[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 8, Chapter 26]
[Chapter 26. Unauthorized Appropriations; Legislation on Appropriation Bills]
[C. Provisions as "Changing Existing Law," Generally]
[Â§ 32. Appropriations Prior to or Beyond Fiscal Year]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 5771-5797]
 
                               CHAPTER 26
 
    Unauthorized Appropriations; Legislation on Appropriation Bills
 
        C. PROVISIONS AS ``CHANGING EXISTING LAW,'' GENERALLY
 
Sec. 32. Appropriations Prior to or Beyond Fiscal Year

    Statutes provide that appropriations in annual appropriation acts 
are not permanent. Thus, no spe

[[Page 5772]]

cific or indefinite appropriation made subsequent to Aug. 24, 1912, in 
any regular annual appropriation act shall be construed to be permanent 
or available continuously without reference to a fiscal year unless it 
belongs to one of the following four classes: ``Rivers and harbors,'' 
``lighthouses,'' ``public buildings,'' and ``pay of the Navy and Marine 
Corps,'' or unless it is made in terms expressly providing that it 
shall continue to be available beyond the fiscal year covered by the 
appropriation act in which it is contained.(15) Except as 
otherwise provided by law, all balances of appropriations contained in 
the annual appropriation bills and made specifically for the service of 
any fiscal year shall only be applied to the payment of expenses 
properly incurred during that year, or to the fulfillment of contracts 
properly made within that year.(16) Thus, provisions in 
general appropriation bills which make funds available for the payment 
of obligations chargeable against prior appropriations are legislative 
in character. But appropriations for public buildings are available 
until completion of the work. A statute provides:(17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 31 USC Sec. 1301.
16. 31 USC Sec. 1502.
17. 31 USC Sec. 1307.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        All moneys appropriated for the construction of public 
    buildings shall remain available until the completion of the work 
    for which they are, or may be, appropriated; and upon the final 
    completion of each or any of said buildings, and the payment of all 
    outstanding liabilities therefor, the balance or balances remaining 
    shall be immediately covered into the 
    Treasury.                          -------------------

General Rule--Public Building Construction Funds

Sec. 32.1 Although it is generally not in order in a general 
    appropriation bill to require that funds therein shall be 
    ``available until expended'' or beyond the fiscal year covered by 
    the bill unless the authorizing law contains that provision, such 
    language may be included where other existing law can be 
    interpreted to permit that availability. Thus, a provision in a 
    general appropriation bill that funds therein for the construction 
    of the west front of the U.S. Capitol shall ``remain available 
    until expended'' was held not to constitute legislation in 
    violation of Rule XXI clause 2 where an existing law provided that 
    funds for public building construction shall remain available until 
    the completion of the work.

[[Page 5773]]

    On Apr. 17, 1973,(18) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the legislative branch appropriation bill 
[H.R. 6691], a point of order was raised against a provision as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 119 Cong. Rec. 12781, 12782, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [J. Edward] Roush [of Indiana]: Mr. Chairman, I have a 
    point of order against the language found on page 17 of the bill, 
    lines 14 through 22.
        The portion of the bill to which the point of order relates is 
    as follows:

                            Extension of the Capitol

            For an amount, additional to amounts heretofore 
        appropriated, for ``Extension of the Capitol'', in substantial 
        accordance with plans for extension of the West Central front 
        heretofore approved by the Commission for Extension of the 
        United States Capitol, to be expended as authorized by law, by 
        the Architect of the Capitol under the direction of such 
        Commission, $58,000,000, to remain available until expended.

        Mr. Roush: Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard on the point 
    of order.
        The Chairman: (19) The Chair will hear the 
    gentleman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. John M. Murphy [N. Y.].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Roush: Mr. Chairman, my point of order is based upon these 
    following facts: The appropriation as proposed lacks legislative 
    authority and, secondly, the language ``$58,000,000 to remain 
    available until expended'' constitutes legislation on a general 
    appropriation bill.
        Mr. Chairman, I point to rule XXI [which] prohibits an 
    appropriation in a general appropriation bill unless previously 
    authorized [as well as] provisions changing existing law. I will 
    take my second point first, Mr. Chairman, the prohibition against 
    changing existing law.
        I would refer to the appropriation bill last year, which would 
    be Public Law 92-342, under the section ``Extension of the 
    Capitol:''

            Funds available under this appropriation may be used for 
        the preparation of preliminary plans for the extension of the 
        west central front: Provided, however, That no funds may be 
        used for the preparation of the final plans or initiation of 
        construction of said project until specifically approved and 
        appropriated therefor by the Congress.

        I point out to the Chairman that the plans have not been 
    specifically approved.
        Second, Mr. Chairman, I would point to an old provision of the 
    law which is found in the United States Code, 1970 edition, title 
    40, section 162 (providing that) no change in the architectural 
    features of the Capitol Building or landscape features of the 
    Capitol Grounds shall be made except on plans to be approved by the 
    Congress.
        Now, Mr. Chairman, I am again going back to rule XXI. The 
    question then arises as to whether or not the Congress has passed 
    authorizing legislation. Mr. Chairman, I have searched this matter 
    diligently and the only authority that I can find for the extension 
    of the west front of the Capitol necessarily has to be inferred 
    from the language of a bill which was passed in 1955. I would like 
    to read that section of that bill. Again it is entitled ``Extension 
    of the Capitol'':

[[Page 5774]]

            The Architect of the Capitol is hereby authorized, under 
        the direction of a Commission for Extension of the United 
        States Capitol . . . to provide for the extension, 
        reconstruction, and replacement of the central portion of the 
        United States Capitol in substantial accordance with scheme B 
        of the architectural plan submitted by a joint commission of 
        Congress and reported to Congress on March 3, 1905 (House 
        Document numbered 385, Fifty-eighth Congress), but with . . . 
        modifications and additions . . .

        Mr. Chairman, I submit that this is the authority for the 
    extension of the East Front and Scheme B is the key reference in 
    the 1955 statute, and those words are in substantial accord with 
    Scheme B of the architectural plan, et cetera. Scheme B, as it is 
    referred to, provides that the building--referring to the Capitol 
    Building--should be projected eastward 32 feet, 6 inches from the 
    wall of the Supreme Court and statuary hall--should be projected 
    eastward, Mr. Chairman.
        The question then arises can authority be inferred? Certainly 
    there is no specific authority granted by this authority by 
    inferring from that wording, which affects the rest of Scheme B. 
    And I respectfully submit that the answer is ``no,'' that that is 
    not the effect of the statute. It is not another program, it is not 
    another sentence, it is a continuation of the same sentence, and 
    the only possible inference is that the language was inserted to 
    implement Scheme B, which calls for an extension of the East Front.
        Finally, Mr. Chairman, the bill provides for the appropriation 
    of $58 million, to remain available until expended. The precedents 
    of the House are explicit that an appropriation made available 
    until expended is in the nature of legislation and not in order on 
    a general appropriations bill, and thus is in violation of rule 21. 
    . . .
        The Chairman: Does the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Casey) desire 
    to be heard on the point of order?
        Mr. [Bob] Casey of Texas: Mr. Chairman, I do.
        Mr. Chairman, this project is authorized, and I would point out 
    that the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roush) who is making the point 
    of order, failed to read all of Public Law 242 of the 84th 
    Congress.
        The law reads:
        Extension of the Capitol: The Architect of the Capitol is 
    hereby authorized. . . .
    Et cetera.

            In substantial accordance with Scheme B of the 
        architectural plan submitted by a joint commission of Congress 
        and reported to Congress on March 3, 1905 (House Document 
        Numbered 385, Fifty-Eighth Congress), but with such 
        modifications and additions, including provisions for 
        restaurant facilities and such other facilities in the Capitol 
        Grounds, together with utilities. . . .

        It does not just refer to one item. I think this gives great 
    latitude.

            Together with utilities, equipment, approaches, and other 
        appurtenant or necessary items . . . there is hereby 
        appropriated $5,000,000, to remain until expended: Provided, 
        that the Architect of the Capitol under the direction of said 
        commission and without regard to the provisions of section 3709 
        of the Revised Statutes, as amended, is authorized to enter 
        into contracts.

        Et cetera.

[[Page 5775]]

        This law was amended February 14, 1956, and there was added 
    this amendment under ``Extension of the Capitol.'' This was Public 
    Law 406, 84th Congress:

            The paragraph entitled ``Extension of the Capitol'' in the 
        Legislative Appropriation Act, 1956, is hereby amended by 
        inserting after the words ``to remain available until 
        expended'' and before the colon, a comma and the following: 
        ``and there are hereby authorized to be appropriated such 
        additional sums as may be determined by said Commission to be 
        required for the purposes hereof.

        Mr. Chairman, I think it is quite clear that the authority is 
    here for any and all changes under plan B as put together in the 
    architectural plan, because there is language in there ``with such 
    modifications and additions'' as well as ``other appurtenant or 
    necessary items, as may be approved by said Commission,'' and the 
    Capitol building includes not only the East Front, but it includes 
    the West Front. I submit the point of order is not well taken.
        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule. . . .
        The Chair has listened carefully to the debate and the laws and 
    precedents cited by the gentlemen from Indiana and Texas; and the 
    Chair has had an opportunity to examine the authorizing legislation 
    for the West Front construction, and would note that in 1956--
    Public Law 84-406--the basic statute was amended to provide that--

            There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such 
        additional sums as may be determined by said Commission to be 
        required for the purposes hereof.

        The Chair would also call the Members' attention to the 
    provisions of 31 U.S. Code 682,(20) which provides that 
    all moneys appropriated for construction of public buildings shall 
    remain available until the completion of the work for which they 
    are, or may be appropriated. Therefore, the inclusion of the 
    language ``to remain available until expended'' in the 
    appropriation bill, although not contained in the basic authorizing 
    statute for the West Front, cannot be considered a change in 
    existing law since other existing law--31 U.S.C. 682--already 
    permits funds for public building construction to remain available 
    until work is completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Now 31 USC Sec. 1307.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The gentleman from Indiana also contends that Public Law 92-342 
    requires ``specific'' approval by Congress of preparation of final 
    plans or initiation of construction prior to an appropriation 
    therefor. The Chair has examined the legislative history of the 
    provision relied upon by the gentleman from Indiana in support of 
    his argument that the appropriation must be specifically approved 
    by Congress prior to the appropriation, and it is clear from the 
    debate in the Senate on March 28, 1972, that approval in an 
    appropriation bill was all that was required by the provision in 
    Public Law 92-342. The Chair feels that there is sufficient 
    authorization contained in Public Law 92-342 as amended by Public 
    Law 84-406 for the appropriation contained in the pending bill, and 
    that no further specific authorization is required prior to an 
    appropriation for final plans and construction for the West Front.
        For these reasons the Chair overrules the point of order.

[[Page 5776]]

    Parliamentarian's Note: As noted in the introduction to this 
section, certain exceptions are made to the general provision of 31 USC 
Sec. 718 that ``no specific or indefinite appropriation . . . in any 
regular annual appropriation Act shall be construed to be permanent or 
available continuously without reference to a fiscal year,'' one of the 
exceptions being appropriations for ``public buildings.''

Where Authorization for Continued Availability is Lacking

Sec. 32.2 An appropriation for railroad research ``to remain available 
    until expended'' was conceded to be legislation on an appropriation 
    bill where the authorizing statute (Pub. L. No. 91-458) did not 
    make those funds available beyond the fiscal year for which 
    appropriated.

    On July 14, 1971,(1) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the Department of Transportation 
appropriation bill (H.R. 9667), the following point of order was 
raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 117 Cong. Rec. 24913, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order as to the language on page 16, lines 1 through 3, as 
    being an unauthorized appropriation and violating rule XXI, clause 
    2.
        The portion of the bill reads as follows:

                               Railroad Research

            For necessary expenses for conducting railroad research 
        activities, $7,000,000, to remain available until expended.

        The Chairman: (2) Does the gentleman from California 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Edmond Edmondson (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [John J.] McFall [of California]: Mr. Chairman, I should 
    like to be heard on the point of order.
        The point of order which the gentleman from Missouri makes is 
    with reference to the language that indicates the amount of $7 
    million for conducting railroad research activities will remain 
    available until expended. The phrase ``to remain available until 
    expended'' is legislation on an appropriation bill. Just as soon as 
    I can get an amendment ready I will offer an amendment which will 
    preserve the $7 million and leave out the ``to remain available 
    until expended.''
        The Chairman: Does the gentleman from California concede the 
    point of order?
        Mr. McFall: I concede the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman: The point of order is sustained.

Characterization of an Appropriation as ``Final''

Sec. 32.3 In an appropriation bill, where an appropriation is

[[Page 5777]]

    authorized by a law which would remain effective in the future, 
    words designating an appropriation as ``a final appropriation'' for 
    ``completing'' acquisition of certain land under authority of such 
    law were conceded to constitute legislation.

    On Mar. 30, 1954,(3) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the independent offices appropriation bill 
(H.R. 8583), a point of order was raised against the following 
provision:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 100 Cong. Rec. 4128, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Land acquisition, National Capital park, parkway, and 
        playground system: As a final appropriation under authority of 
        the act of May 29, 1930 (46 Stat. 482), as amended, for 
        necessary expenses for the National Capital Planning Commission 
        for completing acquisition of land for the park, parkway, and 
        playground system of the National Capital, to remain available 
        until expended, $545,000, of which (a) $135,000 shall be 
        available for the purposes of section 1(a) of said act of May 
        29, 1930, (b) $126,000 shall be available for the purposes of 
        section 1(b) thereof, and (c) $284,000 shall be available for 
        the purposes of section 4 thereof: Provided, That not exceeding 
        $26,450 of the funds available for land acquisition purposes 
        shall be used during the current fiscal year for necessary 
        expenses of the Commission (other than payments for land) in 
        connection with land acquisition.

        Mr. [Howard W.] Smith of Virginia: Mr. Chairman, a point of 
    order.
        The Chairman: (4) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Louis E. Graham (Pa.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Smith of Virginia: Mr. Chairman, I desire to interpose a 
    point of order to the language contained in line 17 on page 35: 
    ``as a final appropriation''; and on line 20 against the word 
    ``completing.''. . .
        Mr. [John] Phillips [of California]: I will concede the point 
    of order.
        The Chairman: The Chair sustains the point of order.

Funds ``To Be Immediately Available''

Sec. 32.4 Under the modern practice the provision that an appropriation 
    shall be immediately available is not subject to a point of order: 
    language in the independent offices appropriation bill making the 
    appropriations for administrative expenses for public works advance 
    planning immediately available was held in order.

    On Feb. 8, 1945,(5) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the independent offices appropriation bill 
(H.R. 1984), a point of order was raised against the following 
amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 91 Cong. Rec. 942, 79th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clifton A.] Woodrum of Virginia: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.

[[Page 5778]]

        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Woodrum of Virginia: On page 18, 
        line 12, insert:
            ``Public works advance planning: Toward accomplishing the 
        provisions of title V of the War Mobilization and Reconversion 
        Act of 1944, $5,000,000, of which not to exceed 4 percent shall 
        be available for administrative expenses necessary therefor, to 
        be immediately available and to remain available until June 30, 
        1946, including salary for not to exceed one position at 
        $10,000 per annum; personal services and rent in the District 
        of Columbia; printing and binding; purchase and exchange of 
        lawbooks and books of reference; purchase (not exceeding 5) and 
        repair, maintenance, and operation of passenger automobiles; 
        and travel expenses (not to exceed $10,000).''

        Mr. [Francis H.] Case of South Dakota: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order against certain language in the amendment just 
    offered reading, ``to be immediately available,'' and call the 
    attention of the Chair to the fact that the bill is an 
    appropriation bill for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1946. I 
    direct this point of order merely against the language, ``to be 
    immediately available.''
        The Chairman: (6) Does the gentleman from Virginia 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. William M. Whittington (Miss.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Woodrum of Virginia: Mr. Chairman, the amendment offered 
    conforms to the point of order which the gentleman made to the 
    paragraph originally. The language in line 17, ``to be immediately 
    available,'' had not been complained of by the gentleman from South 
    Dakota.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from South Dakota [Mr. Case] makes 
    a point of order against the language indicated by the gentleman 
    from Virginia, ``to be immediately available.'' Does the gentleman 
    from Virginia desire to be heard further?
        Mr. Woodrum of Virginia: I do not, Mr. Chairman. . . .
        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule. In volume 7, Cannon's 
    Precedents, section 1120, the Chair finds the following language:

            Under the modern practice the provision that an 
        appropriation shall be immediately available is not subject to 
        a point of order.

        The Chair overrules the point of order.

Permanent Appropriations

Sec. 32.5 Language in a general appropriation bill making 
    appropriations available beyond the current fiscal year is 
    legislation and not in order: appropriations for fulfilling 
    treaties with certain Indians on a permanent basis and 
    appropriations from proceeds from power projects on a similar basis 
    have been conceded as legislation and not in order.

    On May 3, 1950,(7) during consideration in the Committee 
of the Whole of the Agriculture Depart

[[Page 5779]]

ment appropriation bill (H.R. 7786), the following point of order was 
raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 96 Cong. Rec. 6304, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Ben F.] Jensen [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of 
    order against the language appearing on page 227, lines 13 to 18, 
    inclusive, and on page 227, lines 19 to 25, inclusive, and page 
    228, lines 1 and 2 on the ground that it is permanent legislation 
    on an appropriation bill.
        The language to which the point of order is made is as follows:

                         Claims and Treaty Obligations

            For fulfilling treaties with Senecas and Six Nations of New 
        York, Choctaws and Pawnees of Oklahoma, and payment to Indians 
        of Sioux reservations, to be expended as provided by law, such 
        amounts as may be necessary after June 30, 1950.

                              Proceeds from Power

            After June 30, 1950, not to exceed the amount of power 
        revenues covered into the Treasury to the credit of each of the 
        power projects, including revenues credited prior to August 7, 
        1946, shall be available for the purposes authorized by section 
        3 of the act of August 7, 1946 (Public Law 647), as amended, 
        including printing and binding, in connection with the 
        respective projects from which such revenues are derived.

        The Chairman: (8) Does the gentleman from Washington 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Henry M.] Jackson of Washington: Mr. Chairman, I concede 
    both points of order.
        The Chairman: The Chair sustains the points of order.

Available to End of Next Fiscal Year

Sec. 32.6 Language in a supplemental appropriation bill providing funds 
    [to collect and publish certain statistics on voting] to be 
    available until the end of the next fiscal year, was conceded to be 
    legislation and ruled out on a point of order.

    On Apr. 6, 1965,(9) During consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a supplemental appropriation bill (H.R. 
7091), a point of order was raised against the following provision:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 111 Cong. Rec. 7131, 7132, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

                             Department of Commerce

                              Bureau of the Census

                       Registration and Voting Statistics

            For expenses necessary for the collection, compilation, and 
        publication of statistics on registration and voting, in such 
        geographic areas as may be recommended by the Commission on 
        Civil Rights, as authorized by section 801 of the Civil Rights 
        Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 266), $7,500,000, to remain available 
        until December 31, 1966.

        Mr. [Robert L. F.] Sikes [of Florida]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order against the language on page 21, lines 2 through 9, 
    and ask to be heard on the point of order.

[[Page 5780]]

        The Chairman: (10) The Chair recognizes the 
    gentleman from Florida [Mr. Sikes].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Oren Harris (Ark.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Sikes: Mr. Chairman, the language in this section goes 
    beyond the period of time set forth in the bill H.R. 7091. The 
    preamble of this bill states that it is a bill making supplemental 
    appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1965. The 
    language on lines 2 through 9, page 21, proposes to have the funds, 
    $7.5 million, remain available until December 31, 1966. There is no 
    such authority in the basic law.
        The Chairman: Does the gentleman from New York desire to be 
    heard?
        Mr. [John J.] Rooney of New York: Mr. Chairman, the proposed 
    appropriation of $7.5 million contained in the bill for the Bureau 
    of the Census is for the purpose of a registration and voting 
    statistics survey covering the States of Alabama, Louisiana, and 
    Mississippi, to provide a count of all persons of voting age and a 
    determination of the following information for each such person: 
    ``(1) citizenship, (2) residence, (3) years of school completed, 
    (4) race and color, (5) whether registered to vote in Federal 
    elections, (6) whether voted in the most recent statewide primary 
    election and general election in which Members of the U.S. House of 
    Representatives were nominated or elected.''
        As appears at page 161 of the printed hearings on this pending 
    bill, the following questions were asked and the following answers 
    given concerning this requested $7.5 million appropriation:

            Mr. Rooney: What is the legal authority for this proposed 
        activity of the Department of Commerce?
            Mr. Eckler: Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act indicates 
        that the Secretary of Commerce shall promptly conduct a survey 
        to compile registration and voting statistics in such 
        geographic areas as may be recommended by the Commission on 
        Civil Rights.
            I believe we have included a full text of title VIII, 
        section 801, in the material which was put into the record.
            Mr. Rooney: Where do you get the authority for the 
        unlimited availability?
            Mr. Imhoff: We have no specific authority for that, Mr. 
        Chairman.

        In view of this, the gentleman from New York is reluctantly 
    constrained to concede that the gentleman's point of order is well 
    taken.
        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule. . . .
        The purpose of the bill is to make supplemental appropriations 
    for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1965. The language on page 21, 
    line 9, is ``to remain available until December 31, 1966'', which 
    goes beyond the purpose of the bill.
        The point of order is sustained.

Available for Next Fiscal Year

Sec. 32.7 To a supplemental appropriation bill, an amendment to 
    increase a limitation on use of funds for administrative purposes 
    contained in another act and to make such funds available beyond 
    the current fiscal year was conceded to be legislation and 
    therefore was ruled out as not in order.

[[Page 5781]]

    On May 7, 1957,(11) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a supplemental appropriation bill (H.R. 7221) 
for fiscal year 1957, a point of order was raised against the following 
amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 103 Cong. Rec. 6431, 6432, 85th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Amendment offered by Mr. [DeWitt S.] Hyde [of Maryland]: 
        Page 5, after line 10, insert the following item:

         ``Administration Expenses, Employees' Life Insurance Fund

            ``The limitation under this head in the Independent Offices 
        Appropriation Act, 1957, on the amount made available from the 
        `Employees' life insurance fund,' for reimbursement to the 
        Civil Service Commission for administrative expenses incurred 
        in the administration of the Federal Employees' Group Life 
        Insurance Act, is increased from `$117,500' to `$194,000.'

        ``Not to exceed $23,000 of the funds in the `Employees' life 
    insurance fund' shall be available for reimbursement to the Civil 
    Service Commission during the fiscal year 1958, for administrative 
    expenses incurred by the Commission during that fiscal year in the 
    administration of said act, and such amount shall be in addition to 
    any amounts otherwise made available from the fund for such 
    expenses for the fiscal year 1958.''. . .
        Mr. [Albert] Thomas [of Texas]: Mr. Chairman, very reluctantly 
    I must state that the committee insists on the point of order. . .
        You will recall that the language, Mr. Chairman, does two 
    things that makes the amendment subject to a point of order. It 
    first attempts to increase the limitation, then in the next place 
    it attempts to take part of the funds so limited and transfer them 
    from that fund to the general administrative expense fund of the 
    Civil Service Commission.
        No. 2. This is a deficiency appropriation bill for the fiscal 
    year 1957. The language attempts to carry the fund over and beyond 
    and into the fiscal year 1958; therefore it is over and beyond the 
    scope of the bill.
        It is subject to a point of order on two counts.
        The Chairman: (12) Does the gentleman from Maryland 
    wish to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Frank N. Ikard (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Hyde: Only to the extent of asking the very genial chairman 
    of the committee a question. I understand that the chairman is 
    objecting to this amendment not on its merit but on a technical 
    basis.
        Mr. Thomas: Let us take one hurdle at a time. I am objecting 
    now on two scores.
        Mr. Hyde: Mr. Chairman, I must bow to the wisdom of the 
    chairman. I recognize that the point of order is well taken.
        The Chairman: The gentleman concedes the point of order?
        Mr. Hyde: Yes.
        The Chairman: The Chair sustains the point of order.

Available ``Each Fiscal Year Thereafter''; Permanent Appropriation

Sec. 32.8 Language in an appropriation bill making appro

[[Page 5782]]

    priations beyond the current fiscal year is legislation: language 
    in the general appropriation bill making appropriations for the 
    Migratory Bird Conservation Fund for the current year ``and each 
    fiscal year thereafter'' from the sale of stamps was conceded to be 
    legislation and not in order.

    On May 4, 1950,(13) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 7786), the 
following point of order was raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 96 Cong. Rec. 6400, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Ben F.] Jensen [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of 
    order, on the ground it is permanent legislation on an 
    appropriation bill and not in accordance with the rules of the 
    House, to the language appearing in lines 18 to 24, page 246, and 
    reading as follows:

                        Migratory Bird Conservation Fund

            For carrying into effect section 4 of the act of March 16, 
        1934, as amended (16 U.S.C. 718-718h), amounts equal to the 
        sums received during the current year and each fiscal year 
        thereafter from the proceeds from the sale of stamps, to be 
        warranted monthly and to remain available until expended.

        The Chairman: (14) Does the gentleman from 
    Washington [Mr. Jackson] desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Henry M.] Jackson of Washington: Mr. Chairman, I concede 
    the point of order and at the proper time will offer an amendment 
    in lieu of the language appearing at that point in the bill.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Jensen] makes a 
    point of order against the language mentioned by him, the gentleman 
    from Washington [Mr. Jackson] concedes the point of order, and the 
    Chair sustains the point of order.

Fees and Royalties Hereafter Received; Permanent Appropriation

Sec. 32.9 Language in a general appropriation bill making fees and 
    royalties collected pursuant to law available beyond the current 
    fiscal year is legislation and not in order.

    On May 3, 1950,(15) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the Interior Department appropriation bill 
(H.R. 7786), the following points of order were raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 96 Cong. Rec. 6296, 6297, 81st Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Ben F.] Jensen [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of 
    order against the paragraph appearing on page 222, lines 18 through 
    25, and page 223, lines 1 through 3, which is as follows:

[[Page 5783]]

                               Range Improvements

            The aggregate of all moneys received after June 30, 1950, 
        as range-improvement fees under the provisions of section 3 of 
        the Act of June 28, 1934 (43 U.S.C. 315) and 25 per centum of 
        all moneys received after June 30, 1950, under the provisions 
        of section 15 of said Act (in addition to all moneys received 
        during the fiscal year 1950 from either of such sources but not 
        yet appropriated) shall be available until expended for 
        construction, purchase, and maintenance of range improvement 
        pursuant to the provisions of sections 3 and 10 of said Act.

        Mr. Jensen: . . . I make a point of order against the language 
    on page 223, lines 13 through 24, which language is as follows:

                              Payment to Oklahoma

            Thirty-seven and one-half percent of the royalties received 
        after June 30, 1950 (in addition to 37\1/2\ percent of all 
        royalties received during the fiscal year 1950 but not yet 
        appropriated), from the south half of Red River in Oklahoma 
        under the provisions of the joint resolution of June 12, 1926 
        (44 Stat. 740), shall be available for payment to the State of 
        Oklahoma in lieu of all State and local taxes upon tribal funds 
        accruing under said act, to be expended by the State in the 
        same manner as if received under section 35 of the act approved 
        February 25, 1920 (30 U.S.C. 191).

        I make a point of order against the language on page 224, lines 
    1 through 8, which language is as follows:

                            Leasing of Grazing Lands

            The aggregate of all moneys received after June 30, 1950 
        (in addition to all moneys received during the fiscal year 1950 
        but not yet appropriated), from grazing fees for State, county, 
        or privately owned lands leased in accordance with the 
        provisions of the act of June 23, 1938 (43 U.S.C. 315m-4), 
        shall be available until expended for leasing of such lands.

        I make a point of order against the language on page 224, lines 
    9 through 16, which language is as follows:

                       Payments to States (Grazing Fees)

            Thirty-three and one-third percent of all grazing fees 
        received after June 30, 1950, from each grazing district on 
        Indian lands ceded to the United States for disposition under 
        the public-lands laws, shall be available for payment to the 
        State in which said lands are situated, in accordance with the 
        provisions of section 11 of the act of June 28, 1934, as 
        amended (43 U.S.C. 315j).

        Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order that the language I 
    have indicated, in each instance, has the effect of making 
    appropriations on a permanent basis, which goes beyond the scope of 
    the bill and also constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill, 
    and, therefore, is not in order under the rules of the House.
        Mr. [Henry M.] Jackson of Washington: Mr. Chairman, I concede 
    the points of order.
        The Chairman: (16) The Chair sustains the points of 
    order made by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Jensen].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appropriation Available Until Expended

Sec. 32.10 A provision that an appropriation is ``to remain

[[Page 5784]]

    available until expended'' constitutes legislation on an 
    appropriation bill and is not in order where such availability is 
    not authorized by law.

    On Apr. 30, 1952,(17) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the Agriculture Department appropriation bill 
(H.R. 7314), a point of order was raised against the following 
amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 98 Cong. Rec. 4620, 82d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Amendment offered by Mr. [Arthur L.] Miller of Nebraska: Page 
    9, after line 13 insert the following:
        ``Research Laboratory: For establishment of a research 
    laboratory, including acquisition of necessary land and the 
    preparation of plans and specifications for, and construction of 
    laboratory buildings and related facilities for research and study 
    of foot-and-mouth disease and other animal diseases, in accordance 
    with the act of April 24, 1948 (Public Law 496, 80th Cong.), 
    $24,500,000, to remain available until expended.''
        Mr. [Jamie L.] Whitten [of Mississippi]: Mr. Chairman, I make 
    the point of order that the amendment contains legislation in that 
    the last clause directs that the money ``remain available until 
    expended.''
        The Chairman: (18) Does the gentleman from Nebraska 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Aime J. Forand (R.I.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Miller of Nebraska: I do, Mr. Chairman. The Chairman: The 
    Chair will hear the gentleman briefly. Mr. Miller of Nebraska: Mr. 
    Chairman, I maintain that the amendment is in order because the 
    Eightieth Congress passed Public Law 496 providing for the 
    laboratory. It is not new legislation; it merely implements 
    legislation Congress has already passed. I am merely trying to 
    implement that legislation by an appropriation which was authorized 
    at that time.

        The Chairman: The Chair has not been able to find in Public Law 
    496 any authority that the funds shall remain available until 
    expended.
        Mr. Miller of Nebraska: If the Chair please, Public Law 496 of 
    the Eightieth Congress is the law that this Congress passed 
    authorizing the construction of this laboratory. I am merely 
    providing funds to implement a law that has already been passed by 
    Congress.
        The Chairman: The gentleman is within his rights in offering 
    such an amendment with the exception of the fact that the 
    gentleman's amendment contains a clause stating that the funds 
    shall remain available until expended. That is new legislation.
        Mr. Miller of Nebraska: I concede the point of order, Mr. 
    Chairman, and submit the amendment minus the last clause.
        The Chairman: The gentleman concedes the point of order. The 
    point of order is sustained.19
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See also 96 Cong. Rec. 6296, 6297, 81st Cong. 2d Sess., May 3, 
        1950; and 89 Cong. Rec. 3080, 78th Cong. 1st Sess., Apr. 7, 
        1943.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 32.11 Language in a paragraph of a general appro

[[Page 5785]]

    priation bill providing that funds provided in that paragraph shall 
    remain available until expended is generally conceded to be 
    legislation in violation of Rule XXI clause 2 unless the 
    authorizing legislation permits such availability, since such 
    language extends funds beyond the period permitted by law.

    On Aug. 1, 1973,20 during consideration in the Committee 
of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 9590), the following 
proceedings took place:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 119 Cong. Rec. 27288, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   National Archives and Records Service

                             operating expenses

        For necessary expenses in connection with Federal records 
    management and related activities, as provided by law, including 
    reimbursement for security guard services, contractual services 
    incident to movement or disposal of records, and acceptance and 
    utilization of voluntary and uncompensated services, $33,000,000, 
    of which $500,000 for allocations and grants for historical 
    publications as authorized by 44 U.S.C. 2504, as amended, shall 
    remain available until expended.
        Mr. [John D.] Dingell [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, a point of 
    order.
        The Chairman: (1) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Dingell: Mr. Chairman, the point of order is to the 
    language on page 20, line 25, referring specifically to the words 
    in the bill, ``shall remain available until expended.''
        That again, Mr. Chairman, is violative of rule XXI, clause 2, 
    as legislation on an appropriation bill.
        Mr. [Thomas J.] Steed [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Chairman, we concede 
    the point of order.
        The Chairman: The point of order is conceded and sustained.

Sec. 32.12 To a provision in an appropriation bill providing funds for 
    construction and rehabilitation of authorized reclamation projects, 
    an amendment providing funds to ``be programed and remain available 
    until spent for the Fort Randall-Grand Island 230-kilovolt 
    transmission line,'' was held to be legislation and not in order.

    On May 22, 1956,(2) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 11319), 
the following transpired:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 102 Cong. Rec. 8728-30, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

                        Construction and Rehabilitation

            For construction and rehabilitation of authorized 
        reclamation projects or parts thereof (including power 
        transmission facilities) and for other related activities, as 
        authorized by law,

[[Page 5786]]

        to remain available until expended, $125,900,000, of which 
        $63,083,000 shall be derived from the reclamation fund. . . .

        Mr. [Arthur L.] Miller of Nebraska: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Miller of Nebraska: On page 7, 
        line 22, after ``Congress.'', insert ``Provided further,  That 
        $5,500,000 shall be programed and remain available until spent 
        for the Fort Randall-Grand Island 230-kilovolt transmission 
        line.''

        Mr. [Clarence] Cannon [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, I reserve a 
    point of order. . . .
        Mr. Chairman, we are constrained to insist upon our point of 
    order.
        The Chairman: (3) Does the gentleman from Nebraska 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Miller of Nebraska: Mr. Chairman, I concede that it is 
    legislation on an appropriation bill and concede the point order.
        The Chairman: The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] makes a 
    point of order; the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Miller] concedes 
    it and the Chair sustains the point of order.

Sec. 32.13 An amendment to an appropriation bill seeking to appropriate 
    funds for a specific purpose making such appropriation ``available 
    until expended'' was held to be legislation on an appropriation 
    bill and therefore not in order.

    On June 16, 1948,(4) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a deficiency appropriation bill (H.R. 6935), 
a point of order was raised against the following amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 94 Cong. Rec. 8469, 80th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Amendment offered by Mr. [George H.] Mahon [of Texas]: On 
        page 14, line 19, after the period, add a new section as 
        follows:
            ``Rural Electrification Administration, salaries and 
        expenses, for an additional amount, fiscal year 1949, for 
        administrative expenses to be available immediately and to 
        remain available until expended, $450,000.''

        Mr. [John] Taber [of New York]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of 
    order against the amendment, that it carries legislation in the 
    words ``which will be available until expended.''
        The Chairman: (5) Does the gentleman from Texas 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Clifford R. Hope (Kans.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Mahon: Mr. Chairman, the amendment provides additional 
    funds for the administrative expenses for the Rural Electrification 
    Administration. It carries the same wording as was carried in the 
    original act providing the funds. It is in accordance with the 
    budget estimate, and it seems to me it is not subject to a point of 
    order. It is not legislation because it is authorized by law.
        Mr. Taber: Mr. Chairman, the words ``to be available until 
    expended'' make it legislation, and therefore the amendment is 
    subject to a point of order.

[[Page 5787]]

        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule. The amendment in its 
    present form with the language ``to be available until expended'' 
    is clearly legislation. The Chair sustains the point of order.

Sec. 32.14 A provision in a paragraph of a general appropriation bill 
    authorizing certain funds therein to remain available until 
    expended whenever determined by the recipient to be necessary and 
    without regard to provisions of law was conceded to be legislation 
    in violation of Rule XXI clause 2 and was stricken from the bill.

    On Aug. 1, 1973,(6) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 9590), a 
point of order was raised against the following provision:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 119 Cong. Rec. 27289, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

                            United States Tax Court

                             Salaries and Expenses

            For necessary expenses, including contract stenographic 
        reporting, and other services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
        $5,760,000: Provided, That travel expenses of the judges shall 
        be paid upon the written certificate of the judge: Provided 
        further, That $1,280,000 of this appropriation shall remain 
        available until expended for equipment, furniture, furnishings 
        and accessories, required for the new Tax Court building and, 
        whenever determined by the Court to be necessary, without 
        compliance with section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, as 
        amended (41 U.S.C. 5).

        Mr. [John D.] Dingell [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I assert a 
    point of order against the line beginning with ``Provided further'' 
    at page 26, line 21, down through the end of the paragraph at the 
    top of page 27, line 2.
        Mr. Chairman, the burden of the point of order is that the 
    language in the bill referred to is violative of rule XXI, clause 
    2, constituting legislation in an appropriation bill. I refer 
    specifically to the language at line 22 wherein the words are as 
    follows:

            That $1,280,000 of this appropriation shall remain 
        available until expended for equipment, furniture, furnishings, 
        and accessories . . .

        Mr. [Thomas J.] Steed [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Chairman, I concede 
    the point of order.
        The Chairman: (7) The point of order is conceded, 
    and the point of order is sustained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7 Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Available Until Expended; Bureau of Reclamation Construction Funds

Sec. 32.15 Language in a supplemental appropriation bill for the 
    Department of the Interior providing that funds for Bureau of 
    Reclamation construction ``shall remain available until expended,'' 
    was

[[Page 5788]]

    held to be legislation where authorizing language was not cited.

    On July 24, 1956,(8) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a supplemental appropriation bill (H.R. 
12350), a point of order was raised against a provision which contained 
language as described above, and which also prescribed the conditions 
under which certain contracts could be entered into.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 102 Cong. Rec. 14289, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            [For an additional amount for ``Construction and 
        rehabilitation'', $2,500,000 to remain available until 
        expended: Provided, That any contract under the Act of July 4, 
        1955 (69 Stat. 244), as amended, which calls for the making of 
        loans beyond the fiscal year in which the contract is entered 
        into shall be made only on the same conditions as those 
        prescribed in section 12 of the Act of August 4, 1939 (53 Stat. 
        1187, 1197).]

        Mr. [Clarence] Cannon [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, I desire to 
    make a further point of order against the language appearing on 
    page 7, beginning with line 5 ``Bureau of Reclamation'' down to the 
    bottom of the page and including the remainder of the bill.
        The Chairman: (9) Does the gentleman from Missouri 
    desire to be heard on his point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Oren Harris (Ark.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Cannon: Mr. Chairman, it is legislation on an appropriation 
    bill.
        Mr. [John] Phillips [of California]: Mr. Chairman, I should 
    like to be heard on the point of order. . . .
        Mr. Chairman, in my opinion, this is not subject to a point of 
    order, as it covers a project which has been approved by 
    legislation. It appears in this bill, as a matter of information 
    for the Chairman, only because at the time the regular bill came 
    through the matter of contracts had not been settled between the 
    people involved in the district and the Government. That matter has 
    been settled. That is why this is here. Therefore this is not 
    subject to a point of order, as it has already been authorized.
        Mr. Cannon: It provides for the negotiation of contracts to be 
    entered into in a particular and specified way.
        Mr. Phillips: Then I desire to be heard further, Mr. Chairman, 
    before the Chairman rules in reply to the gentleman from Missouri, 
    that his point of order lies against the proviso only and not 
    against lines 7 and 8.
        The Chairman: The Chair is ready to rule.
        The gentleman from Missouri has made a point of order against 
    the language appearing in the bill on page 7, beginning in line 5, 
    on the ground that it contains legislation on an appropriation 
    bill.
        The Chair has examined the language covered in the point of 
    order and invites attention to the fact that there appears in line 
    8 the words ``to remain available until expended,'' which 
    constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill.
        The Chair therefore sustains the point of order.

Available Until Expended for Payment of Prior Obligations

Sec. 32.16 Language in an appropriation bill providing for

[[Page 5789]]

    funds for the Tennessee Valley Authority ``to remain available 
    until expended, and to be available for the payment of obligations 
    chargeable against prior appropriations,'' was conceded to be 
    legislation and not in order.

    On May 22, 1956,(10) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 11319), 
the following point of order was raised:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 102 Cong. Rec. 8725, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Louis C.] Rabaut [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order against certain language in the Tennessee Valley 
    Authority paragraph as follows: . . .
        . . . In lines 11 through 13 ``, to remain available until 
    expended, and to be available for the payment of obligations 
    chargeable against prior appropriations.''. . .
        Mr. [Clarence] Cannon [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, the language 
    read by the gentleman is unquestionably legislation on an 
    appropriation bill and I therefore concede the point of order.
        The Chairman: (11) . . . The gentleman from 
    Missouri, chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, concedes the 
    point of order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Jere Cooper (Tenn.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        It is clearly legislation on an appropriation bill and the 
    point of order is sustained.

    Parliamentarian's Note: 31 USC Sec. 1502 provides:

        Except as otherwise provided by law, all balances of 
    appropriations contained in the annual appropriation bills and made 
    specifically for the service of any fiscal year shall only be 
    applied to the payment of expenses properly incurred during that 
    year, or to the fulfillment of contracts properly made within that 
    year.

    Thus, provisions in general appropriation bills which make funds 
available for the payment of obligations chargeable against prior 
appropriations are legislative in character.

Office of Telecommunications Policy; Earmarking Certain Funds to Remain 
    Available Until Expended

Sec. 32.17 To a paragraph in a general appropriation bill containing 
    funds for salaries and expenses of the Office of Telecommunications 
    Policy, an amendment increasing the amount and providing that the 
    additional amount shall be available until expended for 
    telecommunications studies and research was held to constitute 
    legislation in violation of Rule XXI clause 2.

[[Page 5790]]

    On Aug. 1, 1973,(12) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 9590), a 
point of order was raised against the following amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 119 Cong. Rec. 27285, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clarence J.] Brown of Ohio: Mr. Chairman, I offer an 
    amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Brown of Ohio: Page 10, line 24, 
        after the first comma, strike out the figure $2,070,000 and 
        insert the figure $2,745,000, and add at the end thereof the 
        following: ``Provided, That not to exceed $675,000 of the 
        foregoing amount shall remain available for telecommunications 
        studies and research until expended.''

        Mr. [Tom] Bevill [of Alabama]: Mr. Chairman, I should like to 
    make a point of order against the amendment.
        The Chairman: (13) The gentleman will state his 
    point of order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Bevill: The second provision is: Provided, That not to 
    exceed $675,000 of the foregoing amount shall remain available for 
    telecommunications studies and research until expended.
        There is no authorization for studies and research, and I make 
    a point of order against that portion of the amendment.
        The Chairman: Does the gentleman from Ohio desire to be heard 
    on the point of order?
        Mr. Brown of Ohio: Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to 
    restore funds which were stricken by the committee in its 
    consideration of the proposals for this particular office as the 
    bill was under consideration in the committee.
        The amendment seeks to restore a portion of the funds which 
    were a part of that total budget asked of the committee. The reason 
    for the proviso language is to further clarify for what the 
    additional funds would be used, to go back to the testimony of the 
    office when it appeared before the committee and to restore the 
    specific portion of those funds.
        Mr. [Thomas J.] Steed [of Oklahoma]: Mr. Chairman, may I be 
    heard on the point of order?
        The Chairman: The Chair will hear the gentleman.
        Mr. Steed: The language of the original bill was submitted to 
    the experts, and it was held it would be subject to a point of 
    order, because the funds would be available until expended. That is 
    why it was deleted from the bill in the committee. . . .
        The Chairman: The Chair is prepared to rule.
        The Chair will rule narrowly on the point made by the gentleman 
    from Oklahoma. The words ``until expended'' constitute legislation 
    on an appropriation bill. Therefore, the point of order is 
    sustained on that ground.

Laws Not Permitting Availability Until Expended--Mutual Security Act

Sec. 32.18 An amendment to the Mutual Security Act appropriation bill 
    to provide for the equivalent of $1.5 million in local currencies 
    for hos

[[Page 5791]]

    pital construction, to remain available until expended, was ruled 
    out as legislation.

    On June 17, 1960,(14) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of the mutual security appropriation bill (H.R. 
12619), a point of order was raised against the following amendment:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. 106 Cong. Rec.  13133, 86th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Clement J.] Zablocki [of Wisconsin]: Mr. Chairman, I offer 
    an amendment.
        The Clerk read as follows:

            Amendment offered by Mr. Zablocki: On page 3, line 7, after 
        ``$206,000,000,'' strike out beginning ``of which not'' and 
        through the colon on line 12 and insert on page 3, after line 
        19, the following:
            ``Special assistance, special authorization: For assistance 
        authorized by section 400(c) for hospital construction the 
        equivalent of $1,500,000 in local currencies to remain 
        available until expended.''

        Mr. [H. R.] Gross [of Iowa]: Mr. Chairman, a point of order.
        The Chairman: (15) The gentleman will state it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Wilbur D. Mills (Ark.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Gross: Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
    amendment and against the words ``until expended'' as not being 
    authorized. I would call the Chair's attention to title 31, United 
    States Code, 718, which provides as follows:

            No specific or indefinite appropriation made subsequent to 
        August 24, 1912, in any regular annual appropriation act shall 
        be construed to be permanent or available continuously without 
        reference to a fiscal year unless it belongs to one of the 
        following four classes: ``Rivers and harbors,'' 
        ``lighthouses,'' ``public buildings,'' and ``pay of the Navy 
        and Marine Corps,''. . . or unless it is made in terms 
        expressly providing that it shall continue available beyond the 
        fiscal year for which the appropriation act in which it is 
        contained makes provision.

        Mr. Chairman, I point out that this is an annual appropriation 
    bill and, therefore, this is language on an appropriation bill that 
    is not authorized by law.
        Mr. Zablocki: I will not argue the point, Mr. Chairman, I 
    concede the point of order.
        The Chairman: The Chair sustains the point of 
    order.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. See the present 31 USC Sec. 1301.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- National Academy of Sciences

Sec. 32.19 A paragraph in a general appropriation bill containing funds 
    to enable the National Academy of Sciences to conduct an analysis 
    of the Environmental Protection Agency under contract, which funds 
    were to remain available until expended, was conceded to contain an 
    appropriation unauthorized by law and legislation where the only 
    law cited authorized the National Academy to investigate any

[[Page 5792]]

    subject of science or art when requested by an agency.

    On June 15, 1973,(17) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a general appropriation bill (H.R. 8619), a 
point of order was raised against the following provision:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 119 Cong. Rec. 19852, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        For an amount to provide for a complete and thorough review, 
    analysis, and evaluation of the Environmental Protection Agency, 
    its programs, its accomplishments and its failures, and to 
    recommend such changes, cancellations, or additions as necessary, 
    to be conducted under contract with the National Academy of 
    Sciences, $5,000,000, to remain available until expended.
        Mr. [John D.] Dingell [of Michigan]: Mr. Chairman, at this 
    point I make a point of order against the language appearing at 
    lines 20 through 24 on page 32, and on through the first two lines 
    of page 33.
        The reason for my point of order, Mr. Chairman, is twofold. 
    First, this is legislation in an appropriation bill; and it 
    constitutes an appropriation of funds not previously authorized by 
    law.
        So that the language referred to is again violative of rule 
    XXI, clause 2, and I would point out again, Mr. Chairman, that the 
    rule should be so interpreted as to require strict compliance.
        Mr. Chairman, I am quoting from page 466 of the Manual of the 
    Rules of the House of Representatives, as follows:

            In the administration of the rule, it is the practice that 
        those upholding an item of appropriation should have the burden 
        of showing the law authorizing it.

        Mr. Chairman, I would point out that neither the statute 
    setting up the EPA nor the statute setting up the National Academy 
    of Sciences affords the National Academy of Sciences the duty, 
    responsibility, or power to investigate or to study EPA. For that 
    reason, Mr. Chairman, I make this point of order.
        Mr. [Sidney R.] Yates [of Illinois]: Mr. Chairman, I make the 
    additional point of order that the language in the paragraph 
    appearing at the top of page 33, containing the words, ``to remain 
    available until expended,'' is also subject to a point of order.
        The Chairman: (18) Does the gentleman from 
    Mississippi (Mr. Whitten) desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. James C. Wright, Jr. (Tex.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [Jamie L.] Whitten: Mr. Chairman, I seem to have a little 
    difficulty finding it at the moment, but the language setting up 
    the National Academy of Sciences, after establishing the Academy, 
    provides for making this kind of study when asked by any department 
    or agency of the Government.
        While we seem to have difficulty finding it--I do not know 
    whether the Chair has it in his hands or not--it does so provide. 
    Based on that, we have directed this agency to make such a request. 
    That is the situation as we submit it at this time.

[[Page 5793]]

        Mr. Dingell: Mr. Chairman, I would point out that the committee 
    in its kindness, in the report at page 99 and page 100, under the 
    words ``limitations and legislative provisions'' has set forth 
    precisely the language which I have alluded to.
        I would point out since it is clearly not a limitation and 
    since it does not limit the level of expenditures, then it becomes, 
    in the words of the distinguished committee, then legislation, 
    since to exclude one is necessarily to require the expression of 
    the other alternative. Therefore, it is conceded at page 100 of the 
    report in the second to last paragraph to which I referred the 
    Chair that this does in fact constitute legislation in an 
    appropriation bill.
        Mr. Whitten: Mr. Chairman, I shall not press the matter 
    further. The language on which we rely is to be found--and we have 
    finally found it here--March 3, 1963, and it provides in section 3 
    of such act:

            Be it further enacted that the National Academy of Sciences 
        shall hold an annual meeting at such place in the United States 
        to be designated and the Academy shall when called upon by any 
        department of the Government investigate, examine, and report 
        any subject of science or art the actual expenses for which are 
        to be paid for in an appropriation which may be made for the 
        purpose. The Academy shall receive no compensation whatever for 
        its services to the Government of the United States.

        If I may have a second to write a similar amendment to that 
    which we substituted a while ago in a similar point of order, we 
    will provide the money for such an expense if I might have the 
    cooperation of my friends. I have to acknowledge the point of order 
    at this point.
        Mr. Dingell: I thank the gentleman.
        Mr. Whitten: If the Chair will oblige me for a second while I 
    write the amendment, we will provide $5 million for such study by 
    the National Academy of Sciences, and we shall be happy to so amend 
    the legislation.
        The Chairman: Does the Chair understand that the gentleman from 
    Mississippi concedes the point of order?
        Mr. Whitten: I do. And I beg the indulgence of the Chair that 
    we may write an amendment to replace the section.
        Mr. Dingell: Out of deference to my good friend from 
    Mississippi and in order to have the business on the committee go 
    forward, I will ask unanimous consent that he be permitted to 
    return at a time later--
        Mr. Whitten: I think we have it ready.
        Mr. Dingell: Very well.
        The Chairman: The point of order is sustained, and the language 
    is stricken.

-- Lump-sum Appropriation for Joint Economic Committee

Sec. 32.20 Since the law establishing the Joint Economic Committee [15 
    USC Sec. 1024(e)] authorizes the appropriation of ``such sums as 
    may be necessary during each fiscal year,'' it is not in order in a 
    general appropriation bill to

[[Page 5794]]

    make funds for that joint committee available beyond the fiscal 
    year covered by the bill.

    On May 11, 1971,(19) during consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole of a supplemental appropriation bill (H.R. 
8190), a point of order was raised against the following provision:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 117 Cong. Rec. 14472, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

                       Contingent Expenses of the Senate

                            joint economic committee

            For an amount (to be disbursed by the Secretary of the 
        Senate on vouchers signed by the chairman or vice chairman and 
        the chairman of the subcommittee) necessary to enable the 
        Subcommittee on Fiscal Policy, under authority of the 
        Employment Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 23, sec. 5), to undertake a 
        study to develop reliable, comprehensive, and factual 
        information concerning welfare programs and needs in the United 
        States, $500,000, to remain available until June 30, 1973.

        Mr. [Durward G.] Hall [of Missouri]: Mr. Chairman, I make a 
    point of order against this bill, on page 11, the section beginning 
    with line 15 through page 12, line 3.
        My point of order is directed, Mr. Chairman, particularly to 
    the last clause which says, ``to remain available until June 30, 
    1973.''
        The point of order should lie in the fact that this is an 
    appropriation on unauthorized legislation [sic].
        The Chairman: (20) Does the gentleman from Alabama 
    desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Wayne N. Aspinall (Colo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. [George W.] Andrews [of Alabama]: Mr. Chairman, we concede 
    the point of order.
        The Chairman: The point of order is sustained.

Federal Building Fund; Limiting Obligational Authority to Current 
    Fiscal Year

Sec. 32.21 Notwithstanding legislation providing that funds when 
    appropriated shall be available ``until expended'' or ``without 
    regard to fiscal year limitation'', the Committee on Appropriations 
    may nevertheless limit the availability of funds to the fiscal year 
    covered by the bill absent a clear showing that the amounts in the 
    general appropriation bill are required by law to remain available 
    without such limitation.

    The Chair ruled on June 25, 1974,(1) that, where 
existing law provided that moneys deposited into the federal buildings 
fund shall be available for expenditure by GSA ``for real property 
management . . . in such amounts as

[[Page 5795]]

are specified in annual appropriations acts without regard to fiscal 
year limitations'', a paragraph in a general appropriation bill 
specifying the amount to be made available from that fund ``during the 
current fiscal year'' did not constitute a change in that law. The 
language of the law was interpreted merely to permit, and not to 
require, the annual appropriation bill to make those funds available 
until expended. The proceedings are shown below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 120 Cong. Rec. 21040, 21041, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Clerk read as follows:

            The revenues and collections deposited into a fund pursuant 
        to Section 210(f) of the Federal Property and Administrative 
        Services Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 490(f)), shall be 
        available during the current fiscal year for necessary expenses 
        of real property management and related activities not 
        otherwise provided for, including operation, maintenance, and 
        protection of federally owned and leased buildings; . . . 
        construction of new buildings (including equipment for such 
        buildings); and payment of principal, interest, taxes, and any 
        other obligations for public buildings acquired by purchase 
        contract; in the aggregate amount of $871,875,000 of which (1) 
        not to exceed $25,000,000 shall be available for construction 
        of buildings as authorized by law including construction 
        projects at locations and at maximum construction improvement 
        costs (including funds for sites and expenses) as follows:
            New Construction:
            Arizona: Lukeville Border Station, $2,081,000
            Texas: Laredo Border Station, $15,462,000. . . .
        Provided, That the immediately foregoing limits of costs may be 
        exceeded to the extent that savings are effected in other such 
        projects, but by not to exceed 10 per centum; (2) not to exceed 
        $26,244,000 for purchase contract payments; . . . (6) not to 
        exceed $54,037,000 for program direction and centralized 
        services; and (7) not to exceed $25,000,000 shall be available 
        for obligation in fiscal year 1976. . . .

        Mr. [William H.] Harsha [of Ohio]: Mr. Chairman, I make a point 
    of order against the language in the bill appearing at page 15, 
    lines 10 and 11, that this is legislation in an appropriation act, 
    and it is, I believe, in violation of rule XXI, clause 2.
        Mr. Chairman, two provisions under the appropriation heading, 
    ``Federal Buildings Fund--Limitations on Availability of Revenue,'' 
    are subject to a point of order because they change existing law.
        The first such provision is the clause, ``during the current 
    fiscal year,'' at page 15, lines 10-11 of the bill. This language 
    would limit the use of funds made available to GSA from the Federal 
    Building Fund to fiscal year 1975. This is in direct conflict with 
    section 210(f) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
    Act of 1949, as amended, which specifically provides that ``the 
    fund shall be available for expenditure--without regard to fiscal 
    year limitations.'' The language in the bill is clearly designed to 
    change the authorizing law and is contrary to rule 21, clause 2 
    that prohibits legislation in an appropriation bill.
        The objectionable language in the bill cannot be supported on 
    any theory of retrenchment of expenditures. The limitation 
    requiring that moneys made

[[Page 5796]]

    available for real property activities be spent in the fiscal year 
    does not reduce expenditures, but would tend to increase costs and 
    spending by encouraging expenditures over a shorter period of time 
    than good management and planning would otherwise require.
        If the language is allowed to remain in the bill, the Congress 
    will, in effect, be substantially modifying the concept of a 
    Federal Building Fund. The Public Works Committee, when it 
    considered the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972, which 
    established the fund, concluded that the Federal Building Fund 
    would have to be available without regard to fiscal year 
    limitations, but with reasonable congressional control, if the 
    purpose of reforming real property management financing was ever 
    going to be achieved. . . .
        The fiscal year limitation applies to all construction work 
    performed by GSA including the construction of new buildings and 
    conversion and extensions to older buildings. The restriction is 
    thus directly in conflict with section 682 of title 31 of the 
    United States Code which provides that appropriations for 
    construction of public buildings remain available until completion 
    of the work; that is, without regard to fiscal year limitations. I 
    know of no single instance where the Congress has placed a fiscal 
    year limitation on the construction of new buildings.
        Elimination of the objectionable language in the appropriation 
    bill will not in any way interfere with normal congressional 
    controls of appropriations to GSA for its real property activities. 
    The Appropriations Committee in considering the 1976 budget 
    requests can take into account any unobligated balances in the fund 
    in determining the amount to be made available to GSA from the fund 
    in fiscal 1976.
        For the above-stated reasons, the phrase ``during the current 
    fiscal year'' is subject to a point of order and should be deleted. 
    . . .
        Mr. [Tom] Steed [of Oklahoma] . . . Mr. Chairman, this is a 
    simple, negative limitation, it merely restricts the use of the 
    funds to the fiscal year. The fact that there is no authority to 
    make them available for a longer period of time does not constitute 
    a point of order against the language here. . . .
        The Chairman: (2) The Chair is prepared to rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. B. F. Sisk (Calif.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The gentleman from Ohio makes the point of order against the 
    clause on page 15, lines 10 and 11 of H.R. 15544 which limits the 
    availability ``during the current fiscal year'' of the aggregate 
    amount of $871,875,000 for expenditure by GSA from the Federal 
    Buildings fund. The gentleman from Ohio contends that this language 
    in H.R. 15544 violates clause 2, Rule XXI by constituting a change 
    in existing law [section 210(f) of the Federal Property and 
    Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended (Public Law 92-
    313)] which provides:

            (2) Moneys deposited into the fund shall be available for 
        expenditure for real property management and related activities 
        in such amounts as are specified in annual appropriations Acts 
        without regard to fiscal year limitations.

        The gentleman from Ohio contends that this law requires that 
    amounts in Federal Building Fund must be made available by the 
    Appropriations Committee without a fiscal year restriction,

[[Page 5797]]

    and that the Committee on Appropriations has no authority under 
    clause 2, rule XXI to limit the availability of amounts from that 
    fund for the current fiscal year. The Committee on Appropriations, 
    on the other hand, contends that such a provision of law merely 
    permits, and does not require, the Committee on Appropriations to 
    appropriate funds from the Federal Building Fund without a fiscal 
    year limitation, or to be available until expended, and therefore 
    that the limitation contained in the paragraph for the current 
    fiscal year is within the prerogative of the Committee on 
    Appropriations under Public Law 92-313.
        The Chair would point out that while authorizing legislation 
    customarily provides that funds authorized therein shall ``remain 
    available until expended'', the Committee on Appropriations has 
    never been required, when appropriating for those purposes, to 
    specify that such funds must remain available until expended. The 
    Appropriations Committee often confines the availability of funds 
    to the current fiscal year, regardless of the limit of availability 
    contained in the authorization. Conversely, however, where the 
    authorizing statute does not permit funds to remain available until 
    expended or without regard to fiscal year limitation inclusion of 
    such availability in a general appropriation bill has been held to 
    constitute legislation in violation of clause 2, rule XXI.
        The Chair thus is of the opinion that Public Law 92-313 should 
    be construed as has been suggested by the Committee on 
    Appropriations, absent a clear showing that the language in 
    question was intended to require appropriations from the Federal 
    building fund to be made available until expended. In this regard, 
    the Chair has examined the legislative history of Public Law 92-313 
    in an effort to understand congressional intent on this question. 
    The Chair notes that on June 5, 1972, during debate on the 
    conference report on S. 1736 which became Public Law 92-313, the 
    gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gray) in response to a question by Mr. 
    Bow of Ohio, stated that:

            Any residue left over from existing appropriations now will 
        go automatically, when this legislation is signed into law into 
        the revolving fund. That residue from previous appropriations 
        plus the amount of rents collected from all Federal agencies 
        will make up the total revolving fund, and the House Committee 
        on Appropriations will have complete control on an annual basis 
        over the revolving fund.

        The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Harsha) then stated during that 
    debate:

            I think there is quite an adequate safeguard in what the 
        Committee on Appropriations can do in controlling the 
        implementation of this measure. All of the money that goes into 
        the revolving fund must be appropriated before it is expended. 
        Therefore, the Committee on Appropriations will have control 
        from that standpoint.

        The Chair holds that the Committee on Appropriations has not 
    changed existing law by limiting the availability of a portion of 
    the funds taken from the Federal building fund to the current 
    fiscal year. The Chair therefore overrules the point of order.

[[Page 5798]]