B-142011, APRIL 1, 1960, 39 COMP. GEN. 665

B-142011, APRIL 1, 1960, 39 COMP. GEN. 665

APPROPRIATIONS - LIMITATIONS - ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES - FISCAL YEAR V. CALENDAR YEAR PROGRAMS THE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LIMITATION IN TITLE II OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION APPROPRIATION ACT, 1960, WHICH PRECLUDES THE USE OF FUNDS IN "THIS AUTHORIZATION" FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES FOR PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS ON AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES IN SHORT SUPPLY FOR 1960 IN EXCESS OF $50,000, IS APPLICABLE TO PROGRAMS FOR WHICH ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED DURING THE 1960 FISCAL YEAR AND DOES NOT APPLY TO NEW PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS FINANCED WITH 1961 APPROPRIATIONS, EVEN THOUGH THE PROGRAMS WERE INCIDENT TO SURPLUS AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES PRODUCED IN THE CALENDAR YEAR 1960.

TO THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE, APRIL 1, 1960:

YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 12, 1960, CONCERNS THE $50,000 PRICE SUPPORT LIMITATION CONTAINED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION APPROPRIATION ACT, 1960, PUBLIC LAW 86-80, 73 STAT. 167, UNDER THE HEADING " COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION," SUBHEADING " LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES" (73 STAT. 178).

YOU SAY THAT PRICE SUPPORT IS MADE AVAILABLE BY YOUR DEPARTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE AGRICULTURAL ACT OF 1949, AS AMENDED, 7 U.S.C. 1421, ET SEQ., UNDER WHICH PRICE SUPPORT IS MANDATORY ON A NUMBER OF AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND DISCRETIONARY ON OTHER COMMODITIES. YOU ADVISE THAT BY JUNE 30, 1960, YOUR DEPARTMENT WILL HAVE FORMULATED PRACTICALLY ALL OF THE PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS FOR 1960 CROPS AND WILL HAVE ISSUED THE PRICE SUPPORT REGULATIONS CONTAINING ALL OF THE DETAILS OF THE PROGRAMS FOR MOST OF SUCH CROPS. YOU STATE, HOWEVER, THAT PRICE SUPPORT REGULATIONS COVERING SOME COMMODITIES MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL AFTER JUNE 30, 1960. ALSO, YOUR LETTER DISCLOSES THAT IT IS POSSIBLE THAT PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS MIGHT BE ANNOUNCED ON ONE OR MORE ADDITIONAL COMMODITIES AFTER JUNE 30, ALTHOUGH THIS IS NOT CONTEMPLATED AT THIS TIME. FURTHER, YOU SAY THAT PRACTICALLY ALL 1960 CROP PRICE SUPPORT LOANS AND PURCHASES BY YOUR DEPARTMENT WILL BE MADE AFTER JUNE 30, 1960.

YOUR LETTER INDICATES THAT, AT FIRST, YOUR DEPARTMENT WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE LIMITATION IN QUESTION WOULD EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1960, UNLESS CONTINUED BY OTHER LEGISLATION. YOU SAY, HOWEVER, THAT UPON FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROVISION, THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND THE DECISIONS OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN UNITED STATES V. DICKERSON, 310 U.S. 554, AND UNITED STATES V. LOVETT, 328 U.S. 303, IT APPEARS QUESTIONABLE WHETHER THE LIMITATION WILL EXPIRE JUNE 30, 1960, AS APPLIED TO THE 1960 PRODUCTION OF ANY AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES.

YOU REQUEST A DECISION AS TO WHETHER, ASSUMING THAT THERE IS NOT NEW LEGISLATION, THE $50,000 LIMITATION WILL APPLY TO PRICE SUPPORT LOANS AND PURCHASES MADE AFTER JUNE 30, 1960, WITH RESPECT TO THE 1960 PRODUCTION OF ANY SURPLUS AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY.

TITLE II OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION APPROPRIATION ACT, 1960, PUBLIC LAW 86-80, 73 STAT. 177, WHICH APPROPRIATES OR MAKES FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1960, PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, AS FOLLOWS:

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

NOTHING IN THIS ACT SHALL BE SO CONSTRUED AS TO PREVENT THE COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION FROM CARRYING OUT ANY ACTIVITY OR ANY PROGRAM AUTHORIZED BY LAW: PROVIDED, THAT NOT TO EXCEED $42,000,000 SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OF THE CORPORATION: PROVIDED FURTHER, THAT $1,000,000 OF THIS AUTHORIZATION SHALL BE AVAILABLE ONLY TO EXPAND AND STRENGTHEN THE SALES PROGRAM OF THE CORPORATION PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY CONTAINED IN THE CORPORATION'S CHARTER: PROVIDED FURTHER, THAT NOT LESS THAN 7 PERCENTUM OF THIS AUTHORIZATION SHALL BE PLACED IN RESERVE TO BE APPORTIONED PURSUANT TO SECTION 3679 OF THE REVISED STATUTES, AS AMENDED, FOR USE ONLY IN SUCH AMOUNTS AND AT SUCH TIME AS MAY BECOME NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT PROGRAM OPERATIONS: * * * PROVIDED FURTHER, (1) THAT NO PART OF THIS AUTHORIZATION SHALL BE USED TO FORMULATE OR CARRY OUT A PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAM FOR 1960 UNDER WHICH A TOTAL AMOUNT OF PRICE SUPPORT IN EXCESS OF $50,000 WOULD BE EXTENDED THROUGH LOANS, PURCHASES, OR PURCHASE AGREEMENTS MADE OR MADE AVAILABLE BY COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION TO ANY PERSON ON THE 1960 PRODUCTION OF ANY AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY DECLARED BY THE SECRETARY TO BE IN SURPLUS SUPPLY, UNLESS (A) SUCH PERSON SHALL REDUCE HIS PRODUCTION OF SUCH COMMODITY FROM THAT WHICH SUCH PERSON PRODUCED THE PRECEDING YEAR, IN SUCH PERCENTAGE, NOT TO EXCEED 20 PERCENTUM, AS THE SECRETARY MAY DETERMINE TO BE ESSENTIAL TO BRING PRODUCTION IN LINE WITHIN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME WITH THAT NECESSARY TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY TO MEET DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN DEMANDS, PLUS ADEQUATE RESERVES, OR (B) SUCH PERSON SHALL AGREE TO REPAY ALL AMOUNTS ADVANCED IN EXCESS OF $50,000 FOR ANY AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE ADVANCE OF SUCH FUNDS OR AT SUCH LATER DATE AS THE SECRETARY MAY DETERMINE, * * * ( ITALICS SUPPLIED.)

IT IS CLEAR FROM THE LANGUAGE OF THE LIMITATION IN QUESTION THAT THE COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION MAY NOT USE THE FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE TO IT BY THE AUTHORIZATION IN WHICH THE LIMITATION IS CONTAINED TO FORMULATE OR CARRY OUT A PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAM FOR 1960 UNDER WHICH A TOTAL AMOUNT OF SUCH SUPPORT IN EXCESS OF $50,000 MAY BE MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH LOANS, PURCHASES OR PURCHASE AGREEMENTS, TO ANY PERSON ON THE 1960 PRODUCTION OF ANY AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY DECLARED TO BE IN SURPLUS SUPPLY, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE LIMITATION. AS INFERRED IN YOUR LETTER, IT APPEARS FROM THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE LIMITATION THAT THE CONGRESS INTENDED TO LIMIT PRICE SUPPORT LOANS AND PURCHASES ON AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES IN SURPLUS SUPPLY TO $50,000 TO ANY PERSON WITH RESPECT TO ALL THE 1960 PRODUCTION OF SUCH COMMODITIES, I.E., TO ALL CROPS HARVESTED IN CALENDAR YEAR 1960, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM FISCAL YEAR 1960. SEE PAGE 13, SENATE REPORT NO. 330 ON THE BILL WHICH BECAME THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION APPROPRIATION ACT, 1960; PAGES 8601 AND 8602, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, JUNE 2, 1959; PAGE 8710, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, JUNE 3, 1959; PAGES 11130, 11132, AND 11134, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, JUNE 30, 1959; AND PAGES 11203 AND 11204, JUNE 30, 1959, IN CONNECTION WITH THE SAME BILL. HOWEVER, THE LANGUAGE USED BY THE CONGRESS IN THE LIMITATION ACCOMPLISHES THE APPARENT PURPOSE OR INTENT OF THE LIMITATION, ONLY SO FAR AS THE AUTHORIZATION IN WHICH THE LIMITATION IS CONTAINED IS CONCERNED, SINCE THE LANGUAGE USED MAKES THE LIMITATION APPLICABLE ONLY TO "THIS AUTHORIZATION," THAT IS, TO FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1960 (WHICH ENDS ON JUNE 30, 1960). THE LIMITATION PROHIBITS THE USE OF FUNDS OF THE COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION FOR ANY ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES INCURRED DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1960 CONCERNING THE FORMULATION OR CARRYING OUT OF A PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAM FOR 1960 UNDER WHICH A TOTAL AMOUNT OF PRICE SUPPORT WOULD BE IN EXCESS OF $50,000, WITH CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS. THEREFORE, THE LIMITATION IN QUESTION WOULD NOT APPLY TO NEW PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS FORMULATED OR CARRIED OUT WITH FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE BY A FISCAL YEAR 1961 AUTHORIZATION EVEN THOUGH SUCH PROGRAMS, AND THE LOANS AND PURCHASES MADE THEREUNDER, INVOLVE SURPLUS AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES PRODUCED IN CALENDAR YEAR 1960.

THE SUPREME COURT CASES CITED IN YOUR LETTER ARE DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE INSTANT CASE. IN UNITED STATES V. DICKERSON, 310 U.S. 554, THE LIMITATION CONSIDERED THEREIN PROVIDED THAT "NO PART OF ANY APPROPRIATION CONTAINED IN THIS OR ANY OTHER ACT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1939, SHALL BE AVAILABLE FOR THE PAYMENT" OF ANY RE ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCE FOR "RE- ENLISTMENTS MADE DURING THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1939," NOTWITHSTANDING CERTAIN OTHER PROVISIONS OF LAW. THE COURT HELD THAT IN VIEW OF THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY, THE EFFECT OF THE PROVISO WAS NOT MERELY TO RESTRICT THE FUNDS AVAILABLE, BUT TO SUSPEND THE RIGHT TO RE-ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCES DURING THE FISCAL YEAR SPECIFIED THEREIN, I. E., THE FISCAL YEAR 1939, WHICH ENDED JUNE 30, 1939. HOWEVER, THERE WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THAT CASE THE EXTENSION OF THE LIMITATION TO A RE-ENLISTMENT ALLOWANCE PAYABLE IN A SUBSEQUENT FISCAL YEAR FROM A SUBSEQUENT FISCAL YEAR APPROPRIATION, THAT IS, A FISCAL YEAR OTHER THAN THE ONE SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO IN THE LIMITATION. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE DECISION TO INDICATE THAT THE SUPREME COURT WOULD HAVE HELD THAT THE PROVISO IN QUESTION PROHIBITED SUCH PAYMENTS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1940 FROM FUNDS IN A FISCAL YEAR 1940 APPROPRIATION ACT, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS SOME EVIDENCE IN THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1939 APPROPRIATION ACT TO INDICATE THAT THERE WAS A CONGRESSIONAL INTENT THAT RE-ENLISTMENT BONUSES SHOULD NOT BE PAID IN FISCAL YEAR 1940.

THE LIMITATION CONSIDERED IN UNITED STATES V. LOVETT, 328 U.S. 303 WENT FURTHER THAN THE LIMITATION IN THE INSTANT CASE, SINCE IT PROVIDED THAT " NO PART OF ANY APPROPRIATION, ALLOCATION, OR FUND (1) WHICH IS MADE AVAILABLE UNDER OR PURSUANT TO THIS ACT, OR (2) WHICH IS NOW, OR WHICH IS HEREAFTER MADE AVAILABLE UNDER OR PURSUANT TO ANY OTHER ACT, TO ANY DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR INSTRUMENTALITY OF THE UNITED STATES, SHALL BE USED AFTER NOVEMBER 15, 1943, TO PAY ANY PART OF THE SALARY, OR OTHER COMPENSATION FOR THE PERSONAL SERVICES" OF CERTAIN NAMED PERSONS. IN VIEW OF THE SCOPE OF THE LIMITATION THE SUPREME COURT HELD IN THAT CASE THAT IT WAS MORE THAN AN APPROPRIATION LIMITATION AND THAT ITS PURPOSE WAS NOT MERELY TO CUT OFF THE COMPENSATION OF THE EMPLOYEES INVOLVED THROUGH REGULAR CHANNELS, BUT TO PERMANENTLY BAR THEM FROM GOVERNMENT SERVICE. THIS THE COURT SAID MADE THE LIMITATION A BILL OF ATTAINDER WITHIN THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION AGAINST SUCH A BILL. THE INSTANT LIMITATION WOULD NOT FALL WITHIN THE SAME PROHIBITION AND IT IS CLEAR THAT IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE A PERMANENT LIMITATION AS WAS THAT CONSIDERED IN THE LAST CITED COURT CASE.

IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT THE $50,000 PRICE SUPPORT LIMITATION PROVISO IN QUESTION IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS FOR WHICH ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1960.

YOUR LETTER INDICATES THAT THE LIMITATION IN QUESTION IS REFERRED TO IN THE BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1961. WE SUGGEST THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT BRING THE MATTER SPECIFICALLY TO THE ATTENTION OF THE CONGRESS AND ITS APPROPRIATION COMMITTEES DURING THE HEARINGS IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT'S APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1961 SO THAT, IF THE CONGRESS INTENDS THE LIMITATION TO BE CONTINUED IN EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO AUTHORIZATIONS FOR SUBSEQUENT FISCAL YEARS, IT WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION.