Overview
Title
To amend title 14, United States Code, to make appropriations for Coast Guard pay in the event an appropriations Act expires before the enactment of a new appropriations Act, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The Coast Guard Sustained Funding Act of 2025 is a plan to make sure that Coast Guard workers keep getting paid even when the government hasn't decided on the new budget yet, like when a toy store promises to keep giving toys to kids even when they're still thinking about which toys to sell.
Summary AI
H.R. 2051, also known as the "Coast Guard Sustained Funding Act of 2025," seeks to ensure that the Coast Guard receives necessary funding for pay and allowances during periods when a new appropriations act has not yet been enacted. This bill proposes amendments to title 14 of the U.S. Code to automatically appropriate funds to pay military members, civilian employees, and certain contract workers of the Coast Guard during funding lapses. It also outlines exceptions related to the Anti-Deficiency Act for certain situations, including emergencies involving human safety or property protection. The bill defines a "Coast Guard-specific funding lapse" as a situation where an appropriation bill for the Coast Guard isn't in effect at the fiscal year's start.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "Coast Guard Sustained Funding Act of 2025" seeks to amend title 14 of the United States Code. Its primary aim is to ensure that members of the United States Coast Guard, including military personnel, qualified civilian employees, and contract workers, continue to receive their pay and benefits in the event of a lapse in appropriations. This situation could occur if the general appropriation bill specifically covering the Coast Guard is not enacted before the start of the fiscal year. The bill also defines various terms to clarify who would be eligible for continued compensation during such funding lapses.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several noteworthy issues arise from the way the bill is written:
Indefinite Funding Without Limits: The bill uses the phrase "such sums as may be necessary" to allocate funds during a lapse. This lack of a specified cap could lead to financial mismanagement or unchecked spending.
Ambiguous Definitions and Authority: Terms such as "qualified contract employee" empower the Commandant of the Coast Guard to determine eligibility, potentially leading to subjective interpretations and favoritism.
Exception Clauses and Oversight: Exceptions to the Anti-Deficiency Act, which typically prohibits spending without appropriation, are listed in a manner that might allow broad interpretations. This could result in expenditures during emergencies without proper oversight.
Undefined Termination of Appropriations: The bill lacks specificity on what constitutes a termination of appropriations, risking indefinite availability of funds without additional legislative approval.
Lack of Oversight Mechanisms: There is no outlined process for reviewing determinations made by the Commandant regarding employee qualifications, raising concerns about potential unethical practices.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill aims to address disruptions typically faced by Coast Guard personnel and associated workers during funding lapses, ensuring continuity in compensation. This could provide stability for those serving and maintaining the operations of the Coast Guard, thereby safeguarding national security interests.
However, the bill also raises concerns about fiscal responsibility and effective oversight, as indefinite funding could strain taxpayer resources without the proper checks and balances. These issues might lead to skepticism about the appropriate use of public funds.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Coast Guard Personnel and Employees: The bill would directly benefit members of the Coast Guard and associated employees by ensuring they are financially secure during funding lapses. This could improve morale and aid in retention, positively impacting readiness and service effectiveness.
Government Oversight Bodies: The lack of specific oversight measures in the bill could cause complications for government bodies tasked with fiscal management and accountability, potentially leading to increased scrutiny and the need for additional guidelines.
Taxpayers: While the intent of the bill is to maintain operational continuity, the potential for unchecked spending during lapses raises concerns about responsible use of taxpayer money. Ensuring financial discipline while supporting critical services will be a key area of concern.
In conclusion, while the bill addresses the crucial need for consistent pay and benefits for the Coast Guard during financial impasses, ensuring robust definitions, clear funding limits, and oversight mechanisms will be necessary to mitigate potential risks.
Issues
The bill lacks a specified cap or limit on the amount of funds that can be appropriated to cover pay and benefits during a funding lapse (Sections 2 and 2780). This could lead to uncontrolled or wasteful spending, impacting the federal budget and taxpayer money.
The term 'such sums as may be necessary' in subsection (a) of Section 2780 is vague, providing no clear spending limit, which opens the possibility for financial mismanagement (Section 2780).
The term 'qualified contract employee of the Coast Guard' as defined in the bill is overly broad, subject to the Commandant's determination. This could result in excessive or unnecessary contracting if not properly monitored (Sections 2 and 2780).
The exceptions for the application of the Anti-Deficiency Act can potentially be broadly interpreted, allowing expenditures during emergencies without proper oversight, which could lead to misuse of funds (Sections 2 and 2780).
There is potential ambiguity in the definition of terms like 'qualified civilian employee' and circumstances under which they are applied, which might result in varied interpretations or favoritism (Sections 2 and 2780).
The bill does not clearly define termination conditions for appropriations and funds during a funding lapse, which could leave funds available indefinitely without further legislative approval, creating a risk of misuse or financial misconduct (Section 2780).
The bill lacks a clear oversight mechanism to review the Commandant’s determinations regarding qualified employees and contract employees, leading to potential favoritism or unethical practices (Sections 2 and 2780).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the Act states its official name: "Coast Guard Sustained Funding Act of 2025."
2. Pay; continuation during lapse in appropriations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In the event of a funding gap specifically affecting the Coast Guard, this section outlines the immediate allocation of necessary funds to ensure military personnel, qualified civilian employees, and contract workers continue to receive their pay and benefits. It also defines the conditions under which these appropriations apply and specifies which employees are considered "qualified" for these provisions.
2780. Pay; continuation during lapse in appropriations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In the event of a funding gap specifically affecting the Coast Guard, funds are allocated to ensure that Coast Guard members, certain civilian employees, and contract workers continue to receive their pay and benefits. This provision remains effective until a new funding bill or resolution is passed, and it outlines exceptions where the usual restrictions on spending without appropriation don't apply, such as emergencies or essential duties of the President. The definitions of "qualified civilian employee" and "qualified contract employee" specify those individuals eligible for continued pay during such funding lapses.