Technical corrections only. The differences between v5 and v6 consist of the addition of GPO (Government Publishing Office) annotations, such as statutory citations and effective date markers, as well as legislative history information. No substantive policy changes were made between these two versions.
Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Cole, Tom [R-OK-4]
- Committees
- Appropriations Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Nov 12, 2025
Bottom line
This omnibus bill funds significant portions of the federal government for FY2026 and extends critical programs, avoiding a lapse in government operations.
What it actually does
This Act provides continuing appropriations for various federal departments and agencies for fiscal year 2026 until January 30, 2026, to prevent a government shutdown. It also enacts full-year appropriations for Agriculture, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs for FY2026. Additionally, it includes numerous extensions for agricultural, health, and veterans' programs, and reauthorizes the Over-the-Counter Monograph Drug User Fee program.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this bill is essential to maintain government operations, provide certainty for federal agencies and beneficiaries, and prevent the disruptions and economic costs associated with a government shutdown. They highlight the inclusion of full-year appropriations for key sectors and the extension of vital health and agricultural programs.
Opponents contend
Critics may contend that the bill represents a failure of the regular appropriations process, relying on a large omnibus package rather than individual bills. They might also raise concerns about specific policy riders, spending levels, or the lack of transparency in a rushed legislative process.
The bill is extensive and highly complex, requiring several hours for a thorough review. Given its passage on November 12, 2025, after a period of consideration in both chambers, the time for public and detailed legislative review was likely constrained.
Division A, Sec. 101, 106
Extension of FY2025 Funding Levels (Continuing Resolution)
This provision provides necessary amounts for continuing projects and activities at the fiscal year 2025 rate of operations until January 30, 2026. This prevents a government shutdown by temporarily funding agencies whose full-year appropriations are not yet enacted, giving Congress more time to finalize the remaining appropriations bills.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this extension is crucial to avoid a government shutdown, which would cause widespread disruption, economic uncertainty, and harm to federal services and employees. It provides essential stability while negotiations for full-year funding continue.
Critics contend
Critics contend that reliance on short-term continuing resolutions reflects a failure of the regular appropriations process, creating uncertainty for agencies, hindering long-term planning, and potentially leading to inefficient spending.
Tradeoffs
This provision offers short-term stability and avoids immediate crisis, but at the cost of delaying comprehensive budget decisions and potentially perpetuating a cycle of fiscal uncertainty.
Division A, Sec. 102
Department of Defense Limitations under Continuing Resolution
This section prohibits the Department of Defense from initiating new production of items not funded in fiscal year 2025, increasing production rates above FY2025 levels, or starting any new projects or activities not funded in FY2025. It also prevents initiating multi-year procurements using advance funding.
Division A, Sec. 120
Prohibition on Federal Reductions in Force (RIFs)
This section prohibits federal funds from being used to initiate, carry out, or implement reductions in force (RIFs) for civilian employees between the date of enactment and January 30, 2026. It also mandates the rescission of any RIFs proposed between October 1, 2025, and the date of enactment, reinstating affected employees with backpay.
Division B, Title I
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Salaries and Expenses
This title appropriates $1,793,063,000 for the operation and maintenance of ARS facilities, research programs, and related expenses. It includes funds for land acquisition and construction projects, with specific limitations on building costs. The provision also requires reports on current and planned funding and staffing levels for each research unit.
Division B, Title IV
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Funding
This title appropriates $107,481,218,000 for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), including a reserve of $6,000,000,000 for program operations. It also allocates funds for nutrition education services to State agencies and Federally Recognized Tribes, and for demonstration projects for tribal organizations.
Division B, Title III
Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account
This title appropriates $445,864,564 for direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants for rural water, wastewater, waste disposal, and solid waste management programs. It includes specific allocations for distressed communities, tribal communities, and technical assistance, aiming to improve infrastructure and public health in rural areas.
Division B, Sec. 742
Prohibition on Poultry/Seafood from China in School Lunch Program
This section prohibits the use of funds to procure raw or processed poultry products or seafood imported into the United States from the People's Republic of China for use in federal child nutrition programs, including the school lunch program, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, and the Summer Food Service Program for Children.
Division C, Title I
House of Representatives Salaries and Expenses
This title appropriates $2,083,055,000 for the salaries and expenses of the House of Representatives. This includes funding for House leadership offices, Members' representational allowances, compensation for interns, salaries and expenses for various committees, and compensation for House officers and employees. It ensures the operational capacity of the House.
Division C, Title I
Capitol Police Salaries and General Expenses
This title appropriates $653,422,000 for salaries and $198,928,000 for general expenses of the U.S. Capitol Police. This includes funding for overtime, hazardous duty pay, employee benefits, security equipment, training, and Member protection activities. It also explicitly prohibits the purchase of drones manufactured in China or by affiliated businesses, except for national security purposes.
Division C, Sec. 213
Requiring Senate Notification for Disclosure of Senate Data
This section amends existing law to require notification to the relevant Senate office and the Office of the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) if any provider or the SAA receives legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data. It explicitly states that providers are not barred from giving notice by court order or other law, creates a private cause of action for violations with significant statutory damages, and sets strict rules for delaying notice in criminal investigations, especially for non-target investigations.
Division D, Title I
Military Construction, Defense-Wide
This title appropriates $3,784,301,000 for acquisition, construction, installation, and equipment of temporary or permanent public works, installations, facilities, and real property for activities and agencies of the Department of Defense (other than the military departments). It includes transfer authority to other military construction or family housing appropriations and allocates funds for study, planning, design, and architect and engineer services.
Division D, Title II
Veterans Health Administration - Medical Services
This title provides $59,858,000,000 (plus reimbursements) for fiscal year 2027 for inpatient and outpatient care for veterans, including care in non-VA facilities, medical supplies, and healthcare employee salaries. It also rescinds $15,889,000,000 from FY2026 funds previously appropriated under this heading, and establishes priorities for medical treatment for veterans with service-connected disabilities, lower income, or special needs.
Division D, Title II
Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund
This title appropriates $52,676,000,000 to the Cost of War Toxic Exposures Fund, to remain available until expended. These funds are designated for investment in veterans' health care, benefits, and medical and other research associated with exposure to environmental hazards, as authorized by section 324 of title 38, United States Code (related to the PACT Act).
Division E, Sec. 5002
Extension of Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 Authorities
This section extends most authorities (including mandatory funding levels) of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (the 2018 Farm Bill) until September 30, 2026, or later if specified in other acts. It also suspends permanent price support authorities for the 2026 crops of covered commodities, cotton, sugar, and for milk through December 31, 2026, ensuring continuity of current farm policy.
Division F, Title I
Extension for Community Health Centers, National Health Service Corps, and Teaching Health Centers
This title extends funding for Community Health Centers, the National Health Service Corps, and Teaching Health Centers that operate Graduate Medical Education Programs. It provides specific pro-rata funding amounts for the period beginning October 1, 2025, and ending January 30, 2026, ensuring these vital public health programs continue operations.
Division F, Title V, Sec. 6501-6511
Over-the-Counter Monograph Drug User Fee Amendments
This title reauthorizes the Over-the-Counter (OTC) Monograph Drug User Fee program for fiscal years 2026 through 2030. It establishes new fee revenue amounts, adjustments, and due dates for facility and order request fees. It also amends definitions related to OTC monograph drug activities, includes provisions for performance reporting by the FDA, and sets sunset dates for the authorization and reporting requirements.
Division G, Title III, Sec. 7307
Improvements to Partial Claim Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs
This section amends the VA's Partial Claim Program to clarify its relationship with other loan powers, adjust administration details (e.g., extending the response period for loan holders to 180 days), and modify provisions related to default and foreclosure. It also allows the Secretary to issue administrative guidance in advance of prescribing formal regulations for the program.
Allows for the continuation of rescissions or cancellations of discretionary budget authority from prior acts by reducing the rate for operations of current applicable Treasury Appropriations Fund Symbols (TAFS). It specifies the amount of rescission as the lesser of the specified amount in the prior act or the available balances as of October 1, 2025.
Division A, Sec. 115
Why it matters:This is standard practice for managing budget authority in continuing resolutions. The specific impact of these rescissions on agency operations might not be immediately apparent without detailed budget analysis, but the mechanism itself is a common budget management tool.
Case for: Proponents argue that carrying forward previously mandated rescissions ensures fiscal discipline and contributes to overall budget management, especially during a continuing resolution.
Case against: Critics may contend that the specific programs affected by these rescissions are not detailed in the bill text, potentially leading to cuts in areas not explicitly debated or understood by the public.
Estimated impact: The total amount of rescissions is not specified in this section, but it refers to amounts from prior acts. The impact would be the reduction of unobligated balances from various federal programs.
Mandates that all iron and steel products used in projects for the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of public water or wastewater systems funded by Division B must be produced in the United States. It includes waiver exceptions if applying the requirement is inconsistent with public interest, if U.S. products are unavailable or of unsatisfactory quality, or if U.S. products increase project cost by more than 25%.
Division B, Sec. 731
Why it matters:Policy riders related to domestic content requirements are often placed in general provisions of appropriations bills. While important, it's a specific policy directive embedded in a broader funding bill.
Case for: Proponents argue this provision supports domestic manufacturing, creates American jobs, and strengthens the U.S. industrial base by prioritizing U.S.-made materials for public infrastructure projects.
Case against: Opponents may argue that this mandate could increase project costs or delay project completion if U.S.-made products are not sufficiently available, competitive, or meet specific technical requirements, potentially impacting rural communities that need these infrastructure improvements.
Estimated impact: Applies to all federal funds for rural water/wastewater systems in Division B, impacting potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in projects. The exact cost increase or delay is not specified.
Amends Section 297A of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to significantly revise the definition of 'hemp.' It excludes certain cannabinoids (those not naturally produced by the Cannabis sativa L. plant, or synthesized/manufactured outside the plant) and sets strict limits on total tetrahydrocannabinols (THC) and any other cannabinoids with similar effects on humans or animals in intermediate and final hemp-derived cannabinoid products. It also mandates FDA to publish lists of cannabinoids and further define 'container.'
Division B, Sec. 781
Why it matters:This is a significant policy change regarding the legality and regulation of hemp-derived products, often placed in an omnibus bill to ensure passage. It addresses a rapidly evolving and controversial market that has seen a proliferation of products with intoxicating effects, which some lawmakers believe exploit a loophole in existing law.
Case for: Proponents argue this clarifies federal law, addresses public safety concerns regarding intoxicating hemp-derived products, and distinguishes legal industrial hemp from illicit cannabis products. It aims to rein in the unregulated market for products like Delta-8 THC and protect consumers from potentially harmful substances.
Case against: Opponents argue this effectively bans many popular hemp-derived cannabinoid products, harming businesses that have invested in the current legal framework and limiting consumer access to non-intoxicating or mildly intoxicating alternatives to traditional cannabis. They may also argue it overreaches federal authority and stifles innovation in the hemp industry.
Estimated impact: Could drastically reshape the multi-billion dollar hemp-derived cannabinoid market, impacting producers, manufacturers, retailers, and consumers nationwide. It is expected to lead to significant business closures and product removals from shelves.
Prohibits the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from conducting new research commencing on or after July 1, 2025, that uses any canine, feline, or non-human primate unless specifically approved by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under strict conditions. These conditions include that scientific objectives can only be met by these animals, the research is directly related to a combat-related illness or injury, it's consistent with VA policy, and ethical considerations are met. The provision also requires detailed reports to Congress and mandates the elimination of such research by September 20, 2026.
Division D, Sec. 247
Why it matters:This is a significant policy change regarding animal research, often placed in an omnibus bill to ensure passage, as it addresses a sensitive public concern that has garnered significant attention from animal welfare advocates.
Case for: Animal welfare advocates argue that this provision reduces the use of animals in research, promotes ethical treatment, and encourages the development and adoption of alternative research methods that do not involve canines, felines, or non-human primates.
Case against: Some researchers may argue that this provision restricts scientific freedom and could potentially hinder critical medical advancements for veterans if certain research can only be effectively conducted using these specific animal models, especially for complex conditions.
Estimated impact: This will significantly alter the scope and methods of animal research conducted by the VA, potentially impacting specific research programs and their outcomes, and requiring a shift towards alternative models or cessation of certain studies.