The President signed both bills into law on October 17 (the authorization is P.L.105-261 and the appropriations is P.L. 4328 ) that provides additional defense-related funding of $8.3 billion,including $1.9 billion for Bosnia operations, $1.3 billion for military readiness, $1.5 billionfor intelligence, $1 billion for missile defense, $1.1 billion for year 2000 fixes in the DefenseDepartment, $469 million for storm damage repairs, $525 million to purchase fissilematerials from Russia (a defense-related program of the Department of Energy), $529million for antiterrorism activities, and $42 million for defense counter-drug activities. 105-277 ) on October 21. The House approved theconference report on September 24 and the Senate on October 1. The President signed thebill into law ( P.L. TheHouse approved the conference report on September 28, and the Senate on September 29. The President signed the bill into law ( P.L. 105-262 ) on October 17. Supplemental defense appropriations for FY1998: On April 30, the House and the Senate approved a conference agreement on H.R. Defense-related supplemental appropriations for FY1999: On October 20, the House, and, on October 21, the Senate, approved an omnibus appropriationsbill for FY1999 ( H.R. Status of FY1999 Defense Appropriations

	Key Budget and Policy Issues

		Major Issues in House and Senate Action on FY1999 Defense Authorization and Appropriations Bills

The conference agreements on the defense authorization and appropriations bills resolved a number of major issues, including: 
Relations with China: The House approved several floor amendments to the authorization bill to limit satellite and missile technology exportsto China. Base closures: Neither the House nor the Senate authorization bills approved new rounds of military base closures, as the Administration hadrequested. The Senate-passed version of thedefense appropriations bill included the requested funding, while the House bill didnot. In floor action on theauthorization, both houses considered and rejected measures to require thewithdrawal of U.S. troops from Bosnia by a specific date, but the Senate version ofthe authorization bill also included a sense of the Congress statement encouraging thePresident to establish conditions allowing a drawdown of forces in Bosnia. The appropriations conference agreement did not include emergencyfunding for Bosnia, but it was later provided in a supplemental appropriationsmeasure included in the FY1999 omnibus appropriations bill. The House andSenate appropriations bills reduced funding for the Theater High Altitude AreaDefense (THAAD) system by substantial amounts in the wake of the most recent testfailure in May. On the broader issue ofcongressional war powers, the House-passed appropriations bill included aprovision proposed by Representative Skaggs to prohibit expenditures onoffensive military action without advance congressional approval. Theappropriations conference agreement does not include emergency funding forBosnia, leaving the issue for later consideration. Theauthorization conference report agrees to the Administration request. The cost of the F-22 has been a major concern in the Senate,especially. A key issue in thedefense authorization bill this year concerns tritium production for Department ofEnergy nuclear weapons programs. H.R.
Congress completed action on FY1999 defense authorization and appropriations bills on October 1. The House approved the conference report on the defense authorization bill( H.R. 3616 ) on September 24 and the Senate on October 1. The President signed thebill into law ( P.L. 105-261 ) on October 17. The House approved the conference report on thedefense appropriations bill ( H.R. 4103 ) on September 28 and the Senate on September29. The President signed the bill into law ( P.L. 105-262 ) on October 17, as well. Later Congressapproved additional funding for defense programs in the FY1999 Omnibus Consolidated andEmergency Supplemental Appropriations Act ( H.R. 4328 , P.L. 105-277 ), which theHouse approved on October 20 and the Senate on October 21, and which the President signed laterthat day.
The authorization conference agreement resolved a number of contentious issues, include restrictions on technology transfers to China in the House bill; gender-integrated basic training,which the House wanted to restrict, while the Senate supported the current system; restrictions onbase consolidation included in the Senate bill; options for producing tritium for nuclear weapons;and a few major weapons issues, including funding for the Theater High Altitude Area Defense(THAAD) system and Senate provisions requiring more testing of the F-22 fighter.
The appropriations conference decided to leave a key issue -- funding for Bosnia -- for action in later legislation. The Senate-passed appropriations bill included $1.9 billion in emergencyfunding for Bosnia, as the Administration had requested, but the House bill did not. Funding forBosnia was subsequently provided in a supplemental appropriations measure approved as part of theOmnibus Appropriations bill. The supplemental measure also included funding for Year 2000(Y2K) fixes in the Defense Department, for military readiness, for drug interdiction, for missiledefense, and for counter-terrorism activities.
Other key issues that Congress addressed this year include base closures, Bosnia policy, and congressional war powers. In action on the defense authorization bill, neither the House nor theSenate agreed to an Administration request to approve a new round of military base closures, so theissue has been put off for renewed debate next year. Both the House and the Senate also debated theU.S. mission in Bosnia. Neither House approved any binding restrictions on the mission, though theauthorization conference agreement includes a sense of the Congress statement urging the Presidentto reduce troops levels. The House-passed appropriations bill included a war powers-relatedprovision that would prohibit the expenditure of funds for offensive military actions without advancecongressional approval, while the Senate rejected the same language. The Administration threateneda veto if that provision was not removed in conference, and the conference agreement did not toinclude the measure.
Key Policy Staff