Table Of Content

LEGISUTIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS l^'^ FOR 1994 Y4.AP6/i;L52/994/PT.2 ^Qg Legislative Branch Appropriations f. . . A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPKOPRIATIONS HOUSE OF EEPEESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SUBCOMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS VIC FAZIO, California, Chairman JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin RON PACKARD, California JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania CHARLES H. TAYLOR, North Carolina BOB CARR, Michigan JIM CHAPMAN. Texas Edward E. Lombard, StaffAssistant PART 2 FISCAL YEAR 1994 LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATION REQUEST ?--- m 5 833 "^^^tel^: Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations LEGISUTIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1994 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SUBCOMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS VIC FAZIO, California, Chairman JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin RON PACKARD, California JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania CHARLES H. TAYLOR, North Carolina BOB CARR, Michigan JIM CHAPMAN, Texas Edward E. Lombard, StaffAssistant PART 2 FISCAL YEAR 1994 LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATION REQUEST Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 66-654 O WASHINGTON 1993 : ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-040784-2 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS WILLIAM H. NATCHER, Kentucky, Chairman JAMIE L. WHITTEN, Mississippi, JOSEPH M. McDADE, Pennsylvania Vice Chairman JOHN T. MYERS, Indiana NEAL SMITH, Iowa C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois RALPH REGULA, Ohio DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin BOB LIVINGSTON, Louisiana LOUIS STOKES, Ohio JERRY LEWIS, California TOM BEVILL, Alabama JOHN EDWARD PORTER, Illinois JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky CHARLES WILSON, Texas JOE SKEEN, New Mexico NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia MARTIN OLAV SABO, Minnesota TOM Delay, Texas JULIAN C. DIXON, California JIM KOLBE, Arizona VIC FAZIO, California DEAN A. GALLO, New Jersey W. G. (BILL) HEFNER, North Carolina BARBARA F. VUCANOVICH, Nevada STENY H. HOYER, Maryland JIM LIGHTFOOT, Iowa BOB CARR, Michigan RON PACKARD, California RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois SONNY CALLAHAN, Alabama RONALD D. COLEMAN, Texas HELEN DELICH BENTLEY, Maryland ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia JAMES T. WALSH, New York JIM CHAPMAN, Texas CHARLES H. TAYLOR, North Carolina MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio DAVID L. HOBSON, Ohio DAVID E. SKAGGS, Colorado ERNEST J. ISTOOK, Jr., Oklahoma DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina HENRY BONILLA, Texas NANCY PELOSI, California PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana THOMAS M. FOGLIETTA, Pennsylvania ESTEBAN EDWARD TORRES, California GEORGE (BUDDY) DARDEN, Georgia NITA M. LOWEY, New York RAY THORNTON, Arkansas JOSfi E. SERRANO, New York ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia DOUGLAS "PETE" PETERSON, Florida JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts ED PASTOR, Arizona CARRIE P. MEEK, Florida Frederick G. Mohrman, Clerk and StaffDirector (II) LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1994 Monday, January 25, 1993. Mr. Fazio. This is the first session of the 1994 fiscal year Legisla- tive Branch Appropriations Subcommittee hearings. This morning we are going to take up the issues that I think are of central im- portance as to how we run the House ofRepresentatives. But before we get to that, I would like to introduce what is a very dramatically changed makeup of this subcommittee. First of we have a new Ranking Member, although not a new Member all, of the House Appropriations Committee; in fact, he is third ranking among the Republicans. He is a very senior Republican member, Bill Young ofFlorida. Then we have Ron Packard, a colleague of mine from California, whom we look forward to working with in this capacity, having worked with him on so many other things. Also on the Republican side, a gentleman whom I understand is on his way in from the air- port, Charles Taylor of North Carolina, a new Member of our committee, along with Mr. Packard. On the Democrat side, I would like to welcome Jim Moran from nearby Virginia, who has a great deal of interest in the work of this committee, and who has made this his first choice among his subco—mmittees. We are glad to hav—e him here. We also have David Obey who will join us later on and John Murtha, two senior Members of this subcommittee who have been with us for a number of years. We also have two other relatively new Members of our full committee. Bob Carr and Jim Chapman. Bob Carr, of course, is chairing the Transportation Subcommittee and Jim Chapman sits with me on Energy and Water. We have, except for Mr. Obey, Mr. Murtha, and myself, a relatively new group of people. Mr. Natcher and Mr. McDade, ofcourse, serve ex officio. I would like to insert in the record at this point the actual jurisdiction of the subcommittee established under the rules of the full Committee on Appropriations. That will be confirmed at a meeting sometime on Wednesday. [The information follows:] Legislative Branch HouseofRepresentatives. JointItems. Architectofthe Capitol {ExceptSenate items). Botanic Garden. Congressional BudgetOffice. Copyright RoyaltyTribunal. General AccountingOffice. GovernmentPrintingOffice. (1) John C. Stennis Center. Library ofCongress: Congressional Research Service; National Film Preservation Board. Office ofTechnology Assessment. United StatesCapitol Preservation Commission. Mr. Fazio. I would like now to take up those matters that relate to the House of Representatives. I will skip over at the moment some additional comments, but put them in the record. There are a lot of people here who have other things to do. Before I put those remarks in the record, we are talking about a $2.1 billion appropriations bill, not including the Senate items. We are talking about a significant allocation of funds but not one that has grown outside the bounds ofwhat we have been spending in general in the Feder- al Government. In fact, less than we have been spending on a per year rate of increase in the executive branch. There are a number of pressures on this committee. I think this year will be no different. CBO indicated we cut our outlay expenditures by 6.5 percent last year. This year, I believe we will be cut- ting this bill beyond last year's level once again. It is anybody's guess as to what that cut will be, but I know we indicated to a lot of people who are appearing this week and next week that they ought to be ready for sizable reductions. There are really only three ways we can do this. We can simply cut across the board and hope for a better performance within each of the agencies whose budgets we review. We can contract out as we have occasionally done in this branch of government; occasionally saving some money, often paying the price in terms of quality as we saw at the House restaurant. We can also shift to the executive branch. That may not, ofcourse, save the taxpayer any money, but it does reduce some of the burden on us the legislation branch. But there are severe and significant questions of jurisdiction and historic relationship that need to be dealt with if we try to do any ofthat. So our task essentially is the same as it has always been. That is to get the job done with a certain amount of quality and consisten- cy, protecting the prerogatives of the legislative branch; and at the same time doing it, as our colleagues seem to require, with less and less funding. I think what I will do is place my remaining remarks in the record and ask my colleagues at this point if they wish to make introductory remarks, beginning with Mr. Young. [The information follows:] STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN FAZIO 3 The budget that we are going to consider totals $2.1 billion ($2,075,757,000). The total does not include Senate items which will be considered in the other body. Of the portion of this budget which will be considered by the Subcommittee, $1.23 billion ($1,233,761,000) is for Congressional Operations only. The balance of the funds requested, which total $842 million ($841,996,000), support statutory and administrative activities of the Legislative Branch which are performed for the Executive Branch and for the public-at-large. These activities include such agencies as the Library of Congress, Copyright Royalty Tribunal, Government Printing Office, and the General Accounting Office. These funds for the Legislative Branch are primarily for staff and computers. We don't have large hardware or grant programs. This is primarily an administrative operation. We should point out that there is far more than $2.1 billion in appropriations included. There are a number of other — activities managed by the agencies covered by our bill a number of trust and gift funds, the copyright royalty fund, service fees and other reimbursements. There is also the Government Printing Office revolving fund which is the method GPO uses to provide printing services for the entire Federal government. Under Title 44 and the Government Corporation Act, we annually authorize the operation of this fund. That is almost $1 billion which is not scored against the bill because it is derived from charges to other agency appropriations. The actual funding covered by the agencies in the Legislative bill, therefore, is not $2.1 billion (plus the Senate,), but over $4.5 billion estimated for FY 1994. So the sun and the scope of these activities are much larger than most realize. I'd like also to make some comparisons from last year's bill. Last year, the fiscal year 1993 bill was a decrease of 1.25% under the fiscal year 1992 appropriation for Legislative Branch activities. In total outlays, the CBO said we reduced expenditures by some 6.5%. Under procedures set up by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, the process that is gone through to develop the legislative and judicial branch budgets is a little different than the executive branch budget. In the case of the executive branch, the departments and agencies (Defense, Commerce, EPA, etc.) go through a budget review by the Office of Management and Budget, acting for the President. After that executive branch process is completed, the President presents the fiscal year budget to the Congress. With the legislative and judicial branch budgets, the procedure is different. There is a separation of powers protection that must be safeguarded. Under the law I have cited, the 0MB and the President must pass through the budget requests presented by these branches without alteration. That procedure was designed to be a reasonable and workable protection of the constitutional distinction among the three independent branches of government. When we first receive and learn about legislative branch budgets, they are as contained or as will be contained in the President's budget. There is no OMB/vniite House "interlocutor" putting a political or funding policy "spin" on the agencies when they submit their budgets. The internal processes of the legislative agencies are the only constraint on their budgets before they see the light of day. So the task of making reductions in these budgets falls upon this Committee. As we go through these hearings, we will review each request carefully and ask whether or not it is essential to the workings of the Legislative Branch, or can be cut back. — I think our record has been good we have held the Legislative bill to an average growth of 5.4% over the past 10 — years. That's less than the average growth of prices so we have really had a level budget in real terms. The fiscal year 1994 budget does represent an increase over 1993 appropriations. However, the Committee will undoubtedly make — reductions when we mark the bill up just as we do every year. Comments From Mr. Young Mr. Young. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I would like to say I look forward to continuing the excellent relationship that we have enjoyed over the years £is we sit officially on the subcommittee. I apologize in advance for those on our side. We are new to this subcommittee, and tend to be very curious. There may be some answers to questions that you would know automatically that we will have to ask about. If you will bear with us, we would like to do that in order to be responsible in our ap- proach to the funding ofthe legislative branch. Personally, and each Member can speak for themselves, but I tend to agree with you, I don't like the across-the-board cuts. I don't think just lopping off a percent of everything is the way to make reductions in spending. If there are going to be reductions, I prefer to target them to areas where we believe they can be directed without adversely affecting the operations of the House. Oper- ation of the House, of course, is essential because it is the peoples' House. I am not going to extend my remarks any further than this. You will find I don't like to take a lot of time making speeches or state- ments. I tend to have a lot ofquestions on occasion. I would like to ask one thing, because of the change in the orga- nization of the House structure in the last Congress, some of the Members, I am sure, understand exactly what happened and who the players are. I don't. I wonder if anybody has a diagram that shows the various agencies of the House, who runs those particular departments that we can look at. Donn, do you have anything like that? Mr. Anderson. Mr. Young, we have our own organizational chart. The changes have not been effected yet except for the trans- fer of the General Counsel's Office, which was done by an amend- ment to the House rules. The changes will take place as directed and scheduled by the Committee on House Administration. For the time being, each of the administrative officers is still responsible for the matters that were under their jurisdiction in the last Con- gress save for the Office of the Postmaster, which has been formal- ly transferred to the Office of the Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services. Mr. Young. Do you have a diagram of the way that it will be? Mr. Anderson. We don't. Mr. Young. One of those charts with the boxes and the wires? Mr. Anderson. We don't have an updated one now. We can provide written information for the record. Mr. Young. That will be helpful to me. [The information follows:] Pursuant to H.Res. 423, the "House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992", the responsibility for the operation ofthe Office of Finance and all functions, entities, duties and responsibilities under the House Postmaster have been transferred tothe DirectorofNonlegislative and Financial Services. Under the terms of the resolution, the following functions and entities are pro- posed to be transferred to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services: Office of Employee Assistance, pay and mileage of Members, House Information Systems, Office Furnishings, Office Supply Service, Office Systems Management, Placement Office, Special Services Office, Telecommunications, Telephone Ex- change, Typewriter Repair, Barber Shop, Beauty Shop, House Restaurant System,