B-247428

FUNDING FOR H. RES. 258

Reported to the House on November 19, 1991, H. Res. 258 would, if adopted, create a task force of Members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee to investigate certain allegations concerning the holding of American hostages by Iran in 1980. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that H. Res. 258 would cost between $1.5 million and $2.5 million. However, CBO estimates that $750,000 to $1.5 million of the cost would be for staff detailed from, and budgeted for, elsewhere in the government. (See H.R. Rep. 102-296, Part 1, 102d Cong., 1st Sess., 9 (1991)).

Under the resolution, funding for the task force would be paid from the contingent fund. You asked four questions related to that funding.

1.

Are there sufficient funds to cover the costs of the task force?

At the start of each session of the Congress, each committee submits a proposed expense resolution setting forth its budget for the session to the Committee on House Administration. The Committee on House Administration

considers each such resolution and reports to the House either an individual expense resolution for each committee or a unified one for all committees.

As of January 30, 1992, the Committee on House Administration had not reported an individual or unified committee expense resolution to the House. Thus, funding for the task force may be considered during House deliberations on the committee expense resolution. If the Foreign Affairs Committee expense resolution does not budget for the task force, section 9 of H. Res. 258 would authorize use of the contingent fund to pay the task force's expenses in an unspecified amount. If, pursuant to section 9 of H. Res. 258, the contingent fund is used to fund the task force, steps could be taken to ensure that there are sufficient funds available to fund the task force by either (1) administratively assuring that sufficient funds are available to meet the task force's expected expenses from funds available for this purpose or (2) legislatively limiting the task force to a known amount of available resources.

B-247428

37

2.

Can funds be made available through reprogramming or a supplemental appropriation?

If adopted, section 9 of H. Res. 258 would authorize payment of task force expenses from the contingent fund of the House. Subject to any requirements of the House or its committees, the appropriation account for "Contingent Expenses of the House (Standing Committees, Special and Select)" can be reprogrammed to fund the task force. In addition, the Appropriations Committee can approve a transfer of funds from another House appropriation account, pursuant to authority contained in section 101 of the Legislative Branch Appropriation Act for 1992. A supplemental appropriation can also be provided.

In recent years, unexpended House appropriations available for transfer have lapsed in amounts greater than the $1.5 million to $2.5 million the CBO estimates the task force would cost. Beginning in 1991, many House appropriations subject to transfer became no-year appropriations. Any unobligated balances in the no-year appropriations are available for transfer to the account for "Contingent Expenses of the House (Standing Committees, Special and Select)" to fund the task force.

3. Do funds left over from Members' allowances remain in the contingent fund?

Members' allowances are funded through appropriations for "Contingent Expenses of the House (Allowances and

Expenses)." Any unexpended balance of a Member's allowance is part of the contingent fund.

4.

When would we know if sufficient funds were going to be available for the task force?

We will know if sufficient funds are going to be available for the task force when one of the following three actions

Occurs:

-

the House includes funds for the task force in the Foreign Affairs Committee expense resolution for 1992;

Our

The purpose of this letter is to confirm what I said during recent discussion of our letter concerning the contingent fund of the House of Representatives, GAO/AFMD92-41R, January 30, 1992.

First, as I said during our conversation, we agree with you that while various statutes and House rules refer to the contingent fund, it is not in fact a discrete, identifiable fund. No law expressly establishes the fund; nor is it necessarily or exclusively composed of the appropriations

for:

--"Contingent Expenses of the House (Standing
Committees, Special and Select),"

--"Contingent Expenses of the House (House

Information Systems)," and

--"Contingent Expenses of the House (Allowances
and Expenses.

During our conversation I also agreed with your point that
when a member does not spend the entire amount authorized
for the member's official expenses, this does not
necessarily result in the unspent amount being available for
other purposes. We recognize that the appropriation for the
line item "Official Expenses of Members" is routinely less
than the amount necessary to fully fund authorized official
nonpersonnel expense levels. Thus when a member spends less
than the full amount authorized, this may result in no
savings in relation to the budgeted amount for "Official

I would of course be happy to talk to you further at any time about our January 30 letter and the issues it

Mr. FAZIO. There seem to be no Committees in particular trouble in terms of shortfalls. Donn, just for the information that was given to all of us, what happens to a Committee that exceeds its budget by some misjudgment along the way? I have seen it happen during my years here.

Mr. ANDERSON. I think I am going to let the new Chief of Finance respond.

Mr. HENY. Mr. Chairman, if that situation occurred, then those expenses would not be paid from our office. The committee then would have to seek relief from the Committee on House Administration for those expenses.

Mr. FAZIO. Typically, what does that mean, Mike? Do they just roll it into the next year and in effect take it off the top?

Mr. HENY. I think generally we are seeing that most committees, or actually all the committees, are living within their authorizations that they received during the year. Their budget management is pretty good and they have good forecasting methods now to ensure they don't have any unforeseen expenses that might carry them over.

Mr. FAZIO. The problems we have seen a few years ago were rectified?

Mr. HENY. That is correct.

Mr. FAZIO. What about unexpended balances?

Mr. HENY. Mr. Chairman, as you know, the amounts are only authorizations, the authorizations are not fully funded. If the authorization is unspent, it means it is just an unspent amount.

Mr. FAZIO. So it is very analogous then, to the Clerk hire account. Mr. HENY. Yes that is correct.

Mr. FAZIO. The House Administration Committee sets an authorized limit, the Members do not normally expend up to that limit, and those funds revert after three years?

Mr. HENY. That is correct. Currently, as you know, we have language in the appropriation bill which makes those funds available until expended. But the authorization again is only an authorization. We don't fully fund that.

Mr. FAZIO. To the Legislative Branch, not to the committee.

Mr. HENY. Right.

Mr. FAZIO. In this case, the Committees are not expending something close to $5 million out of the $60 million that they were authorized to spend?

Mr. HENY. That is the authorization, that is correct.

Mr. FAZIO. Is that about normal?

Mr. HENY. After all the bills are paid, we still have obligations coming in for that year, we are going to end up about 95 percent expended.

Mr. FAZIO. Our committee, as Ed reminds me, doesn't normally appropriate the whole amount that you request under the circumstances. So there are several layers here. There is the first authorized amount which you don't fully request, and then an appropriated amount which is short of what you request. So there are several cuts at this.