June 4, 1979
Page 13233
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the Senate has before it S. 1157, the Department of Justice Authorization Act of 1979. At this time, I would like to comment on the relationship of that bill to the first budget resolution for fiscal year 1980. Before I do, however, I would like to compliment the distinguished chairman and members of the Judiciary Committee for their expeditious handling of this legislation. The committee's performance this year is a significant improvement over past sessions when it was frequently necessary for the Budget Committee and the Senate to approve special waivers required for legislation reported after the May 15 deadline.
As the Senate knows, the budget resolution does not specify spending targets for individual programs. That is determined through the work of the authorizing and Appropriations Committees. However, it obviously is necessary for the Budget Committee to make an approximation of the amount of funding that might be required by a particular agency if it is to select spending targets that can reasonably be expected to accommodate the legislative intent of the Senate.
Mr. President, the budget resolution enacted by Congress assumes that aggregate funding for the programs of the Department of Justice authorized in S. 1157 will be roughly consistent with the President's request. This funding target is roughly equivalent to the fiscal year 1979 appropriation level and should provide adequate resources for the operation of the Department in the coming year.
As the Senate is by now well aware, the funding targets enacted by the Congress in order to achieve a balanced budget is fiscal year 1981 require funding restraints in almost all programs this year. The limited restraint required in this instance is entirely reasonable and should in fact have far less negative impact than actual cutbacks required in other areas.
S. 1157 authorizes appropriations of over $1.9 billion in fiscal year 1980 for Department of Justice activities. The budget impact of the legislation will occur in function 750, administration of justice, for which targets of $4.2 billion in budget authority and $4.4 billion in outlays were established in the first concurrent resolution.
If fully funded, the cost of this bill would exceed the functional targets by roughly $0.1 billion in budget authority and outlays. While this may not appear to be of major budgetary consequence, I would remind the Senate that such incremental increases, if unchecked would naturally result in cumulative totals far in excess of the approved spending targets. Further, full funding of this authorization, in conjunction with full funding of authorizations provided in the Law Enforcement Assistance Reform Act, which also was reported by the Judiciary Committee, would cause the functional targets for budget authority to be exceeded by over one-half billion dollars in fiscal year 1980. And if the same real level of funding was continued in subsequent years, the budget overages in fiscal year 1981 and fiscal year 1982 would be of similar magnitude.
When the LEAA legislation was considered in the Senate, the Budget Committee did not seek to amend that authorization to conform to the budget resolution targets, because the actual funding of LEAA will depend upon subsequent appropriations. Further, both Senator BELLMON and I expressed our confidence in the Appropriations Committee's ability to maintain the function 750 resolution ceilings.
Our position is the same with regard to this legislation.
In summary, Mr. President, I feel the Judiciary Committee has done a commendable job in reporting this authorizing legislation by the May 15 deadline required by the Budget Act. However, the Appropriations Committee will have to do some careful pruning if the budget resolution targets are not to be breached.
I have pointed out the potential budgetary impact of the reported bills in order to assure that the Senate is fully aware of its implications. This should prevent any unpleasant surprises down the road if it turns out that funding of excessive authorizations reported from the Judiciary Committee cause appropriations for other committees' programs to be reduced in order to stay within overall budget targets.
On the assumption that the Senate will ultimately approve appropriations levels lower than authorized for the Department of Justice, including LEAA, I intend to vote in favor of S. 1157.