H.R. 1968: Full-Year Continuing Appropriations & Extensions Act

Context

Every year, Congress is required to pass 12 appropriations bills that fund federal agencies—from defense and transportation to food safety inspectors and national parks. When lawmakers can’t agree by the start of the fiscal year on October 1, the government runs out of legal authority to spend money, triggering a shutdown. That means federal workers are furloughed, services grind to a halt, and programs that millions of Americans rely on face disruption.

That’s where continuing resolutions (CRs) come in. These stopgap measures temporarily extend last year’s funding levels, buying Congress more time to negotiate without closing the government. But they also come with trade-offs: agencies can’t start new projects, planning is hamstrung, and uncertainty persists for everyone from the Pentagon to small businesses waiting on contracts.

The Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R.1968) was introduced to keep the government open while broader budget negotiations play out. Lawmakers framed it not as a long-term fix, but as a necessary bridge to prevent economic harm and disruption for millions of Americans.

Key Provisions

1. Extends government funding through September 30, 2025.
   Keeps the federal government operational for the remainder of FY 2025 by maintaining FY 2024 spending levels and avoiding a shutdown. This buys Congress more time to finalize full-year appropriations.
2. Adjusts spending ceilings. Raises defense spending slightly (about +$6 billion) while trimming nondefense spending (about –$13 billion).
3. Extends key public health and social programs. Preserves critical services by continuing authorities for programs like public health initiatives, Medicare, Medicaid, the National Flood Insurance Program, TANF, immigration-related programs, and more—all vital for ongoing operations and services.
4. Continues emergency authorities for fentanyl scheduling.
   Maintains the DEA’s ability to classify new fentanyl-related substances as Schedule I through September 30, 2025, to keep pace with evolving drug threats.
5. Extends cybersecurity and security measures. Keeps live the Department of Homeland Security’s National Cybersecurity Protection System authorization and unmanned aircraft system mitigation authorities, plus related DOJ tools and assessments, ensuring continuity in security posture.
6. Preserves whistleblower protections. Extends Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) whistleblower program authorities to continue incentivizing disclosure of violations through September 30, 2025.
   Wikipedia+4House Document Repository+4Congress.gov+4
7. Boosts health-related allocations. Increases funding for initiatives like Family‑to‑Family Health Information Centers—from $3 million to $6 million for FY 2025—and supports continuity of coverage and access.
8. Delays reductions in Medicaid DSH payments. Postpones scheduled cuts for Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) Medicaid funding through 2028, giving hospitals more financial stability on the front lines.

Arguments For

1. Prevents a government shutdown, ensuring continuity of federal operations and public services.
2. Modest targeted investments bolster veterans’ healthcare, defense readiness, air traffic control, nutritional support, and housing initiatives.
3. Governable, “clean” legislation without ideological riders allows for smoother consensus and broader agreement.
4. Bipartisan compromise: Passage succeeded through support from both parties—some Democrats crossed to avoid a shutdown, and Republican leadership emphasized unity.

Arguments Against

1. Democratic objections. Many argued the bill failed to include vital disaster relief (e.g., for California) and did not address broader funding priorities or the debt ceiling responsibly.
2. Spending freeze drawback. Freezing most programs at FY2024 levels stalled potential increases for critical needs like climate, infrastructure, and domestic social programs—areas often championed by progressive lawmakers.

Final Thoughts

At its core, the Continuing Appropriations Act is less about reshaping federal priorities and more about keeping the lights on. Supporters view it as a necessary compromise to avoid the economic and social fallout of a shutdown, while critics stress the missed opportunity to address urgent needs or set longer-term fiscal strategy. The measure underscores both the value and the limits of stopgap funding: it buys time and stability in the short run, but leaves many bigger debates unresolved for another day.