the amendment I am offering would impose the same information requirements with respect to unfunded mandates on appropriations bills as H.R. 5 requires for authorizing legislation. Even if we are not going to prohibit consideration of appropriations bills which contain unfunded mandates we should at least, Mr. Chairman, require that they be submitted to CBO for an estimate of the cost of any unfunded mandates they may contain. Otherwise we will be making appropriation bills a magnet for authorizers attempting to circumvent the requirements imposed on their own bills. I personally have some reservations about the practicality of CBO-produced estimates of Federal mandates in legislation. It is a good idea in concept, but we are likely to see problems in its implementation, at least for a while. But if we are going to require such cost estimates for authorizing bills we ought to require them for appropriations bills as well. It is easy to imagine a situation where members of authorizing committees, frustrated that they are unable to get a cost estimate from CBO on a timely basis, or are unwilling to do so because they know how the figures will turn out, go to the Committee on Appropriations and persuade a majority of members there to add the legislation to the appropriations bill.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for cost estimates on unfunded mandates in appropriations bills.
Share
More from Anthony Beilenson
We support this open rule for H.R. 1170, the bill mandating that three-judge panels review constitutional challenges of State referenda. With respect to the bill itself, we are somewhat mystified at the manner in which it has moved through…
If I may further pursue this, why are we treating this in a different manner than we usually treat appropriations? Ordinarily at least, a lower authorization would appropriate a certain amount of money if the Committee on Appropriations…
I will conclude my inquiries, if I may, sir, by asking whether this is a unique or even unusual parliamentary situation? Because it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that so far in the 104th Congress, we are in this situation on almost every rule…
The principal point here is that if the $99 million is provided for in the bill, in the authorizing bill passed by this House, then that money, whatever eventual amount of money is decided upon can in fact be appropriated so long as it is…





