Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are the allocations of money going to in the FY2025 clean CR
Executive Summary
The FY2025 “clean” Continuing Resolution (Full‑Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, P.L. 119‑4) locks in roughly $1.60 trillion in base discretionary budget authority for FY2025, split about $892–893 billion for defense and $708–708.5 billion for nondefense programs, and largely continues FY2024 funding levels with targeted exceptions and “anomalies” [1] [2]. The measure extends many existing programs and contains specific line items and rescissions that change deficit dynamics: the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated net discretionary reductions through 2034 but overall a small net deficit increase largely tied to IRS rescissions and other mandatory changes [2].
1. Why the CR looks like a mirror of FY2024, and where it breaks the mold
The CR’s central design is to replicate FY2024 funding for FY2025, carrying forward the 12 regular appropriations acts’ levels, authorities, and conditions unless the statute explicitly amends them. That approach guarantees continuity for core federal operations across Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, HHS, Homeland Security, and other departments while avoiding year‑long gaps that would disrupt services [3] [1]. The statute, enacted March 2025, includes exceptions called “anomalies” that alter funding or authorities for selected accounts; these are the levers where policymakers inserted changes instead of renegotiating full appropriations, a common legislative technique when Congress wants a clean vehicle but still needs targeted policy or programmatic fixes [1] [3].
2. The headline numbers: $1.60 trillion and the defense/nondefense split
CBO and summary documents consistently report $1.60 trillion in base discretionary budget authority for FY2025, apportioned to about $892.5–893 billion for defense and $707.97–708 billion for nondefense—numbers repeated across section summaries and analytical pieces [1] [2]. Analysts note this is functionally level funding relative to FY2024 in aggregate, but the CR’s internal reallocations produce winners and losers at the program level. Policymakers framed the totals as preserving readiness, veterans’ care, and critical services while avoiding major policy riders; fiscal projections show the CR reduces discretionary outlays versus prior caps through 2034 but introduces other mandatory program adjustments that affect the deficit [2].
3. CBO’s verdict: outlay savings but a small net deficit rise
CBO estimated the CR would yield $54 billion in outlay savings through FY2034 relative to the original FY2025 caps, a figure tied to lower discretionary outlays and the structure of the continuing resolution [2]. However, CBO also flagged a net deficit increase of about $7 billion through 2034 after accounting for changes in mandatory programs and the extension of IRS funding rescissions carried from FY2024, which CBO estimated raised deficits by larger sums in certain scenarios [2]. These conflicting signals—discretionary savings versus mandatory changes raising deficits—reflect the CR’s mixed mechanics: it constrains some spending lines while embedding rescissions and mandatory adjustments that push budget totals upward in net terms.
4. Program winners, losers, and the “anomalies” that matter
Although aggregate funding is level, the CR includes targeted increases and decreases across appropriations titles: modest increases in Defense, Homeland Security, and Labor/HHS/Education, and reductions in Military Construction, VA, Transportation, and HUD compared with FY2024 line items [2]. The statute explicitly funds specific programs—examples called out include large figures for certain Commerce‑Justice‑Science sections and for Labor/HHS/ED accounts—while also extending targeted health programs like community health centers and special diabetes initiatives [3] [4]. The anomalies are the sole mechanism for these deviations; they are typically negotiated to placate stakeholders while preserving a clean passage narrative.
5. Extensions, program continuations, and operational priorities
The CR extends many statutory authorities and program funding streams into FY2025, notably community health centers, special diabetes programs, Medicare‑dependent hospital payments, and a significant boost to WIC totaling about $7.6 billion for the program [3] [4]. It also included operational priorities often emphasized by proponents—pay raises for junior enlisted personnel, full VA health funding, air traffic control investments, and support for federal wildland firefighters—framed as preserving essential services without new unrelated riders [4]. These continuations underline the law’s intent to keep day‑to‑day federal services functioning and to protect politically salient programs during the ongoing appropriations cycle.
6. Competing narratives: fiscal restraint vs. program protection
Supporters characterize the CR as a responsible, clean vehicle that avoids partisan policy riders and protects veterans, troops, and core services; they highlight modest programmatic increases and targeted investments as necessary and pragmatic [4]. Critics note that although the CR curtails some discretionary growth, embedded IRS rescissions and mandatory changes balloon deficits in net estimates, and that level funding masks significant shifts that disadvantage some domestic programs [2]. Both portrayals are rooted in the same data: the CR preserves FY2024 baselines while using anomalies and rescissions to adjust priorities—an approach that produces both continuity and contested fiscal tradeoffs documented in CBO and legislative summaries from March–April 2025 [2] [1].