Legislative 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

1124 Pages·1993·33.2 MB·English

by  United States. Congress. House. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Legislative

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 rank-
ing 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 com-
mittee, 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 juris-
diction 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 appro-
priations 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 expendi-
tures 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; occasion-
ally saving some money, often paying the price in terms of quality
as we saw at the House restaurant. We can also shift to the execu-
tive 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 re-
lationship 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 direct-
ed 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 pro-
vide 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, enti-
ties, 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,