{ "id": "R41726", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "R", "number": "R41726", "active": true, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "retrieved": "2024-04-19T04:03:40.011975", "id": "R41726_23_2024-03-21", "formats": [ { "filename": "files/2024-03-21_R41726_7aba6e5c0f50849e0cea6f6c49440b84ec765522.pdf", "format": "PDF", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41726/23", "sha1": "7aba6e5c0f50849e0cea6f6c49440b84ec765522" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2024-03-21_R41726_7aba6e5c0f50849e0cea6f6c49440b84ec765522.html" } ], "date": "2024-03-21", "summary": null, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "typeId": "R", "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R41726", "type": "CRS Report" }, { "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "retrieved": "2024-04-19T04:03:40.007120", "id": "R41726_20_2023-08-25", "formats": [ { "filename": "files/2023-08-25_R41726_1f377d0199b504e107748bfbf44eb807b1c40041.pdf", "format": "PDF", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41726/20", "sha1": "1f377d0199b504e107748bfbf44eb807b1c40041" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2023-08-25_R41726_1f377d0199b504e107748bfbf44eb807b1c40041.html" } ], "date": "2023-08-25", "summary": null, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "typeId": "R", "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R41726", "type": "CRS Report" }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 461828, "date": "2017-06-07", "retrieved": "2018-05-10T13:15:35.407064", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "This report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1977 through FY2016, preliminary estimates for FY2017 spending, and the levels reflecting the President\u2019s proposals for FY2018 through FY2022 using data from the FY2018 budget submission released on May 23, 2017. This report, by illustrating trends in broad budgetary categories, provides a starting point for discussions about fiscal priorities. Other CRS products analyze spending trends in specific functional areas. Functional categories (e.g., national defense, agriculture, etc.) provide a means to compare federal funding for activities within broad policy areas that often cut across several federal agencies. Subfunction categories provide a finer division of funding levels within narrower policy areas. Budget function categories are used within the budget resolution and for other purposes, such as estimates of tax expenditures. Spending in this report is measured and illustrated in terms of discretionary budget authority as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP). Measuring spending as a percentage of GDP in effect controls for inflation and population increases. A flat line on such graphs indicates that spending has increased at the same rate as overall economic growth. In some cases, rescissions, offsetting receipts, or budgetary scorekeeping adjustments can result in negative budget authority.\nDiscretionary spending is provided and controlled through appropriations acts, which provide budget authority to federal agencies to fund many of the activities commonly associated with such federal government functions as running executive branch agencies, congressional offices and agencies, and international operations of the government. Essentially all spending on federal wages and salaries is discretionary. Administrative costs for entitlement programs such as Social Security are generally funded by discretionary spending, while mandatory spending\u2014not shown in figures presented in this report\u2014generally funds the benefits provided through those programs. For some federal programs, such as surface transportation, the division of funding into discretionary and mandatory categories can be complex.\nSpending caps and budget enforcement mechanisms established in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25; BCA) strongly affected recent budgets. The BCA set discretionary spending caps on defense (budget function 050) and non-defense funding and created a formula to lower those caps to achieve a portion of spending cuts called for in the BCA. Congress modified BCA caps several times, first for FY2013 as part of the fiscal cliff deal at the start of January 2013 (American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012; P.L. 112-240), then through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 (BBA2013; P.L. 113-67) and the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-74), thus avoiding decreases in levels of discretionary funding. The Trump Administration has proposed changes in BCA caps to allow higher defense spending and to constrain non-defense spending. \nA first continuing resolution (P.L. 114-223) was enacted on September 29, 2016, which provides discretionary funding through December 9, 2016. A second continuing resolution (P.L. 114-254), enacted on December 10, 2016, extended funding through April 28, 2017. A stopgap funding measure (P.L. 115-30) was enacted on April 28, 2017. An omnibus appropriations measure (P.L. 115-31) enacted on May 5, 2017, provided funding for the remainder of FY2017. \nAs the 115th Congress begins consideration of the FY2018 budget, past spending trends may help frame policy discussions. For example, rapid growth in national defense and other security spending during the past decade, along with the fiscal consequences and responses to the 2007-2009 Great Recession, has played an important role in fiscal discussions. Since FY2010, base defense discretionary spending has essentially been held flat and non-defense discretionary spending has been reduced significantly. The base defense budget excludes war funding (Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror). While war funding levels are well below those of the last decade, they still represent significant commitments of federal resources.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41726", "sha1": "9b557708008a7ad85f0b1a1127c32f5e2e5f039a", "filename": "files/20170607_R41726_9b557708008a7ad85f0b1a1127c32f5e2e5f039a.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/14.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_842ceea958be55fdc04fef76122b34a1fedb1973.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/5.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_42badd4f92a67c62c23e847071e6263c24fcb6d5.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/3.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_60fabb1a928f5a2996552ff4b5142ea2d6bbbf51.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/1.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_d3c70e4f03574f538696956d35a28ed34cb4a8ca.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/15.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_4d7fad822ab83b3985a34b4b26b5028b6b9a5166.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/11.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_b9f42f66c80fa19a7e61a59ec53cda4aba17ecaa.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/17.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_0a0bc5a05521f0bcded4db7377c40d39af97a035.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/12.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_fa6f12d83039794dd017ca8f00b0084f897b144a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/6.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_957ebdcc49f0ed8f5cb4ef4f4f670f3bd95a061e.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/10.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_26a1ad9f6de10e602a7aabe690c82d3dd7412454.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/7.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_144e3da186e1703cc243d7c0270cf6561228856c.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/0.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_3f13bbc83c7a8aee0b63ff80e6bada48ee1f504f.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/4.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_2faadb5cea3969a71ca7fa2794485a310843ae29.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/9.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_04c85bff0c9e401fcb4255c175a9bb43149d15b4.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/13.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_f085563350f17ceeaa4967c0c2b8f8dcbc524d91.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/2.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_e7f773089215a8ff5216c4d310d862f467895c27.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/8.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_7e34fa624333d41de789265153b37a12bc4451cd.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R41726_files&id=/16.png": "files/20170607_R41726_images_cd4774f4c38ee1cf507899b1f80cbb3bbf624238.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41726", "sha1": "6f6bc17fff9b833919096e869b26e6c1ba467ecb", "filename": "files/20170607_R41726_6f6bc17fff9b833919096e869b26e6c1ba467ecb.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 457736, "date": "2016-12-16", "retrieved": "2016-12-22T16:29:25.314014", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "This report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1977 through FY2016, preliminary estimates for FY2016 spending, and the levels reflecting the President\u2019s proposals for FY2016 through FY2021 using data from the FY2017 budget submission released on February 9, 2016. This report, by illustrating trends in broad budgetary categories, provides a starting point for discussions about fiscal priorities. Other CRS products analyze spending trends in specific functional areas. Functional categories (e.g., national defense, agriculture, etc.) provide a means to compare federal funding for activities within broad policy areas that often cut across several federal agencies. Subfunction categories provide a finer division of funding levels within narrower policy areas. Budget function categories are used within the budget resolution and for other purposes, such as estimates of tax expenditures.\nDiscretionary spending is provided and controlled through appropriations acts, which provide budget authority to federal agencies to fund many of the activities commonly associated with such federal government functions as running executive branch agencies, congressional offices and agencies, and international operations of the government. Essentially all spending on federal wages and salaries is discretionary. Administrative costs for entitlement programs such as Social Security are generally funded by discretionary spending, while mandatory spending\u2014not shown in figures presented in this report\u2014generally funds the benefits provided through those programs. For some federal programs, such as surface transportation, the division of expenditures into discretionary and mandatory categories can be complex.\nSpending in this report is measured and illustrated in terms of discretionary budget authority as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP). Measuring spending as a percentage of GDP in effect controls for inflation and population increases. A flat line on such graphs indicates that spending has increased at the same rate as overall economic growth. In some cases, rescissions, offsetting receipts, or budgetary scorekeeping adjustments can result in negative budget authority.\nSpending caps and budget enforcement mechanisms established in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25; BCA) strongly affected recent budgets. The BCA set discretionary spending caps on defense (budget function 050) and non-defense funding and created a formula to lower those caps to achieve a portion of spending cuts called for in the BCA. Congress modified BCA caps several times, first for FY2013 as part of the fiscal cliff deal at the start of January 2013 (American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012; P.L. 112-240), then through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 (BBA2013; P.L. 113-67), and more recently through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-74), thus avoiding decreases in levels of discretionary funding. The Obama Administration, in its FY2017 budget submission, proposed raising caps further to allow higher spending on domestic and military priorities. \nA first continuing resolution (P.L. 114-223) was enacted on September 29, 2016, which provides discretionary funding through December 9, 2016. A second continuing resolution (P.L. 114-254) was enacted on December 10, 2016, that extends funding through April 28, 2017. As the 115th Congress prepares to begin the FY2018 budget cycle, past spending trends may help frame policy discussions. For example, rapid growth in national defense and other security spending during the past decade, along with the fiscal consequences and responses to the 2007-2009 Great Recession, has played an important role in fiscal discussions. Since FY2010, base defense discretionary spending has essentially been held flat and non-defense discretionary spending has been reduced significantly. The base defense budget excludes war funding (Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror). While war funding levels are well below those of the last decade, they still represent significant commitments of federal resources.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41726", "sha1": "91a7f94ae1058183e78aebf3d41430b7101bba71", "filename": "files/20161216_R41726_91a7f94ae1058183e78aebf3d41430b7101bba71.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41726", "sha1": "d20152d83c1c90e84c8ff7d8876cd3bcc2acceee", "filename": "files/20161216_R41726_d20152d83c1c90e84c8ff7d8876cd3bcc2acceee.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 438330, "date": "2015-02-05", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T19:31:07.838554", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "This report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1976 through FY2014, preliminary estimates for FY2015 spending, and the levels reflecting the President\u2019s proposals for FY2016 through FY2020 using data from the FY2016 budget submission released on February 2, 2015. Spending in this report is measured and illustrated in terms of discretionary budget authority as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP). Measuring spending as a percentage of GDP in effect controls for inflation and population increases. A flat line on such graphs indicates spending that increased at the same rate as overall economic growth. Functional categories (e.g., national defense, agriculture, etc.) provide a means to compare federal funding for activities within broad policy areas that often cut across several federal agencies. Subfunction categories provide a finer division of funding levels within narrower policy areas. Budget function categories are used within the budget resolution and for other purposes, such as possible program cuts and tax expenditures.\nSpending caps and budget enforcement mechanisms established in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25; BCA) strongly affected recent budget cycles. Congress modified BCA caps for FY2013 as part of the fiscal cliff deal and modified caps for FY2014 and FY2015 through the Murray-Ryan agreement (Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013; BBA; H.J.Res. 59; P.L. 113-67). The BCA set discretionary spending caps on defense (budget function 050) and non-defense funding that are lowered to achieve a portion of spending cuts according to a formula in the BCA. The lowering of caps was turned off for FY2014 and FY2015 by the Murray-Ryan agreement. The estimated lowered defense cap for FY2016 is $523 billion, slightly above the FY2015 cap of $521.3 billion. The estimated non-defense lowered cap for FY2016 is $493.0 billion, close to the FY2015 cap of $492.4 billion. The Obama Administration, in its FY2016 budget submission, proposed raising caps to accommodate higher spending on domestic and military priorities.\nAs the 114th Congress prepares to consider funding levels for FY2016 and beyond, past spending trends may help frame policy discussions. For example, rapid growth in national defense and other security spending in the past decade has played an important role in fiscal discussions. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5; ARRA), a stimulus measure enacted after a sharp economic downturn, funded sharp increases in spending on education, energy, and other areas. Since FY2010, however, base defense discretionary spending has essentially been held flat and non-defense discretionary spending has been reduced significantly. The base defense budget excludes war funding (Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terror). This report provides a starting point for discussions about spending trends. Other CRS products analyze spending trends in specific functional areas.\nDiscretionary spending is provided and controlled through appropriations acts, which provide budget authority to federal agencies to fund many of the activities commonly associated with such federal government functions as running executive branch agencies, congressional offices and agencies, and international operations of the government. Essentially all spending on federal wages and salaries is discretionary. Program administration costs for entitlement programs such as Social Security are generally funded by discretionary spending, while mandatory spending\u2014not shown in figures presented in this report\u2014generally funds the benefits provided through those programs. For some federal agencies, such as the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Transportation, the division of expenditures into discretionary and mandatory categories can be complex. This report will be updated as events warrant.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41726", "sha1": "0c9d77cf5e0a63b79c9d24011b0d8073ad7b6d9a", "filename": "files/20150205_R41726_0c9d77cf5e0a63b79c9d24011b0d8073ad7b6d9a.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41726", "sha1": "9f14ff41e934d7eb0e314e0136ac9a5c8d9c4faa", "filename": "files/20150205_R41726_9f14ff41e934d7eb0e314e0136ac9a5c8d9c4faa.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc276919/", "id": "R41726_2014Jan24", "date": "2014-01-24", "retrieved": "2014-03-05T18:18:19", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "This report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1976 through FY2012, preliminary estimates for FY2013 spending, and the levels consistent with the President's proposals for FY2014 through FY2018 using data from President Obama's FY2014 budget submission that was released on April 10, 2013.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20140124_R41726_67acfab2ee41b3fa0cf030298b41901cb8217955.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20140124_R41726_67acfab2ee41b3fa0cf030298b41901cb8217955.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budgets", "name": "Budgets" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Government spending", "name": "Government spending" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budget deficits", "name": "Budget deficits" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc461906/", "id": "R41726_2013Apr25", "date": "2013-04-25", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "This report presents figures showing trends in discretionary budget authority as a percentage of GDP by subfunction within each of 17 budget function categories, using data from President Obama's FY2014 budget submission. The report also provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority from FY1976 through FY2012, preliminary estimates for FY2013 spending, and the levels consistent with the President's proposals for FY2014 through FY2018.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130425_R41726_9af2408a25fd16a6e42318b39910ee23b0c7f261.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130425_R41726_9af2408a25fd16a6e42318b39910ee23b0c7f261.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budgets", "name": "Budgets" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Government spending", "name": "Government spending" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budget deficits", "name": "Budget deficits" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87175/", "id": "R41726_2012Feb14", "date": "2012-02-14", "retrieved": "2012-07-03T07:51:21", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "President Obama's FY2013 budget submission was released on February 13, 2012. This report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1976 through FY2011, enacted levels for FY2012 spending, and the levels consistent with the President's proposals for FY2013 through FY2017. Spending caps and budget enforcement mechanisms established in the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 will probably strongly affect the FY2013 budget cycle. This report may provide a starting point for discussions about spending trends and federal priorities, but it does not attempt to explain spending patterns in each policy area.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20120214_R41726_b1df817b32be2d1d4bfbd4f349477ab509270123.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20120214_R41726_b1df817b32be2d1d4bfbd4f349477ab509270123.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budgets", "name": "Budgets" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Government spending", "name": "Government spending" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budget deficits", "name": "Budget deficits" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc99035/", "id": "R41726_2011Mar29", "date": "2011-03-29", "retrieved": "2012-08-31T21:48:36", "title": "Discretionary Budget Authority by Subfunction: An Overview", "summary": "This report provides a graphical overview of historical trends in discretionary budget authority (BA) from FY1976 through FY2011, enacted levels for FY2012 spending, and the levels consistent with President Obama's proposals for FY2013 through FY2017. It also includes a background on functional categories and a section discussing historical spending trends.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20110329_R41726_bc3c9ff4989cd78d8a7a7872ed364d301869739a.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20110329_R41726_bc3c9ff4989cd78d8a7a7872ed364d301869739a.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budgets", "name": "Budgets" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Government spending", "name": "Government spending" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Budget deficits", "name": "Budget deficits" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Domestic Social Policy", "Economic Policy", "Foreign Affairs", "Health Policy", "Intelligence and National Security", "National Defense" ] }