[Page: S6109]
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, on April 30, 1996, the Select Committee on Intelligence reported S. 1718, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 from committee. Knowing that this would be a relatively short legislative year and that the Armed Services Committee would take our bill on referral for up to 30 days of session--as it does every year, the committee marked up this bill at the earliest possible date. The Congressional Budget Office was not able to complete its scoring of our bill before we filed the report. We have now received the report of the Congressional Budget Office and I ask that it be printed in the Record so that Members will have an opportunity to review it before the Intelligence bill comes up for consideration by the full Senate.
The report follows:
U.S. CONGRESS,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 22, 1996.
Hon. Arlen Specter,
Chairman, Select Committee on Intelligence , U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1718, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, as reported by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on April 30, 1996.
The bill would affect direct spending and receipts, and thus would be subject to pay-as-you-go procedures under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them.
Sincerely,
James L. Blum
(For June E. O'Neill, Director).
1. Bill number: S. 1718.
2. Bill title: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997.
3. Bill status: As reported by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on April 30, 1996.
4. Bill purpose: This bill would authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1997 for intelligence activities of the United States government, the Community Management Staff of the Director of Central Intelligence , and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System.
5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Table 1 summarizes the budgetary effects of the unclassified sections of the bill on direct spending, revenues, and authorizations of appropriations for 1997. CBO could not obtain the necessary information to estimate the costs for the entire bill because parts are classified at a level above clearances now held by CBO employees.
6. Basis of estimate: The estimate assumes that S. 1718 will be enacted by October 1, 1996, and that the full amounts authorized will be appropriated. CBO used historical spending rates for estimating outlays.
Title V of S. 1718 defines economic espionage and contains provisions governing fines and forfeitures that would affect direct spending and revenues. Although the bill would provide for penalties that could accumulate to be in the millions of dollars in any one year, CBO cannot predict the frequency of successful prosecutions for economic espionage or the amounts of the fines that would be levied and collected. Nevertheless, the only net budgetary impact would stem from civil fines.
TABLE 1: ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNCLASSIFIED SECTIONS OF S. 1718
[By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIRECT SPENDING AND REVENUES
Direct spending:
Estimated budget authority 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 )
Estimated outlays 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 )
Revenues 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 )
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS ACTION
Spending under current law:
Budget authority 2 305 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated outlays 350 39 19 5 0 0 0
Proposed changes:
Estimated authorization level 0 282 1 0 0 0 0
Estimated outlays 0 239 25 14 5 0 0
Spending under the bill:
Estimated authorization level 2 305 282 1 0 0 0 0
Estimated outlays 350 278 44 19 5 0 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fines.--The imposition of new civil and criminal fines in S. 1718 could cause governmental receipts to increase. Civil fines would be deposited into the general fund of the Treasury. Criminal fines would be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund and would be spent in the following year; thus, direct spending from the fund would match the increase in revenues from criminal fines with a one-year lag.
Forfeiture.--A new forfeiture provision in S. 1718 could lead to more assets seized and forfeited to the United States as a result of economic espionage. Proceeds from the sale of any such assets would be deposited as revenues into the Assets Forfeiture Fund of the Department of Justice and spent out of the fund in the same year. Thus, direct spending from the Assets Forfeiture Fund would match any increase in revenues.
[Page: S6110]
The bill would authorize the appropriation of $280 million for intelligence and intelligence -related activities for 1997 as well as such sums as may be necessary to establish the Commission to Assess the Organization of the Federal Government to Combat the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Section 104 would authorize appropriations of $95.5 million for 1997 for the Community Management Account of the Director of Central Intelligence . Similarly, section 201 specifies an authorization of appropriations for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability Fund of $184.2 million. In addition, CBO estimates costs of $3 million over two years to establish the new commission.
7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts through 1998. The bill would have the following pay-as-you-go impact:
[By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
------------------------------------
1996 1997 1998
------------------------------------
Change in outlays 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 )
Change in receipts 0 ( 1 ) ( 1 )
------------------------------------
8. Estimated cost to State, local, and tribal governments: Section 4 of Public Law 104-4 excludes from application of that act legislative provisions that are necessary for the national security. CBO has determined that all the provisions of S. 1718 either fit within this exclusion or do not contain intergovernmental mandates as defined by Public Law 104-4.
9. Estimated impact on the private sector: CBO has determined that all the provisions of S. 1718 either fit within the national security exclusion or do not contain private-sector mandates as defined by Public Law 104-4.
10. Previous CBO estimate: None.
11. Estimate prepared by: Federal Cost Estimate: Jeannette Van Winkle. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Karen McVey. Impact on Private Sector: Neil Singer.
12. Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine for Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.