Sandy Streeter
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
One of the most common methods for changing spending priorities in appropriations bills on the House floor is through offset amendments. House offset amendments generally change spending priorities in a pending appropriations measure by increasing spending for certain activities (or creating spending for new activities not included in the bill) and offsetting the increase with funding decreases in other activities in the bill. Offset amendments are needed to avoid the Congressional Budget Act 302(f) and 311(a) points of order enforcing certain spending ceilings.
There are two types of House offset amendments considered in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union (Committee of the Whole): clause 2(f) and reachback (or fetchback) amendments. As provided under House Rule XXI, clause 2(f) offset amendments consist of two or more amendments considered together (or en bloc) that would change amounts by directly adding text or changing text in the body of the bill. Taken as a whole the amendment does not increase the amount of funding in the pending bill. Such amendments (1) must provide offsets in both new budget authority and outlays, (2) may contain certain unauthorized appropriations, (3) cannot add new appropriations or spending set asides, and (4) must not contain legislation.
Reachback offset amendments are generally offered at the end of the bill and change funding amounts in the pending bill by reference. These amendments (1) must provide offsets in new budget authority, but not necessarily offsets, (2) cannot include unauthorized appropriations, (3) may add new appropriations (and spending set asides), (4) cannot contain legislation, and (5) may provide across-the-board spending reductions as offsets.
Parliamentary rules governing consideration of offset amendments may be suspended or waived, typically by House adoption of a special rule, but also by unanimous consent.
The significant advantages of clause 2(f) amendments over reachback amendments are that clause 2(f) amendments may contain certain unauthorized appropriations and are typically considered before reachback amendments, sometimes limiting offset opportunities for reachback amendments. The main advantages of reachback amendments are they may add new appropriations and include across-the-board spending reductions.
Date of Report: November 19, 2010
Number of Pages: 17
Order Number: RL31055
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
One of the most common methods for changing spending priorities in appropriations bills on the House floor is through offset amendments. House offset amendments generally change spending priorities in a pending appropriations measure by increasing spending for certain activities (or creating spending for new activities not included in the bill) and offsetting the increase with funding decreases in other activities in the bill. Offset amendments are needed to avoid the Congressional Budget Act 302(f) and 311(a) points of order enforcing certain spending ceilings.
There are two types of House offset amendments considered in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union (Committee of the Whole): clause 2(f) and reachback (or fetchback) amendments. As provided under House Rule XXI, clause 2(f) offset amendments consist of two or more amendments considered together (or en bloc) that would change amounts by directly adding text or changing text in the body of the bill. Taken as a whole the amendment does not increase the amount of funding in the pending bill. Such amendments (1) must provide offsets in both new budget authority and outlays, (2) may contain certain unauthorized appropriations, (3) cannot add new appropriations or spending set asides, and (4) must not contain legislation.
Reachback offset amendments are generally offered at the end of the bill and change funding amounts in the pending bill by reference. These amendments (1) must provide offsets in new budget authority, but not necessarily offsets, (2) cannot include unauthorized appropriations, (3) may add new appropriations (and spending set asides), (4) cannot contain legislation, and (5) may provide across-the-board spending reductions as offsets.
Parliamentary rules governing consideration of offset amendments may be suspended or waived, typically by House adoption of a special rule, but also by unanimous consent.
The significant advantages of clause 2(f) amendments over reachback amendments are that clause 2(f) amendments may contain certain unauthorized appropriations and are typically considered before reachback amendments, sometimes limiting offset opportunities for reachback amendments. The main advantages of reachback amendments are they may add new appropriations and include across-the-board spending reductions.
Date of Report: November 19, 2010
Number of Pages: 17
Order Number: RL31055
Price: $29.95
Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports
Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Posts
