2022 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies funding bill, which now moves on to subcommittee consideration. It includes a new 10% recovery set‐aside for the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment block grant (SAPT BG) and an increase of $1.6 billion over the 2021 enacted level for the block grant overall.

Hal Rogers’s Kentucky Kingdom

This year marks Harold “Hal” Rogers’s twenty-first consecutive electoral victory in Kentucky’s Fifth Congressional District, making him the secondlongest-serving Republican in Congress. He rode into office on the wave of the Reagan Revolution in 1980, and the governing style he’s employed in the Fifth District—which covers the rural, mountainous, Appalachian region of southeastern Kentucky—can mostly be described as Reaganite: pro–War on Drugs, pro–prison expansion, anti-regulation of extractive industries, and pro-family. The congressman has had to improvise a little over the years in response to changes in the economy and political system, but he’s wellpositioned to do so: as a former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, the elite “College of Cardinals” that manages the government’s budget, and the ranking member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, he’s one of the most influential men in Washington. Rogers has extraordinary discretion over where and how the government exercises power domestically and overseas, especially within the border regions; he can coerce other lawmakers to support his policies by withholding funding; and, crucially, he can funnel tons of “pork” back to his home district

In Case You Haven't Heard…

Good news for substance use prevention and treatment overall in House appropriations: Partnerships for Success (from the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention [CSAP]) grants were restored, and funding for primary prevention was restored. It's likely that the Senate will look at appropriations over the summer. But for many, especially those who are new to Congress, the frame of reference is STR and SOR. They didn't grow up in the system, and they don't understand the complexities, which mean that once money is delivered to the states, it needs to be spent at a local level. “The rollout stunk,” one Washington insider told ADAW recently, referring to the STR process. As we have written many times before, STR was passed by Congress in December 2016, and states had less than two months to get in their applications. The money went out and “stuff appeared,” as our source said. The pressure to get resources out the door, given the opioid crisis mode, was clear. But moving forward — and this is where appropriations come in — it's important to look at the entire substance use problem. STR and SOR are only for opioids. Adding billions of dollars to the budget for opioids when methamphetamine is around the corner and more people are still dying from alcoholism than opioids means that a broader view is needed. The Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment block grant, in which states decide where they need to spend the money, should come in for more funding. Under House appropriations, it doesn't. Still, the overall topline number increased for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in the House, proposed cuts to the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention were rejected and there was a small increase in funding to combat underage drinking.

In Case You Haven't Heard…

The House Appropriations Committee last week approved $25 million for the new substance use disorder (SUD) professionals loan repayment program. In general, workforce did very well in the House appropriations bill. There are increases at the Health Resources and Services Administration Behavioral Health Workforce Education and Training program, especially for the training of peers, noted Andrew Kessler, principal for Slingshot Solutions, in a comment to ADAW last week. “There is also a very generous appropriation for the new peer support technical assistance center,” said Kessler. “The workforce used to be an afterthought for appropriators,” he said. “Through the advocacy of IC&RC, as well as several state‐based professional associations, appropriators and the rest of Congress have come to realize that without a highly trained workforce, progress in our fight against substance use disorders will be minimal. This is an investment that, if sustained, will most certainly pay off, both in the near future and for decades to come.” The House appropriations bill was marked up May 8. “Now we very much need the Senate to follow suit,” said Kessler. For the bill, go to https://appropriations.house.gov/news/press‐releases/appropriations‐committee‐releases‐fy‐2020‐subcommittee‐allocations‐labor‐hhs.

Briefly Noted

Last week, a sign‐on letter spearheaded by Rep. Paul Tonko (D‐New York) and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R‐Pennsylvania) picked up signatures from lawmakers calling for an additional $500 million for the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) block grant. The letter is addressed to the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. The increase would bring the SAPT block grant to $2,358,070,000. For decades, the SAPT block grant has been below $2 billion. “Any sustainable strategy designed to address the substance use crisis in America must include a strong commitment to the SAPT block grant, particularly in the midst of the ongoing opioid epidemic,” the March 26 letter states. “The SAPT Block Grant, distributed by formula to all States and Territories, funds services that result in exceptional outcomes,” the letter continues. Last year, the House Appropriations Committee voted to provide an additional $500 million to the SAPT block grant, and reduced the SOR appropriation by the same amount, a move that was embraced by the full House, but not by the Senate. As the benefits of flexibility in terms of federal resources get more traction (see story on the Bipartisan Policy Center on p. 5, and story on the Senate hearing in ADAW, March 11), the need to increase the block grant becomes more obvious. It's not just opioids anymore, as methamphetamine and cocaine use increases. “We believe over time that transitioning opioid‐specific funding to the SAPT block grant is good public policy and the appropriate step to take,” said Rob Morrison, executive director of the National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors, when asked to comment on the sign‐on letter. “This approach ensures resources flow to the lead agency for alcohol and drug issues; provides the flexibility needed to address all substance use disorders that may exist in a particular state; and ensures federal resources contribute to a coordinated approach to planning and implementation at the state level. The House supported the beginning of a transition last year, and we see some momentum for the same step this year.”

Sign‐on letter for SAPT increase due March 20

Representatives Paul Tonko (D‐New York) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R‐Pennsylvania) need signatures for their letter to the House Appropriations Committee urging a $500 million increase for the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) block grant in fiscal year 2020. “This funding stream serves as the cornerstone of States' substance abuse treatment, prevention, and recovery systems,” states the letter. “SAPT Block Grant funds, which are distributed by formula to all States and Territories, provide lifesaving treatment services to approximately 1.5 million individuals per year. In some States, the SAPT investment accounts for 100 percent of substance use prevention dollars. Unfortunately, SAPT Block Grant funding has not kept up with inflation, resulting in a 24 percent—or $444 million—decrease in actual funding since 2009.” The block grant has been just over $2 billion for decades. The letter requests that legislators fund just over $2.358 million for the SAPT block grant, which is equal to what the House of Representatives approved in the FY2019 Labor‐Health and Human Services Appropriations legislation and a $500 million increase over current funding levels. To sign on to the letter, contact Jeff Morgan in Rep. Tonko's office at jeff.morgan@mail.house.gov or Joseph Knowles in Rep. Fitzpatrick's office at joseph.knowles@mail.house.gov.

The Personal or the Partisan? The Politics of House Appropriations Amendments, 1985-2016

Offering amendments represents an important tool for individual members to engage in behaviors that help them pursue reelection, like position-taking and credit claiming. When the House leadership limits the opportunities for rank-and-file members to offer amendments on most measures debated on the floor but leaves spending bills relatively open to amendment, we might expect that individual members will respond by redirecting their amendments to the appropriations process. In this article, I explore whether members use these opportunities to pursue personal goals and to enhance their party's collective reputation.

President's Message Summer Musings…Still Uncertain Times for Science

President's Message Summer Musings…Still Uncertain Times for Science

How the Budget Process Works in the U.S. House Appropriations Committee and Its Implications for the Korean Government

The recent recession and subsequent rescue efforts along with snowballing annual deficits and national debts in the United States have made it urgent for scholars to examine national budget processes across countries. The House Appropriations Committee is a key cog in the annual appropriations process in the United States and understanding how it behaves offers a clue for what to do with central government deficits. I offer a comprehensive review of scholarly contributions on the behavior of House Appropriation Committee since Fenno`s seminal works in 1962 and 1966. Then, I note potential lessons that these studies and U.S experiences can offer for the Korean government.

Strong NSF Funding Favored by House Spending Committee

Although the federal budget request lowers the agency’s funding by 11%, a House appropriations committee chair declared at a hearing his panel’s commitment to U.S. leadership in fundamental research.

House appropriations committee focuses on federal funding gaps in opioid crisis

Alcoholism & Drug Abuse WeeklyVolume 29, Issue 15 p. 1-3 Articles House appropriations committee focuses on federal funding gaps in opioid crisis Alison Knopf, Alison KnopfSearch for more papers by this author Alison Knopf, Alison KnopfSearch for more papers by this author First published: 10 April 2017 https://doi.org/10.1002/adaw.30912Citations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume29, Issue1510 April 2017Pages 1-3 RelatedInformation

A Replication of “Political Influence behind the Veil of Peer Review” (Journal of Law and Economics 2009)

Using U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant panel data, Hegde and Mowery and Hegde look at political influence at the US congressional level on the allocation of these funds. Their key finding is that members of the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee and former New York Senator Al D’Amato as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee were able to indirectly steer NIH grant money to organizations in their home states. A reexamination of their evidence does not support that conclusion.

Fenno on the House Appropriations Committee's Success: (Or, How to Construct a Nash Equilibrium Without Really Trying)

Fenno's classic paper, "The Appropriations Committee as a Political System" (1962), focuses on the norms and institutions that are the foundations of House Appropriations Committee’s (HAC) success. The fundamental idea is that of committee integration, the degree to which committee members cooperate so as to capture the gains from cooperation. According to Fenno, cooperation requires procedures and norms for successful bargaining, first within committee then before the whole chamber. As Fenno reports, cooperation requires that committee members adhere to several norms: committee integration, the ability to make decisions without creating disorder; members specialize by subcommittee, focusing on matters before their subcommittee, not those matters before other subcommittees; committee members practice reciprocity, by which members not on a given subcommittee defer to and support the recommendations of that subcommittee; and members exhibit to subcommittee unity, the practice that, no matter what the disagreements in the subcommittee about the bill, all subcommittee members support the subcommittee’s recommendations in the full committee. This paper shows that Fenno constructs a Nash equilibrium of committee integration that explains why committee members had incentives to follow the HAC norms.

The Future of AHRQ's Health Services Research.

Within days after draft congressional spending bills for 2016 proposed eliminating funding for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), dozens of health care organizations raced to the agency’s defense. Writing as “Friends of AHRQ,” more than 100 health groups signed letters in June and July urging the House and Senate to maintain AHRQ and the research it funds. To do otherwise “is pennywise and pound foolish,” the groups wrote (http://bit .ly/1U0GVJS). “Americans deserve reliable information on how to deliver the best possible care, at the greatest value, with the best outcomes,” they added. “AHRQ-funded health services research provides those answers.” Critics, however, say the agency duplicates work by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which carries out comparative effectiveness research (http://bit.ly/1I0r1ue). House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (D, Ky) said in a statement that “great efforts were made to ensure none of the funding in the [2016 spending] bill is spent wastefully or inappropriately” (http://1.usa.gov /1D9Wzhf). Both houses of Congress will have to resolve their differences to pass a 2016 federal budget bill, which then goes to President Obama for his signature or veto. In the meantime, AHRQ Director Richard Kronick, PhD, sat down with JAMA to talk about the agency’s work and its relationship with other federal health research entities. The following is an edited transcript of that conversation.

House appropriations subcommittee approves FY 2016 funding bill for NASA, NIST, NOAA, and NSF

The bill was approved quickly and with little partisan rancor. The bill was approved quickly and with little partisan rancor.

R&D ekes out an increase in FY 2015 budget request

With spending caps in place, President Obama proposes an off-budget fund to support additional R&D. NASA would ground a flying observatory, and DOE would sharply curtail its nonproliferation programs.

“I Have Never Cut His Budget and I Never Expect to”: The House Appropriations Committee's Role in Increasing the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Cold War Power

In July 1971, officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) faced an unexpected challenge. Assistant Director Thomas Bishop received a memo from Milton Jones, who served as the head of the...