Referred to the House Committee on Appropriations.
This bill appropriates, from Treasury funds, whatever sums are necessary during any lapse in FY2025 appropriations to pay pay and allowances for active-duty and reservists on active or inactive-duty training. It also authorizes pay for Department of Defense and (when applicable) Coast Guard civilian employees and contractors whom the Secretary determines support those service members.
Progressives focus on inclusivity for civilians and contractors.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill succinctly establishes an appropriation authority to continue pay and allowances for military personnel (and certain supporting civilians and contractors) during a FY2025 lapse in appropriations, and it includes basic coverage definitions and termination triggers.
This bill appropriates, from Treasury funds, whatever sums are necessary during any lapse in FY2025 appropriations to pay pay and allowances for active-duty and reservists on active or inactive-duty training.
It also authorizes pay for Department of Defense and (when applicable) Coast Guard civilian employees and contractors whom the Secretary determines support those service members.
The authority terminates upon enactment of relevant appropriations, an appropriations Act without such funding, or January 1, 2026.
Single-purpose continuity bills historically attract support; contractor coverage and fiscal concerns are the main risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill succinctly establishes an appropriation authority to continue pay and allowances for military personnel (and certain supporting civilians and contractors) during a FY2025 lapse in appropriations, and it includes basic coverage definitions and termination triggers. However, it omits several implementation and fiscal particulars that are commonly expected for appropriation-authority statutes.
Progressives focus on inclusivity for civilians and contractors.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives focus on inclusivity for civilians and contractors.
Likely supportive; sees it as protecting service members, lower-income personnel, and families during shutdowns.
Appreciates inclusion of supporting civilian employees and some contractors, while noting oversight and equity concerns.
Generally supportive as a pragmatic measure to protect national security and avoid harm to servicemembers.
Wants narrow, time-limited authority and clearer eligibility definitions to limit fiscal and precedent risks.
Likely supportive overall because it ensures troops are paid and readiness is preserved, but cautious about circumventing the appropriations process and extending pay to contractors.
Prefers narrow scope limited to uniformed personnel.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Single-purpose continuity bills historically attract support; contractor coverage and fiscal concerns are the main risks.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives focus on inclusivity for civilians and contractors.
Single-purpose continuity bills historically attract support; contractor coverage and fiscal concerns are the main risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill succinctly establishes an appropriation authority to continue pay and allowances for military personnel (and certain supporting civilians and contractors) during a FY…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.