This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Government Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance). U.S. Congress Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is about one (or many) thing(s).

Is there any reason to have this list ? It's long and yet missing entire years and some CRs during the years mentioned. I'm inclined to just point to Thomas.loc.gov list or some external cite that describes them bu do not see why the list inside WP provides value. Should I just delete it ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markbassett (talk • contribs) 04:24, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For 2015 and 2016, the write-ups for the continuing resolutions indicate how much funding the bills provided. However, the amounts indicated are misleading. The amounts shown reflect annualized totals for the bills, but the continuing resolutions don't cover the full year. So if a continuing resolution covers 70 days, it only makes available 19.2% (70/365) of the annualized level it is based upon. And whatever full-year appropriation amount is eventually provided, any amount provided under the continuing resolution counts against that. So if a continuing resolution were passed covering a quarter of the year based on an annualized level of $1.0 trillion (so making $250 billion available), but the eventual full-year appropriation was for $1.1 trillion, the total for the year would be $1.1 trillion, regardless of the fact that the spending rate was different during the course of the continuing resolution. —Salton Finneger (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and changed it to indicate the amounts reflected annualized totals, rather than the amount actually made available during the duration of the CR. —Salton Finneger (talk) 19:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Continuing resolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110113150949/http://appropriations.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=246 to http://appropriations.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=246
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.budget.senate.gov/republican/public/index.cfm/2015/9/budget-bulletin-2016-continuing-resolution

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:17, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are more urgent legislative matters, than appropriations? I suggest saying "other urgent legislative matters" but other than declaring war (Pearl Harbor), I cannot think of even one more urgent than funding the federal budget.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 13:38, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]