Fiscal year 2005 ends this Friday, Sept. 30, and House and Senate Republican leaders have not been able to pass all spending bills for FY 2006 on the floor. Thus, we can expect them to pass a stop-gap funding bill to cover federal government spending by the end of the week. According to an aide, GOP leaders in both chambers will push through a CR to fund government programs through Nov. 18. While some believe this extension will give appropriators sufficient time to wrap up their work on the outstanding FY 2006 appropriations bills, others think GOP leaders will not make their ambitious goal to pass all of the bills as separate measures this year. While the House has passed all eleven of its spending bills, the Senate has only passed eight of twelve, and only two of those have been given final approval and sent to Bush for his signature.

Many Republican leaders in the House and Senate are worried about the costs of rebuilding after Katrina, even though President Bush has promised, and rightly so, to devote all the funds needed to help the devastated region. Republicans who are worried about excessive deficit-financed spending are pushing for the costs will be offset (most are suggesting by cutting the budget elsewhere). To appease them, OMB Director Josh Bolten said Tuesday that the administration would consider offsets, but did not offer any details about what would be cut and by how much. As Stan Collender correctly points out (subscription required), any offsets proposed by the administration would to little, if anything, to reduce the amount Katrina relief spending will add to the deficit, and the national debt. Because President Bush refuses to even consider not extending or rolling back some of his first term tax cuts, it will be future generations who will be paying for reconstructing the Gulf Coast. The federal government is required by law to pay at least 75 percent of the cost of rebuilding public infrastructure after a disaster (1988 Stafford Act). To comply, Congress -- besides approving about $64 billion in emergency spending -- has agreed on a tax-relief bill to expand deductions this year for victims. The final bill was scored by the Joint Committee on Taxation as costing $6.1 billion over 10 years. Congress hopes these targeted tax cuts will spur employment of low-income workers on the Gulf Coast. In addition, President Bush signed three bills today to help in the aftermath of the disaster. The bills waive Pell Grant and other federal student loan requirements for displaced college students and expand Temporary Assistance to Needy Families eligibility for victims. CNN.com: House Passes Tax Breaks for Hurricane Katrina Victims

Yesterday, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Rep. David Obey (D-WI) -- who are the ranking members on the Senate and House Appropriations Committees -- sent a letter to OMB Director Joshua B. Bolten sharing their thoughts on the type of detail they would like to see reported to them for oversite purposes of the current government relief spending. The letter requests that the OMB provide the Appropriations Committees with information regarding all spending, so the committee members "can determine whether taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely and efficiently." Specifically, the letter requests:

Detailed information on every obligation, allocation, or expenditure that totals more than $50 million, broken down in no less than $50 million increments. The detailed information should include: the purpose; whether the work will be performed by the government or a contractor; and, if the work is performed by a contractor, the name of the contractor, the type of contract let (fixed-price, cost-plus), and whether the contract was sole-source, full and open competition, or limited competition;

The amount of credit card purchases by agency/mission assignment;

Weekly obligations, allocations, and expenditures by agency and state, and by purpose/mission assignment (for example, public assistance, debris removal, etc.);

Weekly status of the disaster relief fund, including unexpended balance, unobligated balance and unallocated balance; and

Information on any waivers granted.

With Congress in recess for the month of August, it seems appropriate to sit back and prepare for what surely will be an action-packed fall in Washington, DC. The Senate, in particular, has more than a full plate for September and October with the Supreme Court nomination of John Roberts, the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, two reconciliation bills, and more than half (7) of the appropriations bills to finish. The appropriations wrap up this year promises to be particularly dreadful, causing headaches for politicians, congressional staff, and analysts alike. This is because earlier this year, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees reorganized. In a startling display of ignorance and lack of foresight, they choose to reorganize in an inconsistent and uncoordinated way. The result is a different number of appropriations bills in the House and Senate (11 in the House and 12 in the Senate) and a committee structure that does not easily compare between the two chambers (There are only 6 appropriations bills this year with identical jurisdictions). This will cause much chaos in attempts to form and staff conference committees for the remaining 6 bills with no identical counterpart and much confusion for outside analysts and observers in attempt to track appropriations for different programs across committee jurisdictions. It will almost surely lead to delays and drag out the conference committee process at a time when Congress can least afford to waste time. Because of this incongruence and also because the Senate is woefully behind in their appropriations work with little hope of catching up, it appears Congress is headed for another round of unending, short-term continuing resolutions, and most likely another extremely large omnibus appropriations bill. As we have previously observed, omnibus appropriations bills are bad policy:

Omnibus bills are bad legislative practice: they remove transparency and accountability from the appropriations process and usually lead to fiscal irresponsibility. The bills are massive, with plenty of cover to hide extra spending, legislative changes, and special interest items that end up making the bill more fiscally irresponsible than if the bills where passed separately. Removing transparency and accountability from the process by which Congress allocates government funds, especially for other members of Congress, is troubling.- OMB Watcher June 27, 2005