A continuing resolution circus under a big top dome

Mark Twain once noted that, “History may not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” For some reason that refrain keeps circling back to my brain whenever Congress engages in one of its CR binges (short for: continuing appropriations resolutions).

I have labeled this column a “CR Circus,” not to ridicule its varied colorful and acrobatic components, but rather to focus on it as a vital bridge to a more stable and functioning government. The circular nature of the CR process refers to its recurring use to provide for continuing governance: Think of those 12 white stallions, galloping in circles inside the center ring at the circus. The center ring of the appropriations process is a cacophony of competing interests, demands and ideologies, all clamoring for attention and their perceived fair share of the pie.

It is not surprising to this D.C. denizen of over a half-century that CRs have become a regular feature of the congressional budget process, even though they are not refenced in the budget act as being a regular step in that process. Their purpose is to keep the government functioning if Congress has not enacted all of the 12 regular appropriations bills by the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1. 

That’s why they are often referred to as “stopgap” government funding measures. They fill-in for what would otherwise be lack of money to keep federal departments and agencies executing their statutory responsibilities.  

According to Congressional Research Service (CRS) data, in all but three of the 47 years since the start of the fiscal year was changed from July 1 to Oct. 1 in 1978, one or more CRs were needed to keep the government open and fully functional. During 14 of those years, through fiscal 2023, CRs covered all of the appropriations bills to the end, with the annual average number of CRs being 5.04, and the average total annual days of duration for CRs being 137.5 days. The last times CRs covered an entire year were in fiscal years 2011 and 2013. 

To understand what drives this process, consider the alternative: a government shutdown. The longest government shutdown in recent years was 35 days in 2018-19 over President Trump’s demand for sufficient money to complete building of his border wall. That is followed by a 21-day shutdown in 1995-96 over disputes between Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and President Bill Clinton; and 16 days in 2013 under President Barack Obama and House Republicans. 

There are some hardline fiscal conservative members who openly advocate for a government shutdown: “Bring it on! Shut it down!” Their thinking is that only a shutdown crisis will force leaders in Congress and the White House to capitulate to their demands for more stringent, deeper budget cuts. But that kind of bargaining seldom succeeds.  

The usual formula for a CR is to fund existing programs at the previous fiscal year’s spending levels until the new year’s levels are enacted. Moreover, policy riders are usually discouraged because the rules already prohibit legislating (authorizing) on appropriations bills. Nevertheless, some riders are occasionally included if carried over from previous CRs, or have bipartisan, bicameral and White House support, as essential to good management practices or national security needs. 

In the current fiscal 2024 appropriations process, four continuing resolutions have been enacted between Oct. 1 and the present, taking the unfinished fiscal business of Congress into its sixth month. A new twist was added in the second, third and fourth CRs with two scheduled expiration dates: the first covering four regular appropriations measures and the second, the remaining eight. 

House and Senate appropriators on Sunday released the first six bills and bundled them into a single package (a minibus bill), which the House approved under suspension of the rules Wednesday. The remaining six, presumably, are to be combined and confirmed by the March 22 deadline (bring on the elephants for the final parade).

Thus far the House has already passed seven of the 12, the Senate just three. But none of the regular dozen has been passed by both chambers, let alone been resolved through negotiations between the houses. To get back to Mark Twain’s observation about history not repeating itself but sometimes rhyming, a limerick is perhaps an appropriate way to end this circular tour of the budgetary universe.  

There once was a Congress entangled, 
In a budget so badly mangled; 
It worked to the end 
To save more than spend, 
Then wrapped itself  
In Star-Spangled. 

Don Wolfensberger is a 28-year staff veteran of Congress, culminating as chief-of-staff of the House Rules Committee. He is author of “Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial” (2000), and “Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays.” The views expressed are solely his own.