Technical corrections only. v5 incorporates standard Public Law formatting, including statutory pagination and `<<NOTE>>` annotations, which provide additional context and cross-references. No substantive policy changes were made between v4 and v5.
Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Cole, Tom [R-OK-4]
- Committees
- Appropriations Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 15, 2025
Bottom line
This omnibus bill funds the federal government for FY2025 and extends critical health and other programs, largely maintaining current service levels with targeted modifications and some new policy authorizations.
What it actually does
This Act provides full-year continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, for most federal departments and agencies, largely based on fiscal year 2024 levels with specific adjustments. It also extends numerous health-related programs, including community health centers, Medicare payment adjustments, and telehealth flexibilities, and reauthorizes several other federal programs, while including various rescissions and policy directives.
Proponents argue
Proponents would argue that this bill prevents a government shutdown, provides stability and predictability for federal agencies and critical programs, and ensures continued funding for essential services like healthcare, national defense, and disaster relief. They would highlight the extensions of vital public health and Medicare programs as crucial for maintaining access to care. The targeted adjustments and rescissions demonstrate fiscal responsibility while avoiding deeper cuts that could harm services.
Opponents contend
Opponents might criticize the bill for being an omnibus continuing resolution rather than individual appropriations bills, arguing it lacks proper oversight and debate for specific spending items. They might point to the specific adjustments as either insufficient or excessive in certain areas, or object to the inclusion of certain policy extensions or rescissions without standalone consideration. Some might argue it perpetuates unsustainable spending levels or fails to address long-term fiscal challenges.
The bill is lengthy and highly complex, requiring significant time for review due to its omnibus nature and numerous cross-references. Given its passage shortly before the fiscal year deadline, the time available for public and legislative scrutiny was likely limited.
Division A, Sec. 1101
Full-Year Continuing Appropriations for FY2025
This section provides funding for most federal government operations for the entirety of fiscal year 2025. It generally extends funding at the levels and under the conditions specified in the applicable appropriations Acts for fiscal year 2024, with numerous specific exceptions and adjustments detailed throughout the bill. This prevents a government shutdown and ensures continuity of services.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this provision is essential to avoid a government shutdown, providing stability and predictability for federal operations and the economy. It allows agencies to plan for the full fiscal year, rather than operating under short-term continuing resolutions.
Critics contend
Critics contend that relying on a full-year continuing resolution, even with adjustments, bypasses the regular appropriations process, limiting congressional oversight and the ability to set new policy priorities or make necessary programmatic changes through individual bills.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the need for government continuity and stability against the desire for a more deliberative and detailed appropriations process that allows for specific policy adjustments and oversight.
Division A, Sec. 1109
Advance Payments for Mandatory Programs in FY2026
This section provides advance appropriations for the first quarter of fiscal year 2026 for several mandatory payment programs. These include significant amounts for Medicaid ($261 billion), Supplemental Security Income (SSI) ($22.1 billion), Child Support Enforcement and Family Support Programs ($1.6 billion), and Foster Care and Permanency ($3.6 billion). This ensures that these critical entitlement programs have funding available at the start of the next fiscal year.
Division A, Sec. 1201-1202
Agriculture and Food Programs Funding Adjustments
These sections specify adjusted funding levels for various Department of Agriculture programs, deviating from the general FY2024 baseline. Notable adjustments include $1.147 billion for Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, $895.7 million for Natural Resources Conservation Service, $478.4 million for Rural Water and Waste Disposal, and $130 million for Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband Programs. Food programs receive $1.214 billion for Food Safety and Inspection Service and $7.597 billion for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
Division A, Sec. 1401-1408
Department of Defense Funding Adjustments
These sections detail extensive, specific funding levels for various Department of Defense accounts, including military personnel, operation and maintenance, procurement, shipbuilding, research and development, and defense health programs. For example, Military Personnel, Army is funded at $51.18 billion, Operation and Maintenance, Navy at $73.65 billion, and Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy at $33.33 billion. These adjustments represent targeted changes from the FY2024 baseline, reflecting current defense priorities and needs.
Division A, Sec. 1416
Department of Defense Rescissions
This section permanently rescinds specific unobligated balances from various Department of Defense accounts from prior fiscal years. Examples include $80 million from the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (2022/2025), $125.3 million from Aircraft Procurement, Air Force (2023/2025), and $408.9 million from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force (2024/2025). These rescissions total over $1.5 billion.
Division A, Sec. 1701(5)
FEMA Disaster Relief Fund Appropriation
This provision appropriates $22.51 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Disaster Relief Fund for fiscal year 2025. This amount is specifically designated for major disasters declared under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, ensuring funds are available for response and recovery efforts.
Division A, Sec. 1807
Enactment of Federal Employee Pay and Wildfire Management Provisions
This section enacts into law Sections 456 and 457 of H.R. 8998 from the 118th Congress. These provisions relate to federal employee pay adjustments and wildfire management policies, including special rates of pay for certain positions and adjustments to wildfire suppression operations. This effectively incorporates standalone policy changes into the continuing appropriations bill.
Division A, Sec. 1904
HHS Authority to Collect OPTN Registration Fees
This section grants the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) the authority to collect registration fees from members of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) for each transplant candidate placed on the waiting list. These fees can be credited to the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) account to support OPTN operations, remaining available until expended. This is a new revenue-generating authority for the OPTN.
Division A, Sec. 11109
Advance Appropriations for Veterans Affairs Medical and Benefits Programs in FY2026
This section provides significant advance appropriations for fiscal year 2026 for key Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) programs. This includes $75.039 billion for Medical Services, $34 billion for Medical Community Care, $12.7 billion for Medical Support and Compliance, and $9.7 billion for Medical Facilities. Additionally, $227.24 billion is provided for Compensation and Pensions and $20.37 billion for Readjustment Benefits, both available until expended. These funds ensure the continuity of essential healthcare and financial support for veterans.
Division B, Title II, Sec. 2207
Extension of Medicare Telehealth Flexibilities
This section extends several key telehealth flexibilities under Medicare until September 30, 2025. These include removing geographic requirements and expanding originating sites for telehealth services, expanding the types of practitioners eligible to furnish telehealth services, extending telehealth services for Federally Qualified Health Centers and Rural Health Clinics, delaying in-person requirements for mental health services furnished via telehealth, and allowing for audio-only telehealth services. This continues the expanded access to virtual care initiated during the public health emergency.
Division B, Title IV, Sec. 2401
Delaying Medicaid DSH Reductions
This section amends the Social Security Act to delay scheduled reductions to Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments. The reductions, which were previously set to begin in April 2025, are now delayed until fiscal year 2028. DSH payments provide critical funding to hospitals that serve a high volume of Medicaid and uninsured patients.
Division C, Sec. 3105
Extension of Temporary Order for Fentanyl-Related Substances
This section extends the temporary order for fentanyl-related substances, maintaining their classification as Schedule I controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act until September 30, 2025. This allows law enforcement to continue prosecuting crimes involving these dangerous synthetic opioids.
Earmarks from fiscal year 2024 appropriations acts, committee reports, or joint explanatory statements shall have no legal effect with respect to funds appropriated by this division.
Division A, Sec. 1111
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice in continuing resolutions to prevent prior year earmarks from automatically carrying over, ensuring that new spending priorities are not inadvertently locked in without fresh congressional approval.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures that funding decisions for the current fiscal year are based on current priorities, preventing the automatic perpetuation of specific projects or allocations that may no longer be relevant or desired.
Case against: Critics might argue that it undermines the intent of prior congressional directives for specific projects that may still be valid and needed, potentially causing disruptions for ongoing initiatives that relied on those earmarks.
Estimated impact: Affects potentially hundreds of millions or billions of dollars in specific projects and programs that were earmarked in FY2024.
For any discretionary account with advance appropriations for FY2025 or FY2026 in a FY2024 appropriations Act, this Act provides advance appropriations in the same amount for FY2026 or FY2027, respectively, with a comparable period of availability.
Division A, Sec. 1112
Why it matters:This is a technical, programmatic extension designed to maintain the continuity of multi-year funding strategies for certain programs, often to ensure long-term stability for projects or research that require sustained investment. It's a common practice to avoid legislative cliffs.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures long-term planning and stability for critical programs that rely on multi-year funding, preventing disruptions and allowing for efficient resource allocation over time.
Case against: Critics might argue that such automatic extensions reduce future congressional flexibility to adjust spending priorities or review program effectiveness in subsequent fiscal years.
Estimated impact: Potentially billions of dollars in future-year appropriations across various discretionary accounts, ensuring their funding continuity.
Allows the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to make an adjustment to discretionary spending limits for fiscal year 2025 if new budget authority exceeds limits due to estimating differences with the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), up to 0.25 percent of the sum of adjusted discretionary spending limits.
Division A, Sec. 1608
Why it matters:This is a standard technical maneuver to provide flexibility in budget enforcement, acknowledging that CBO and OMB may have different estimates for the budgetary effects of legislation. It prevents minor scoring differences from triggering automatic cuts.
Case for: Proponents argue this prevents unintended sequestration or budget enforcement actions due to technical scoring discrepancies, providing a necessary safety valve for the appropriations process.
Case against: Critics might argue that such provisions can be used to obscure true spending levels or to allow spending above agreed-upon limits, even if only for technical reasons, potentially undermining fiscal discipline.
Estimated impact: Could affect billions of dollars in spending, depending on the magnitude of estimating differences, but capped at 0.25% of total discretionary spending limits.