Appropriations Process

On March 2, 1865, the House of Representatives separated the appropriating and banking and currency duties from the Committee on Ways and Means, which was first established in 1789, and assigned them to two new committees - the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Banking and Currency.

Until 1865, all "general" appropriations bills had been controlled in the House by the Committee on Ways and Means - also in charge of revenue measures and some other classes of substantive legislation. 

Membership of the Committee

The new Committee on Appropriations - seven Republicans and two Democrats - was appointed on December 11, 1865, in the 1st session of the 39th Congress, and first reported the general appropriations bills for the fiscal year 1867. By 1920, the number of members had grown to 21. It was changed that year to 35 and gradually increased to 50 by 1951. Until recently, the Committee numbered 66 members, but has since reduced its ranks to 53 members.

Committee Chairmen

Thirty-five Members of Congress have served as chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. The Honorable Clarence Cannon of Missouri, served as chairman nearly 19 years, although his term as chairman was of broken continuity. The Honorable George Mahon of Texas, served as chairman continuously longer than any other person, from May 18, 1964 to January 3, 1979. Several chairmen went on to higher or other important offices. One, James Garfield of Ohio, became President. Three, Samuel Randall of Pennsylvania, Joseph Cannon of Illinois, and Joseph Byrns of Tennessee, became Speaker of the House. Three later served in the U.S. Senate. One became Governor of his State. The list of distinctions is long. Interesting biographical sketches of 21 of the men are contained in House Document No. 299 of the 77th Congress.

The Budget Process

By the early 1970s, new forces were at work calling for changes in the way in which Congress handled the budget and appropriations process.

One of the most compelling of these forces, although it was largely a temporary problem, was due to the "impoundment" of funds in fiscal year 1974 by the President. This was, in effect, a line item veto of funds for programs that were initiated or increased by the Congress. Many Members of Congress and certain special interest groups were outraged and extremely frustrated by the impoundments. Numerous court suits on various impoundments had been filed and were in the process of being heard.

A more serious reason for budget reform was due to the widely held belief that the budget was out of control. Deficits were mounting; so-called "uncontrollable" spending was climbing; and "back door" spending, i.e. spending provided other than through the Appropriations Committee, was increasing. It was also becoming clear that there was little, if any coordination between raising and spending revenues.

Additionally, there was a feeling among some Members of Congress that there needed to be other or additional ways to change the priorities of Federal spending. Because of these and other concerns, formal work was begun on improving the congressional budget process through the establishment of the Joint Study Committee on Budget Control.

The work of this Committee, the House Rules Committee, the Senate Committee on Government Operations, and the Senate Rules Committee eventually resulted in the adoption of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.