S-2587-119
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 140.
Sponsored by Shelley Capito (R-WV)
What it does
This bill would appropriate funds for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for fiscal year 2026 (ending September 30, 2026). It sets specific dollar amounts for hundreds of programs including job training, unemployment insurance, workplace safety, worker compensation, mine safety, pension insurance, and labor statistics. It also includes general provisions that restrict how funds may be used, cap salaries for grant recipients, and bar spending on goods produced with forced child labor.
Who benefits
Workers seeking job training or reemployment services through WIOA-funded programs; unemployed workers receiving unemployment insurance administration support; veterans seeking employment assistance and homeless veteran services; youth in YouthBuild and Job Corps programs; formerly incarcerated individuals receiving reentry employment grants; Native American communities receiving workforce grants; migrant and seasonal farmworkers; workers in Appalachian, Lower Mississippi Delta, and Northern Border regions; community college students in career training programs; disabled workers receiving employment policy support; coal miners and their families receiving black lung benefits; federal employees and longshore workers receiving compensation benefits; energy workers with occupational illness claims; small businesses and workers protected by OSHA and Mine Safety enforcement; retirees and pension holders protected by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation; workers in countries with U.S. trade agreements benefiting from international labor programs.
Who is hurt
Small farms with 10 or fewer employees in low-injury-rate industries, which would be exempt from most OSHA enforcement under this bill's funding restrictions; taxpayers who bear the cost of all appropriated spending; programs or agencies whose funding is reduced relative to prior years or current requests; unauthorized immigrants, who are generally ineligible for most funded workforce programs; private-sector competitors of apprenticeship programs that receive federal subsidies; vendors and contractors who may face salary caps on federally funded work; agencies whose administrative flexibility is constrained by the bill's general provisions.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this bill funds essential workforce infrastructure that keeps millions of Americans employed and economically secure — including $3.97 billion for job training, $1.76 billion for Job Corps, and $395 million for senior employment programs — while maintaining critical safety nets like unemployment insurance administration and black lung benefits for coal miners. They contend the bill reflects careful bipartisan committee work, directing funds to proven programs with measurable outcomes, and that provisions like the OSHA small-farm exemption and salary caps protect taxpayers and reduce regulatory burden on low-risk employers without compromising worker safety.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that annual appropriations bills of this scale — spanning three cabinet departments and dozens of agencies — lack the transparency and accountability needed for responsible governance, with billions directed through earmarks and congressionally directed spending that bypass competitive merit review. They contend that funding levels for key programs may be insufficient relative to inflation and growing workforce needs, that the OSHA enforcement exemptions for small employers leave workers in those settings without adequate protections, and that salary caps on grant recipients may deter qualified professionals from administering federally funded programs in high cost-of-living areas.
Constitutional context
Congress's power to appropriate funds derives from the Spending Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 1) and is among its most foundational authorities. No significant constitutional tension arises from the core appropriations function here. However, provisions that delegate spending discretion to the Secretary of Labor — such as allowing fund transfers between programs and waiving statutory requirements for outlying areas — could face post-Loper Bright scrutiny if agencies interpret their discretion broadly, since courts now independently assess whether statutory language authorizes agency action.
Checks and balances
Congress holds the power of the purse under this bill, directing specific dollar amounts to executive branch agencies; the executive branch (Secretary of Labor, HHS, and Education) gains implementation authority, but is constrained by detailed spending directives, salary caps, transfer limits, and 15-day advance notification requirements to the Appropriations Committees before any fund transfers.
Historical precedent
Annual appropriations bills for these three departments have been enacted every fiscal year for decades; the structure, program mix, and general provisions in this bill closely follow prior-year versions of the same legislation.