Appropriations Committee, Senate

The Senate Appropriations Committee is one of the largest committees in the Senate and one of the most important. But traditionally its role in the Senate has been considered less significant than that played by its counterpart in the House. (See Appropriations Committee, House.) In early 2003, the committee had twenty-nine members—fifteen Republicans and fourteen Democrats.

Like the House panel, the Senate committee is responsible for preparing the annual bills that provide money for federal government agencies. The committee reviews the spending proposals of the executive branch and can recommend to the full Senate changes in the amounts requested for various programs. For decades the Senate Appropriations Committee existed in the shadow of its more powerful House counterpart, because an unwritten rule in Congress requires that the House be the first chamber to act on these annual spending bills (called appropriations bills).

But beginning in the 1980s Senate committee members sought to strengthen their role. Members worked to unite their committee and to establish a more unified stance in negotiations with the House in conference committees. The committee gained a new focus when former Senate majority leader Robert C. Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat known for upholding congressional prerogatives, served as chair from 1989 to 1995. When Byrd regained the gavel in 2001, it was at his insistence that all thirteen fiscal 2002 spending bills became law as separate measures. Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska—another passionate defender of congressional spending prerogatives but also a party loyalist—succeeded Byrd as chairman in 2003.

The Senate Appropriations Committee normally takes up a spending bill only after it has passed the House, although preliminary subcommittee work on the bills begins earlier. During protracted budget battles in the 1980s, the Senate Appropriations Committee acted on some spending bills before its House counterpart, but still the full Senate did not take up the bills on the floor before the House acted. For the most part, Senate committee members find themselves in the position of reacting to a completed bill that has already been approved by the House. As a result, Senate members are likely to allow much of the House bill to go through unchanged, while focusing their attention on increasing or reducing funding for a few highly visible programs.

For many years the Senate committee operated largely as a “court of appeals.” Supporters of programs whose funding had been cut by the House would try to lobby Senate committee members to restore some or all of the money. Senators frequently sought to increase funding levels approved by the House, and they rarely proposed funding reductions. After a 1990 budget agreement between Congress and President George H. W. Bush, the Senate Appropriations Committee several times scaled back House proposals, bringing them closer to the president's position.

The heavy and diverse workloads of senators put the Senate Appropriations Committee at a disadvantage in dealing with the House spending panel. Senate committee members serve on one or two other major committees in addition to Appropriations, while House Appropriations Committee members generally serve only on that committee. As a result senators often have less time than House committee members to master the details of spending bills.

...