    [House Hearing, 108 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

              OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                       COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                          ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                 HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, APRIL 28, 2004

                                   __________

          Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration

                            U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    94-003                        WASHINGTON : 2004
    _____________________________________________________________________
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
    Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800
    Fax: (202) 512-2250  Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC  20402-0001

                       COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                            BOB NEY, Ohio, Chairman
    VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan           JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
    JOHN L. MICA, Florida                  Ranking Minority Member
    JOHN LINDER, Georgia                 JUANITA MILLENDER-McDONALD,
    JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California            California
    THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York         ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania

                               Professional Staff

                         Paul Vinovich, Staff Director
                    George Shevilin, Minority Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Statements of Bruce James, Public Printer of the United States,
      GPO; Marc Nichols, Inspector General, GPO; and Linda Koontz,
      General Accounting Office......................................     7
        Statement of Bruce James.....................................     7
        Statement of Marc A. Nichols.................................    19
        State of Linda Koontz........................................    27
    Statements of Ben Cooper, Printing Industries of America; George
      Lord, Chairman of the Joint Council of Unions, Government
      Printing Office; William Boarman, Communications Workers of
      America; and Janis Johnston, University of Illinois at
      Champaign-Urbana...............................................    74
        Statement of Ben Cooper......................................    74
        Statement of George Lord.....................................    82
        Statement of William Boarman.................................    88
        Statement of Janis Johnston..................................    94

                           GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 2004

                              House of Representatives,
                             Committee on House Administration,
                                                       Washington, D.C.
        The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room
    1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Robert W. Ney
    (chairman of the committee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Ney, Linder, Larson, Millender-
    McDonald, and Brady.
        Staff present: Jeff Janas, Professional Staff Member; Maria
    Robinson, Policy Director; Fred Hay, General Counsel; George
    Shevlin, Minority Staff Director; Charles Howell, Minority
    Chief Counsel; and Michael Harrison, Minority Professional
    Staff Member.
        The Chairman. The committee will come to order. And we will
    begin today by welcoming Congressman Brady. Other Members, I am
    sure, will be joining us. I wanted to start by introducing--we
    have a special guest in the audience--Karim Sayed. If you could
    stand up, Karim. Karim is with the Parliament in Egypt. He is
    over here today. So welcome to the United States and to the
    U.S. Capitol.
        The committee is meeting today to hold an oversight hearing
    on the Government Printing Office. I think it is important that
    we bring to light the many changes that have been taking place
    at the GPO.
        The purpose of this committee hearing is to discuss the
    ways in which GPO has been improving its operations; the recent
    General Accounting Office, or GAO as we all know it, report
    examining Federal printing, information dissemination; and the
    progress of the Office of Management and Budget.
        For nearly 150 years, the Government Printing Office has
    provided invaluable service to the American people by
    producing, procuring and disseminating printed and electronic
    publications produced in the legislative and executive branch
    so that every citizen has access to the wealth of information
    that is produced on our behalf.
        I want to welcome our Ranking Member, Congressman Larson of
    Connecticut.
        Historically, as advancements in technology have altered
    the means for meeting its mission, the GPO has embraced these
    new technologies to more efficiently deliver information to the
    American public. The GPO disseminates more than 35 million
    documents per month on line via GPO Access, one of the Federal
    Government's largest and most heavily used Web sites.
        We once again are at a crucial juncture requiring a vast
    transformation of the ways in which GPO does business. When
    electronic distribution of documents over the Internet arrived
    in the early 1990s, few in the printing industry anticipated
    the sweeping publishing revolution that would occur inside of
    10 years. Few at GPO imagined the day when print media would
    become secondary to or even potentially replaced by documents
    created digitally by authors and distributed electronically
    from their source.
        However, this is now a reality. Under the authority of the
    Joint Committee on Printing, (JCP) and the stewardship of the
    Public Printer, Mr. Bruce James, GPO has worked to meet this
    new reality, maximizing cost-effectiveness across all of its
    operations.
        With JCP approval, the GPO last year carried out an initial
    round of a very successful voluntary retirement incentive
    program which has generated an annual savings, I want to repeat
    savings, of 21.7 million to the taxpayers of the country. Due
    to the success of this buyout, the JCP subsequently authorized
    a second round of buyouts for this year aimed at achieving an
    annual cost savings of 16.5 million.
        In addition, the JCP authorized the GPO to close several
    areas of its business that were consistently losing money. In
    2003, the Government Printing Office closed their remaining 13
    retail book stores, one of which was in the State of Ohio where
    I am from, with a cost savings of 1.5 million, and their ink
    shop where GPO was still making its own ink. Through their
    inspector general, they determined it was cheaper to buy ink
    elsewhere, resulting in 1.1 million in savings over the next 5
    years. With JCP approval, Mr. James has been cutting costs at
    the GPO while maintaining a high level of service.
        To realize its vision of a primarily digital future, GPO
    will need to look at what type of facility will fully support
    this type of operation. With JCP approval, GPO has begun the
    information-gathering process with respect to the possibility
    of relocating their headquarters from their oversized facility
    on North Capitol Street to a more modern and efficiently
    manageable facility that will meet the emerging and future
    needs of the agency.
        I look forward to hearing testimony today from Linda
    Koontz, Information Management Issues Director of GAO, who has
    just concluded an extensive and thorough examination of GPO
    operations and is making recommendations on how GPO can
    transform to keep up with general trends in the printing
    industry.
        GAO concluded that GPO's print procurement business has
    seen a loss in revenue in at least 3 of the last 5 years.
    Although the printing work that GPO traditionally did is in
    decline, the good news is that the agencies are generally
    satisfied with GPO's products and services. Most responded that
    they knew more about what GPO has to offer and that they need
    to expand their electronic dissemination programs, which fall
    in line with Mr. James' strategic planning for the
    organization.
        I look forward to hearing testimony from the panels. Before
    I turn over to our Ranking Member, I also want to say something
    that needs to be addressed publicly, and I have said this
    before, when we were over at a Congressional Research Service
    (CRS) event. I came here in 1994 and started serving in 1995.
    We went from shut it down, take it apart, dismember it, to
    different ideas people had, to throwing our hands up in the air
    and not knowing particularly what to do. And I think under your
    stewardship, Mr. James, as the Public Printer--and I know from
    the phone calls that you have made and your staff--you have
    taken the right approach to test ideas, to think outside of the
    box, to see what works or what doesn't work. So I think that
    personally, after 9 years of dealing with this issue, I believe
    that we are on the right track due to your stewardship. So I
    just want to publicly commend you, and all of your staff
    because I know you always speak about the people that work
    there and you always compliment them. With that I will turn to
    our distinguished Ranking Member Mr. Larson.
        Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to the
    panelists. We thank you for availing yourselves today for this
    important hearing. This is the first oversight hearing on the
    Government Printing Office since July of 2002.
        Much has happened since July of 2002. A new Public Printer,
    Bruce James, has taken office. He has appointed a new inspector
    general, Marc Nichols, who we had the pleasure of meeting
    yesterday, and who joins us here today. Both gentlemen come to
    the GPO directly from the private sector, Bruce after a
    successful career in the printing industry in California, Marc
    Nichols from a law practice in Colorado.
        Since taking office, as the Chairman has pointed out, Bruce
    has reorganized the GPO's top management and has accrued
    significant savings. He has embarked on a strategic planning
    process and made other changes in direction that are laudable.
    This hearing offers Bruce an opportunity to provide this
    committee with better understanding of his vision for the GPO
    of the future.
        This is a normal part of our process, and, again, I commend
    the Chairman for holding this hearing. And we welcome it, as I
    trust all of the panelists welcome it as much as we do. This
    hearing offers us the opportunity to hear from others
    interested in these matters, including the General Accounting
    Office, organized labor, the printing industry, and the library
    community, panels that we will hear from later.
        Yesterday we had an important memorial service that took
    place at the Library of Congress. They memorialized a former
    Librarian of Congress, Daniel J. Boorstin. And I was struck at
    that service, again, and I am most interested in hearing from
    the library community, because you are the protectors of
    knowledge and of the historic record. The Chairman and I
    happened to be at a CRS-sponsored class last evening that was
    conducted by Judith Schneider at the Smithsonian Institute. And
    I mentioned this last night about Boorstin's remarks, talking
    about libraries and the principal responsibility that all of
    them share both from the GPO's perspective, but most
    importantly from the library's perspective. They are the
    cathedrals or the only place where one still has the
    opportunity to ask the unimagined question and receive
    unwelcome answers.
        That indeed is a tremendous responsibility and one that
    should be cherished. It is one that makes our government unique
    from every other government in this pursuit of knowledge and
    this important keeper of the records.
        And so, again, I laud the Chairman, and I look forward to
    hearing from the printing industry and organized labor, who I
    know have concerns, as we project out into the future and look
    at what Bruce James' vision for that future is going to be. But
    I am heartened by the fact that we have the ability and
    capability to move forward into that future collectively, and
    with the support that is necessitated to continue to keep the
    public records and that knowledge there for access to the
    general public.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank the gentleman for his comments.
        [The statement of Mr. Larson follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.002

        The Chairman. With that we will begin with the first panel,
    which consists of, Mr. Bruce James, the Public Printer of the
    United States, GPO; Marc Nichols, Inspector General, GPO; and
    Linda Koontz, General Accounting Office. Welcome to all three.
    We will start with the Public Printer, Mr. James.

    STATEMENTS OF BRUCE JAMES, PUBLIC PRINTER OF THE UNITED STATES,
     GPO; MARC NICHOLS, INSPECTOR GENERAL, GPO; AND LINDA KOONTZ,
                       GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

                        STATEMENT OF BRUCE JAMES

        Mr. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the
    Committee. I am pleased to be here this morning as you conduct
    this oversight hearing of the GPO and our plans to transform it
    to meet the demands of the 21st century. I will be happy to
    summarize my prepared statement, which has been submitted for
    the record.
        The GPO is one of the Nation's oldest and most venerable
    agencies within which the official version of every great
    American state paper since President Lincoln's time has been
    produced. I can't begin to tell you what an incredible honor it
    is to head this distinguished institution.
        The GPO's employees, in my view, are the most talented and
    dedicated group of professional men and women in the Federal
    Government. They perform demanding tasks under demanding
    schedules, and they are committed to providing Congress,
    Federal agencies, and the public with the best products and
    services possible. I have nothing but the highest regard for
    them, and for their representatives in organized labor.
        The support and guidance that we have been getting from
    Congress has been simply amazing. Your leadership of the Joint
    Committee on Printing, Mr. Chairman, with the able assistance
    of the Joint Committee's staff director Maria Robinson, has
    been invaluable to us.
        Equally invaluable has been the support and guidance we
    have been getting from the appropriations committees and other
    Members, officers and staff with the House and Senate, with
    whom we work closely every day.
        Just as gratifying has been the strong support we have been
    getting from our customers throughout the Federal agencies,
    from the public that uses Government information, and from our
    long-standing partners in the Government information community,
    including the printing equipment industries, the library
    community, and the information and technology industries. Their
    advice and input has been extremely helpful. Without their
    input, Mr. Chairman, we would be lost.
        We need their support now more than ever, because the fact
    is that GPO is at the very epicenter of technological change
    that is upending virtually every aspect of Federal information
    policy. There is no time for us to rest on our laurels from the
    successes achieved long ago. The 19th century is not coming
    back. Printing, once the world's only mass communications
    medium, has been eclipsed by revolutionary changes in
    electronic information technologies, principally the Internet.
    While printing will not disappear in our lifetime, its role in
    our lives and in the lives of those who depend on our products
    and services has been forever changed.
        Technological change has made it necessary to rethink what
    the GPO is and what it does. It is forcing us to think about
    how we can lead the way to an information policy that is
    relevant to and necessary for the demands of the Federal
    Government and the public in the 21st century. Our
    stakeholders, our employees, Congress, our customers, and our
    partners all know that. They are ready for change, and they are
    ready for the GPO to lead the way. Over the past 16 months,
    with the help of the General Accounting Office and others, this
    is the essential task we have been confronting.
        I am strongly encouraged by the outcome of the GAO's study
    of Federal printing and information dissemination, which is
    nearing completion. Their findings, which I have summarized in
    my prepared statement, and which they will discuss this
    morning, underscore the strategic direction we are headed. That
    direction is based on a straightforward and uncomplicated
    conclusion.
        The time has come for the GPO to fully assume its
    responsibilities as the Government's primary resource for
    gathering, cataloging, producing, providing and preserving its
    published information in all forms. This is the GPO's historic
    mission, tracing its beginning to 1813, when the amendment for
    Federal Depository Library Program was first enacted. But to
    fully assume it, the GPO must embrace its historic mission
    using the technology of the 21st century, not the past. This is
    the central concept of the strategic vision that we have begun
    presenting to our stakeholders throughout the Government and
    the private sector.
        The implications of this vision are clear. First, the GPO
    needs to take the lead in creating digital standards for
    official documents of the United States Government. The GPO
    must deploy the technology needed by its agency customers and
    the public to gather and produce digital documents in a
    uniformly structured database in order to authenticate
    documents disseminated over the Internet, and to preserve the
    information for permanent public access.
        The GPO needs to work with its library partners to develop
    a new model for no-fee access through the FDLP, which must
    include a fully digital database of all past, present, and
    future U.S. Government documents, augmented database search and
    retrieval tools, and increased training to enable librarians to
    better serve the 21st century information needs of their
    patrons.
        The GPO needs to develop a customer service model that
    partners with its agency customers at the program level in
    order to provide a range of support and solutions for their
    publishing needs and responsibilities, from creation to
    dissemination, whether digital or printed publications.
        The GPO will need to make significant investments in
    workforce development in order to train its existing employees
    in the skills required for 21st century printing and
    information processing.
        Finally, in order to efficiently and effectively meet the
    continuing in-house printing needs of Congress and its agency
    customers, and to provide for a modern information processing
    environment, the GPO will need to relocate to a facility sized
    and suited for its present and future requirements.
        We are getting sound positive feedback from our
    stakeholders as we present this vision. Our stakeholders are
    excited by the prospects this vision represents, and they want
    to work with us to carry it out. We look forward to that
    collaborative process. After fully consulting with them, we
    will make the necessary adjustments to our plan and move
    forward. We expect to have a plan in place later this year.
        In themeantime, we haven't waited to begin making changes
    at the GPO. We are fixing things that needed fixing and putting in
    place the organization and systems that will help carry out our plan.
        The past 16 months have been a period of outstanding
    accomplishment for the GPO resulting in significant
    improvements and savings. These accomplishments could not have
    been achieved without the support and guidance of the Joint
    Committee on Printing, and we deeply appreciate that, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Among those achievements is the very positive reception we
    have had from our appropriations committees on both the House
    and the Senate side. In fact, we are appearing before Chairman
    Kingston's legislative subcommittee this afternoon at 1:00. We
    are extremely fortunate to have received their full support for
    our funding request for fiscal year 2004, including investment
    funds for the buyout we conducted that eased the way for more
    than 300 staff to retire last year. That action, along with
    another buyout we are currently conducting with our own
    finances, will reduce overall staffing by more than 500
    positions, or 20 percent, and achieve cumulative savings of
    more than $38 million annually. Baring any inforseen
    circumstances, these savings will position us to complete this
    fiscal year at or near the break-even point, ending a period of
    sustained losses in the GPO's finances.
        We are seeking the support of the appropriations committees
    again in fiscal year 2005. We are able this year to propose
    appropriation requirements for our congressional Printing and
    Binding and Salaries and Expenses appropriations that are
    actually less than the amounts we received for this fiscal
    year.
        In addition to those requests, we are seeking investment
    funds for essential technology improvements that will generate
    future savings, as well as an independent appropriation for our
    Inspector General. We understand the limits of available
    funding, however, and depending on the decision of the
    Committees, we are committed to do our part to help meet
    funding targets for the legislative branch this year.
        Mr. Chairman, I understand that you have a full slate of
    witnesses before you, and I don't want to use up any more of
    the Committee's time. Once again, I have the distinct honor to
    serve one of the Federal Government's finest agencies, and I am
    blessed with a superb staff.
        We have a tough job ahead of us to map out GPO's future. We
    have already achieved a great deal with the support of the
    Joint Committee and the appropriations committees. With your
    continued help, and with the guidance and support of our
    stakeholder community, we will achieve fundamental change in
    the GPO that will provide lasting benefits to the American
    people. This concludes my remarks. And I will, of course, be
    happy to answer any questions the committee may have.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. James.
        [The statement of Mr. James follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.004

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.006

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.007

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.008

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.009

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.010

        The Chairman. Mr. Nichols, welcome.

                      STATEMENT OF MARC A. NICHOLS

        Mr. Nichols. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I
    appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. As you
    know, GPO is on the threshold of transforming into a 21st
    century digital facility under the leadership of Public Printer
    James. The Office of the Inspector General is dedicated to
    facilitating this transformation. The OIG offer an independent
    and objective means of keeping the Public Printer and Congress
    fully informed about problems and deficiencies relating to the
    administration and operations of the GPO. To meet these
    responsibilities, the OIG conducts audits, evaluations,
    investigations and inspections.
        My office is dedicated to partnering with the Public
    Printer to help the GPO improve its efficiency and
    effectiveness as the GPO transforms. As the GPO becomes a more
    technology- and content-driven agency, I expect the OIG
    universe to grow and the responsibilities associated therewith
    to increase significantly. As GPO's reliance on contractor
    support grows, the need for more advanced skill sets within OIG
    will be necessary to ensure that public assets are protected
    and used effectively. OIG human and other resources are
    critical to adequately monitor this increasingly complex and
    technical universe.
        My written comments highlight some pressing issues that the
    Public Printer and I agree face GPO. These include the
    headquarters building, workforce needs and training,
    information technology vulnerabilities, contracting processes,
    and internal controls.
        As GPO undergoes unprecedented changes, the OIG must adapt
    its resources to facilitate the transformation while continuing
    to meet the current and evolving obligations. Through new
    management initiatives and an improved cooperative relationship
    with GPO management, my office has provided substantive
    recommendations and has identified more than $19 million in
    audit, investigation, and inspection findings in the last
    reporting period. I attribute these results to a better focus
    on higher-priority matters affecting GPO programs, operations,
    and the financial bottom line.
        Let me summarize some key programs and initiatives that my
    office has undertaken recently. Through ongoing partnership
    with the Public Printer, the relationship between my office and
    GPO management has improved considerably. I have initiated a
    liaison program wherein senior members of my staff have been
    assigned responsibility for major GPO divisions to enhance the
    relationship between my office and GPO management in order to
    identify cost savings and efficiency opportunities.
        The Office of Audits conducted audit-related activities
    resulting in 14 recommendations for improvements that represent
    between $1 million and $2 million in potential cost savings per
    year, and identifying $100,000 in funds put to better use.
        The Office of Investigations has closed or referred 56
    matters to GPO management, and active cases are questioning
    more than $8 million.
        The Office of Administration and Inspections issued a
    report on GPO's network security, monitored security concerns
    in passport production, and aided GPO in confirming the
    approximately $542,000 in outstanding receivables for Federal
    Register work, and highlighted $9.6 million in additional
    receivables past due more than 90 days, recommending a new
    process that should help GPO recover payments from its customer
    agencies faster.
        I have spent much of the past year identifying unique
    opportunities and characteristics of the potential inspection,
    audit, and investigation jurisdiction over which I have
    responsibility. There are several examples that highlight the
    uniqueness of GPO's OIG.
        The OIG has a nonpersonnel audit universe of nearly 75
    percent of GPO's overall agency dollar responsibility. The OIG
    has jurisdiction over more than 16,000 contractors, almost
    2,300 of which are active at any given time, and who together
    generate more than 100,000 contracts per year.
        Additionally, there are considerable taxpayer dollars at
    stake. These include printing contracts totaling more than $650
    million annually, approximately $75 million in open GPO
    procurements, over $89.5 million in workers' compensation
    liability for the next decade.
        For fiscal year 2005, the OIG will have responsibility for
    monitoring a nearly $800 million GPO financial universe. Let me
    also note that the Public Printer has requested annual funding
    for the OIG by direct appropriation for fiscal year 2005. I
    believe direct appropriation will provide the OIG with the
    necessary independence and flexibility to monitor and evaluate
    GPO's rapidly changing operations.
        I believe the success of GPO depends not only on a clear
    vision and executable plan by the Public Printer, but also on a
    strong partnership between GPO and my office. This partnership
    depends on two-way communication based on mutual respect for
    the role that both the GPO and the OIG play. This communication
    will ensure that current and future needs of Congress will be
    met, as well as ensure the success and vitality of GPO. I am
    confident we are well on our way to achieving our goals.
        I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank the gentleman for his testimony.
        [The statement of Mr. Nichols follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.011

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.012

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.013

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.014

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.015

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.016

        The Chairman. And now Linda Koontz of the General
    Accounting Office, GAO.

                       STATEMENT OF LINDA KOONTZ

        Ms. Koontz. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am
    pleased to be here today to participate in this hearing.
        As you know, technological advances during the past decade
    have significantly changed the nature of printing and
    dissemination. This changing environment, in turn, is creating
    challenges for GPO.
        Specifically, the agency has seen declining print volumes,
    printing revenues and document sales. At the same time, more
    and more government documents are being created and downloaded
    electronically, many from its Web site, GPO Access. The
    agency's procured printing business, once self-sustaining, has
    experienced losses in 3 of the last 5 years, showing a net loss
    of about $16 million. The sales program lost about $77 million
    over the same time period. In addition, these changes are
    creating challenges for GPO's long-standing structure for
    centralized printing and dissemination and its interactions
    with customer agencies.
        The Public Printer recognizes these challenges and in
    response has embarked upon an ambitious transformation effort.
    To assist in this effort, we have been working with GPO
    leadership on a wide variety of issues. First, we convened a
    panel of printing and dissemination experts who provided
    suggestions for GPO to consider as it transforms itself. The
    panel suggested that GPO develop a business plan focused on
    information dissemination as its primary goal, rather than
    printing; collect data to demonstrate that the services it
    provides, printing and publishing as well as information
    dissemination to the public, add value; improve and extend
    partnerships with other agencies, particularly those with an
    information dissemination role; and ensure that its internal
    operations, including technology, how it does business with its
    customers, management information systems and training, are
    adequate for efficient and effective management of core
    business functions and for service to its customers.
        GPO officials have responded positively to these results,
    commenting that the panel's suggestions dovetail well with
    their own assessments. In addition, these officials stated that
    they are using the results of the panel as a key part of their
    strategic planning effort. In addition, in October of 2003, we
    reported that under the Public Printer's direction, GPO had
    taken several steps that recognize the important role that
    strategic human capital management plays in this
    transformation, including establishing and filling the position
    of Chief Human Capital Officer.
        At that time we made numerous recommendations to GPO on the
    further actions it could take to strengthen its human capital
    management. In response, GPO has begun to address these
    recommendations. For example, it has reorganized its human
    resources offices into teams responsible for each of its
    divisions, serving as a one-stop shop for all of its divisions'
    human resource needs. It also plans to conduct a skills
    assessment of its workforce and is initiating a pay for
    performance pilot.
        Finally, GPO is taking steps to put greater emphasis on
    customer needs. Agency responses to surveys we conducted
    indicated that overall, agencies were generally satisfied with
    GPO's products and services and with the performance of the
    individual organizations that provide them; however, they
    furnished responses that did identify a number of suggestions
    for action to GPO. Again, GPO has responded positively through
    several initiatives, including taking a new direction regarding
    sales by establishing national account managers who work
    directly with customers to identify their needs and offer
    solutions.
        In summary, GPO leadership recognizes the challenges that
    the agency faces and has made the commitment to transform to
    function effectively within this changed environment. As part
    of this effort, the Public Printer has taken important steps by
    establishing a strategic planning process which in part will
    consider changes to the agency's future mission and focus.
        Further, in realizing the importance of effective human
    capital management, he is establishing the foundation needed to
    successfully transform GPO. In addition, by placing new
    emphasis on its customers, the agency is focusing on a key
    characteristic of high-performing organizations. Fulfilling
    this commitment, however, will require sustained attention from
    GPO leadership as well as clear-sighted analysis of the
    challenges and the actions required in response. In the coming
    months, we look forward to continuing to work with these
    leaders cooperatively as they make further progress on their
    transformation.
        That concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any
    questions you may have.
        The Chairman. Well, thank you.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.017

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.018

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.019

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.020

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.021

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.022

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.023

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.024

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.025

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.026

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.027

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.028

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.029

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.030

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.031

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.032

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.033

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.034

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.035

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.036

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.037

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.038

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.039

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.040

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.041

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.042

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.043

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.044

        The Chairman. I want to thank all three witnesses on the
    panel.
        The first question I have would be of Mr. James. Is there
    anything else that Congress needs to do to help GPO with the
    transition in the sense of trying to be, as everybody says,
    more businesslike? Are there things that the Congress needs to
    act upon?
        Mr. James. Yes, sir. We will be coming to Congress with
    some proposals for changing Title 44 of the U.S. Code in regard
    to the policies that govern GPO. And we are in the process
    right now of consulting with our stakeholders, as you know, as
    we develop the strategic plan, and at the appropriate time, Mr.
    Chairman, we will be coming to you and asking you for help. At
    this point, I can tell you that we have received help from
    every Member of Congress whom we have asked. I just cannot be
    more pleased with the support of Congress.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Have you had any type of ways that you have reached out to,
    what I would call customers of GPO, to ask them how things need
    to change or information and feedback? You have undertaken, I
    assume, efforts like that?
        Mr. James. That is a very good question. And you bet we
    have, beginning with me. I spend a considerable portion of my
    time out visiting with our customers and talking to them about
    what they are doing, how their missions are changing, what
    kinds of additional support that we can provide to them.
        I have talked to more than 100 of our customers. In
    addition to that, our management team is out regularly meeting
    with customers and have talked with hundreds more of our
    customers. And as Ms. Koontz indicated, we also have
    established a team of nine what we call National Account
    Managers who I am not even sure that they have desks. Their
    office is their car. And their job is to be out in front of our
    customers every day talking to them about what we can do to
    support their programs, and their mission.
        The Chairman. Thank you. I have a question for Mr. Nichols.
    As the role of GPO changes, do you see the role of the
    inspector general also adapting, changing, or having to look in
    different directions due to technology?
        Mr. Nichols. Yes, I do. And I think the office has to
    change. We have to be just as adaptable as we are asking GPO,
    and I think the Public Printer has identified that GPO needs to
    transform itself. As we become more of a technology- and
    content-driven agency, as I said in my remarks, I believe that
    we have to make sure that we have the skill sets to understand
    the change that is ongoing for GPO.
        I believe that we need to make sure that we are working
    with the agency to have a better understanding of exactly where
    they are going, and I think the Public Printer has indicated to
    me in personal conversations, as well as publicly, that he does
    support the transformation not just within GPO, but the
    transformation that I am trying to bring to the inspector
    general's office as well.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Final question I have is for Ms. Koontz. The Web site, GPO
    Access, what kind of feedback have you had on surveys involving
    that. Or, have you had any feedback on the Web site?
        Ms. Koontz. We did surveys of the executive branch
    agencies, but I don't believe we asked specifically about GPO
    Access. I think in our upcoming surveys that we have agreed to
    do with GPO on the legislative branch customers, that is an
    issue that we will be asking about.
        The Chairman. We look forward to getting some feedback on
    that.
        Mr. Larson.
        Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Let me start first by asking Mr. James, in your testimony
    you cite the need to establish digital standards. Could you
    elaborate on what the criteria would be, what process you have
    set in place?
        Mr. James. I would be pleased to, Mr. Larson. To build a
    database that will allow us to authenticate documents, identify
    versions, and preserve digital databases in perpetuity, which I
    believe I am required to do, we need to have a uniform
    structure to the databases. And there are basically three
    components that need to be taken into consideration. The first
    is the character set, the alphanumerics. I think the Government
    is pretty well agreed on what that character set is.
        The second issue is the coding of the information to impart
    values to it, such as a headline or a paragraph. We have a
    number of schemes in play throughout Government. There is no
    agreed-upon scheme.
        And the third aspect is what has come to be called
    metadata. That is the information that identifies a document,
    who the author was, what the purpose of creating the document
    was, what version it is, and so forth.
        And while there are various views of what it is going to
    take to be able to save this information in perpetuity--some
    people think that computers will be big enough and powerful
    enough in the future that it won't make any difference how we
    structure databases--I think we would be foolish to rely on
    that. I think we as a Government would be well served by having
    a uniform set of standards for all three of those areas I
    outlined.
        As GPO in the past published a Style Manual which covered
    how Government documents are created for printing, I think GPO
    needs to introduce a 21st century Style Manual, which would
    indicate the preferred way of coding data and of adding
    metadata to databases. Not only will we suggest what those
    standards should be in consultation with other people in
    Government who are interested in this, but we also will develop
    a group of our own people who can train agencies in how to
    apply these standards, and then we will have filters at our end
    that check all of this information coming in to make sure that
    it conforms to these uniform standards.
        Mr. Larson. I am also interested in, and applaud you again,
    as was noted by Linda as well, for the efforts that you have
    made in the human capital area. More than half of your current
    workforce is retirement-eligible, and only 5 percent are under
    age 30. Though the world clearly is moving away from ink on
    paper and towards electronic dissemination, we aren't there
    yet.
        Are you satisfied with the direction that we are moving in
    in this transformation? And what do you see your workforce
    needs as we move forward?
        Mr. James. I think you have identified perhaps the biggest
    challenge that we have as an agency. That is, how do we take
    people that have devoted their lives to producing printing and
    supporting the producing of printing at the GPO,and how do we
    retrain them with the skills that are necessary to operate in a digital
    world?
        There are basically three steps that we are doing. The
    first was to take a look and assess what our training policies
    are. When I arrived on the scene, what we had was an
    interesting policy that said that GPO would pay to train people
    in the job they hold today, but we wouldn't train for future
    jobs. Well, we have changed that training policy. And the GPO
    training policy now is to train for mission.
        The second thing we had to do was put in place an
    organization that had the ability to lead in a workforce
    development program, and I have done that. We have hired a
    Chief Human Capital Officer, who is one of the most experienced
    people in the country. He has been through transformations in
    other industries and knows what is required.
        The third thing we need to do--once we create a strategic
    plan and we are able to define exactly the direction we are
    going--is define what skills will be required of our workforce,
    and then implement a program to retrain certainly the part of
    our workforce that will need those skills in the future.
        Mr. Larson. This question is for both you, Mr. James, and
    Ms. Koontz. With respect to the amount of money that the GAO
    cited that is being lost or not being taken in, and in
    surveying a number of agencies, many of whom would say that
    without the Printer doing their specific tasks, their costs
    would rise, and inasmuch as there is still a considerable
    number of agencies that outsource their work currently, does it
    make economic sense for us to look at having OMB having more
    agencies who are currently outside of the norm doing their work
    through the Printer's office?
        Mr. James. Would you like me to answer that first? Title 44
    of the U.S. Code basically says that all printing shall come to
    the Public Printer, unless it is specifically exempted from
    that requirement by Congress.
        Over the years Congress has given permission--the JCP has
    given permission--for some agencies to establish their own in-
    house printing capabilities. Other agencies chose to go forward
    and build what they call duplicating capabilities that they
    didn't believe necessarily fell within the requirements of
    Title 44.
        What we have seen is there is a proliferation of printing
    and duplicating plants in agencies that need to be addressed
    and looked at. We have had a discussion with OMB about this.
    OMB has indicated a great interest in working with us to help
    identify all of the plants that exist in Government, and to
    develop a program to assess whether or not there is any reason
    to continue these plants.
        As far as the printing that is bought and GPO goes, we have
    looked at this, and we have determined that there is a
    significant amount of printing that is being procured directly
    by agencies in violation of Title 44 of the U.S. Code. We, of
    course, have no real mechanism to enforce the buying of
    printing through GPO, but what we find is that it isn't
    necessarily an enforcement problem, it is an education problem.
    And what I found as I have gotten into this, and I have had
    discussions with Cabinet-level Secretaries, and I have had
    discussions with directors of agencies, is that frequently the
    agency or the personnel involved do not understand the
    responsibility under Title 44 to send the work to us, and
    furthermore don't understand what the capabilities are that GPO
    has to perform in their behalf.
        So I think that we have to take responsibility for at least
    part of the problem, and we need to vastly improve our
    education program of agencies. The way we are going about doing
    this is we have reorganized GPO's customer service
    organization. Instead of having just a group of 500 people that
    sort of at random deal with customers, we are reorganizing our
    customer service group by department.
        For instance, the Department of Agriculture will have a
    group of four or five or six GPO specialists that are devoted
    24 hours a day, 7 days a week to providing service to them. As
    I tell the folks in these groups, I want them reading more
    Department of Agriculture publications than anybody at the
    Department of Agriculture. And any time the Department of
    Agriculture announces a new program, I want them in there
    working with the program manager to define what the information
    requirements are going to be at the very beginning.
        So I think that you will see over the next 2 or 3 years,
    and certainly over the next 5 years, that this lack of agencies
    understanding their responsibility will go away. It is our
    responsibility to----
        Mr. Larson. The Chairman had asked earlier, is there
    something that Congress could do? I ask again from GAO's
    perspective and from the inspector general's perspective,
    inasmuch as this is an educational issue, or is it an
    enforcement issue? And I would be interested in your response.
        Ms. Koontz. As to the issue of enforcement, our work
    indicated also that there were agencies who, when we surveyed
    them, stated that they did do in-house printing. Now, some of
    this is the printing that has been approved by the Congress.
    And last summer we did a briefing on this and found that there
    were as many as 240 approved printing plants.
        And I agree. This is something to take a look at, as you
    have an overall decline in printing, that there could be all
    kinds of adverse consequences associated with an overcapacity
    of government printing chasing less and less demand for that
    resource.
        But I think in terms of the other printing that is going
    on, some of it is an inevitable consequence of the changes in
    technology. Agencies do not have to have large-scale printing
    equipment in order to produce small runs of printed documents,
    and they are doing that very thing.
        What we suggested to the Public Printer, and I think what
    he articulated to you, is that this was a place where, as our
    panel said, GPO can demonstrate its value by having closer
    relationships with customers, and if indeed they can provide
    this more efficiently and effectively, I think the business
    should come their way.
        It is also an educational issue, I believe. And I think
    that, in truth, enforcement of Title 44, trying to find all of
    this, would be very, very difficult under any circumstance, and
    that a more proactive approach on the part of GPO would be much
    more effective in the long term.
        Mr. Larson. Does the inspector general agree?
        Mr. Nichols. I would agree with the Public Printer thatit
    is largely an educational issue in terms of trying to work with
    agencies to make sure that they understand what GPO can do and how we
    can go about doing it.
        I would also, however, say that I think it is--we shouldn't
    undervalue that it is also, in part, an enforcement issue. As
    the Public Printer also said, since we don't really have a
    mechanism to enforce Title 44, it becomes more apparent that if
    somebody doesn't want to work with GPO for----
        Mr. Larson. If you had the necessary capability to enforce
    it through the approach that you have taken, the proactive
    capability of a very capable printer, the recommendations of
    the panel from the GAO, and as in your capacity--as my
    grandfather Norman would say, trust everyone, but cut the cards
    capacity, come in and have not only the logic and the
    information that comes from a panel, and the proactive
    marketing on behalf of the Public Printer, but it would seem
    from your perspective that this also would be able to close
    that gap in revenue, and especially since it seems that there
    are so many agencies that aren't rightfully going through the
    Public Printer, and that would only serve to enhance your
    capability and be more economically efficient.
        Mr. Nichols. I would certainly agree with that. One of the
    ways in which we have gone about trying to help the Public
    Printer and GPO in terms of its enforcement is dealing with
    Inspectors General's offices at the various customer agencies,
    when there is an example of a Title 44 issue that comes up
    where there is an agency that is not coming to GPO, is to
    actually work with the IG's office and say there are things
    that your agency is doing that may be not cost-effective, and
    work in tandem or in a joint operation to try and figure out
    how we can help make sure that the agency does that.
        Mr. Larson. I have one quick question for the Inspector
    General. Should we do something to disabuse people of what your
    role is, and that, in fact, it is there to help and to look at
    these things and not--one thing the Chairman and I agree on is
    that the mentality of ``got you'' in government is just bad
    policy, and that what we need to do is focus on the
    constructive means of making sure that we are working in a
    collaborative venue, with the end result being a better
    product, more efficiently delivered at the best cost to the
    taxpayer. Do you agree?
        Mr. Nichols. I couldn't agree with you more. I think the
    Public Printer and I have, from the outset, tried to ensure
    that we led from the top down in making sure that both of our
    respective agencies or entities had that same understanding.
    That cooperation has been ongoing. I expect it to continue.
        Mr. James. May I make one additional comment? The issue
    over the bypass of the Government Printing Office on the
    procurement of printing really falls to the heart, I think, of
    what the responsibilities of the Public Printer are. That is to
    collect in one place and to catalog and identify publications
    of the United States Government, and make them widely and
    broadly available to the public.
        We do that through the Federal Depository Library Program.
    And what we find is that when people procure documents directly
    themselves, if they know they are in violation of the law,
    there is not a single chance they are going to tell us about
    those publications so we can get them in the system.
        Mr. Larson. Good point.
        Mr. James. If they are doing this inadvertently, again,
    they don't know their responsibilities under the law. So I
    think the issue here is we are losing part of the history of
    the American Government, and that is the real key issue here.
        As I have discussed this with the management of OMB, they
    absolutely understand this. Mitch Daniels was there when I
    arrived and if you recall, we had a controversy when I walked
    in the door, and we were able to resolve the controversy
    because Mr. Daniels understood the nature of this. And I can
    absolutely tell you that Mr. Bolten and Mr. Johnson understand
    this and are working closely with us to help us close the gap
    and get these publications to the GPO. And I think that
    probably, at the end of the day, is going to be the best
    enforcement mechanism we have is to have a close working
    relationship with OMB.
        Mr. Larson. Our staff would also like to join with you. I
    know, as the Chairman indicated, his willingness to work to see
    what we can do. We share a love of history and the importance
    of its preservation. I think you are right-on in your comments
    and look forward to working with the triumvirate assembled here
    today, because I think that you have three unique and
    appropriate approaches to this problem-solving that needs to go
    on. And we would like very much to be a part of that to assist
    you in this. I think it in the long run will help everyone.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Mr. Linder had to leave. He has another
    meeting that he has to attend. But I think he will have a
    question to submit, I believe, in writing for you.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let's see
    here.
        Mr. James, it is mentioned that GAO has indicated that GPO
    has initiated positive changes in the human resource management
    of GPO. And if that is the case, how does this positivity, the
    positive changes, result in 2,700 full-time employees not being
    affected; or if they are going to be affected with this
    positive change, how are they going to be affected in the short
    and long run, especially given the fact that you are reducing
    printing, and you have--there is a loss--you have a loss of--
    you have lost money in publication sales? Given all of these
    variables in your agency, how--what steps are you going to take
    in collecting the loss of revenue, and how does this affect the
    changes in your human resources?
        Mr. James. You have just asked the question right at the
    heart of everything. You are correct that we are losing
    revenues in many of our traditional areas, but you have to
    understand that we don't create the revenue. We simply respond
    to the needs of our agency customers. And what we find is that
    they are moving away from
    printing as the answer to their communication needs, and moving
    more to digital documents.
        Now, we are providing some services to these agencies in
    regard to digital documents and to constructing databases and
    Web sites, but I think we have a long way to go. There is much
    more that we can do, as the GPO has pointed out, and I think
    those are the jobs of the future. So as the information needs
    of our customers change, I think it is incumbent upon the
    management of GPO to prepare our labor force to be able to do
    things in the style that is preferred by our customers. That is
    what we are intending to do.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. Well, that is indeed correct.
        Now, this Chief Human Capital Officer, of course, does that
    have anything to do with the training of these employees for
    the new types of jobs that you are referring to?
        Mr. James. The GPO has been around a long time. We have
    been around nearly 150 years. And as I go back and look at
    particularly the 20th century, what I see is that there have
    been several technological changes that occurred in the
    printing industry in the 20th century, and GPO has been at the
    forefront of each of those technological changes. Through
    history, we have changed completely the responsibilities of
    many of our employees, and time after time our employees have
    been able to rise to the challenge and to embrace new
    technology and move forward.
        My guess is that our employees once again will rise to the
    technological challenge, and will embrace the new technology,
    and will prepare themselves in conjunction with the help that
    we give to be able to continue to serve you and continue to
    serve our agency customers.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. So in this whole newfound ambiance
    that we are in, and your trying to change, given the high
    technology, given the reduction in publications and all of the
    other variables, are we suggesting that these 2,700 full-time
    employees will either go by attrition, or they will step up to
    the plate and be ready for the newfound technological changes
    that you are going to make?
        Mr. James. I think the issue that I hear most of from our
    employees is that they are ready for change. They want to
    embrace this change. They want to be retrained. They are ready
    to move ahead, and want to know how come we are moving so
    slowly. I think I hear that more than anything else.
        However, I cannot begin to retrain employees until after we
    have defined what it is we are going to be doing.
        At the same time, there are some basic things we are
    beginning to prepare for. We are doing a study of the skills,
    called a ``skills assessment,'' of our existing employees so we
    know where each employee is. Once we determine that and once we
    determine where we are going, then we will see how successful
    we are.
        I think we will lose some employees, but there will be a
    place for those who want to move ahead with us.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. Will you lose them to attrition or
    just that they are unable to adapt to the new technological
    changes?
        Mr. James. I think there are going to continue to be lots
    of jobs in the GPO that looked like they did yesterday. Not
    every job will change. I think we will have 3-, 4-, 500 of our
    jobs that dramatically change. My guess is that our workforce
    will rise to that challenge. I have every reason to believe
    that they will.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. And they will continue to be as
    diverse as this country is?
        Mr. James. I absolutely believe that.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. One other question or comment.
        I see that FDLP, the Federal Depository Library Program,
    which many libraries in my district are in, has seen a decline
    from 1,400 to 1,300. Can you tell me why this change has
    occurred and, hopefully, if you are going to reduce others,
    they will not be in my district?
        Mr. James. It is interesting. The FDLP program is changing
    and it is being driven by technology. You know, 20 years ago,
    or 25 years ago, the FDLP was the source of information for
    people that couldn't afford to buy it themselves. If you
    couldn't afford to buy a printed publication from the GPO, you
    could go to your depository and find the publication there and
    use it--not only find the publication, but find people that
    were skilled in the use of Government information, librarians
    who had studied and been trained in this.
        What we see today is that the change is so dramatic that as
    much as two-thirds of all new Government publications coming
    into the FDLP are now on the Internet. So you don't need any
    longer to visit a depository library to have access to the
    information. I think what that is doing is causing some of the
    depositorylibraries to reconsider whether they are invested in
    the program to question whether they want to continue or not, whether
    or not it is really necessary to their community or their constituency
    to continue. And we are addressing this on a regular basis.
        Two weeks ago I was in St. Louis meeting with 500
    depository librarians to discuss some of these issues and begin
    to look at what the future will be. I believe we need to
    digitize the entire bank of Government documents going back to
    the Federalist Papers so everyone has access to those documents
    at their home or office or wherever they are.
        And, of course, not everyone will have a computer, and so--
    --
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. That is just what I was going to
    refer to.
        Mr. James. Not everyone will have a computer. So this is
    where libraries will come into play.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. And there is such a connection to
    the Federal Government so far away. And so, to me, it gives
    pause to ensure that as you are downgrading or eliminating some
    of those, that you don't--that you remember that there are some
    who still do not and have not become part of the digital age.
    There is a lot of digital divide, and so we need to recognize
    that.
        I did want to speak, but if Ms. Koontz--I have to go to
    another meeting that I am late for, but you are saying that you
    have recommended that GPO hires the national something
    managers--I will see it when I put my glasses on--but I need to
    know, just how do they play into the whole scheme of things in
    the restructuring of GPO, hiring of national account managers?
        Ms. Koontz. The national account managers I mentioned in my
    statement, this is really just one small part of what GPO is
    doing to put a new emphasis on their agency customers; and they
    have a number of initiatives that are ongoing that we have been
    working with them on. This is one way they have chosen to
    expand their capability in this area.
        Ms. Millender-McDonald. Seems like a positive step. Thank
    you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The statement of Ms. Millender-McDonald follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.045

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.046

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.047

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.048

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003A.049

        The Chairman. Thank the gentlelady.
        Mr. Brady.
        Mr. Brady. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I understand that you have 2,700 employees.
        Mr. James. We may be down a little under that now. I think
    we are under 2,500 employees, Mr. Brady.
        Mr. Brady. Roughly, how many are bargaining, nonbargaining?
        Mr. James. Roughly 50-50.
        Mr. Brady. And I am for buyouts and drop programs. I wish
    to have one around here. How does that work when you have
    buyouts? Is it longevity? Is it an age factor?
        Mr. James. When I came in the door, we took a look at the
    workforce composition, just so I could understand who worked
    for us, what were their skills, where did they come from, how
    long did they work for the GPO; and I was amazed to discover
    that most of the people at GPO, it was their first and only
    job. In many cases, their fathers and mothers had worked before
    us and, in some cases, their grandparents before that. So there
    is a great tradition of the craft of GPO and loyalty to the
    agency.
        But 52 percent of the folks that worked for us were age
    eligible for retirement, that means they reached the correct
    years of service and age. And it was necessary for us to
    substantially reduce our expenses--we have been losing about
    $35 million a year--and Congress seemed unwilling to continue
    to fund that, and my job was to figure out how to deal with it.
        So we figured the easiest thing would be to tell our
    employees what we are going to do, how we were going to
    modernize the GPO, and then give people an opportunity--and we
    offered the opportunity to 300 people--to retire now. They were
    age eligible to retire, and we offered a $25,000 incentive to
    do it.
        We had 600 people that applied. We accepted a little over
    300 of those; and then decided, well, if there are that many
    people that are interested, perhaps we ought to go back and do
    a second round of this. And we went back and did a second round
    and a few--over 200, I think by the time we finished the
    program, it will be close to 250--elected to do that.
        There are a couple of reasons that I see that people have
    elected to do it. One is, they feel they are entitled to
    retire. They spent a life working for the GPO and they would
    just like to enter retirement. The second is that some people
    just don't want to go through the struggles of having to learn
    a new job or learn a new way of doing things. I think this
    gives them an opportunity to opt out. So what we have left, as
    I see it, is a whole bunch of people that are very anxious to
    get on with the future.
        Mr. Brady. Well, those people that apply for this, is that
    still around 50-50, bargaining to nonbargaining? Was it offered
    to both?
        Mr. James. We had it open to both. And I would be happy to
    supply that information for the record. I don't know it.
        Mr. Brady. My concern is--and you can probably see where I
    am going, and I am just worrying about an organization that is
    fundamentally sound with bargaining unit people and then all of
    a sudden, they are the ones that usually get hurt. They are the
    smaller end, and you wind up putting--hiring management people
    with senior positions or whatever you want to call them, and
    replacing them with, you know, taking out the small bargaining
    unit people.
        And I am not against that either. I really believe,
    especially in your case, when you come on board for a new
    agency, you should be able to run that agency the way you see
    fit or else we are going to blame you or praise you. But I
    don't want to see the smaller guy get hurt; I would like to see
    a protection factor.
        And, again, like I said, hiring other people or whatever
    senior positions is fine as long as we don't hurt the core
    people that have been there and offer them in-house or out-of-
    house, whatever training they need to do their job. It is real
    easy to say you can't do this, we have to have a reduction in
    force and hire who you want to hire in a nonbargaining capacity
    and let them do their job also. We need to protect those
    people.
        I don't want to see top heaviness. I want to see you work
    with our unions and make sure that doesn't happen and continue
    to have a happy family there.
        The Chairman. I want to thank the panel. I also want to
    mention something.
        I happen to know that the Inspector General and Printer
    were stuck out in traffic, got out, and kind of semi-jogged
    over here. So that is pretty good.
        Also I wanted to mention, I recognize two staff, Mike
    Harrison--Mike has worked on these issues with Congressman
    Larson, and Maria Robinson. And this is Maria's last hearing
    with us; she is from Belmont County where I am from; she is
    truly a coal miner's daughter. She is a coal miner's daughter;
    her father is a coal miner. And Maria is going on to great
    things. We are going to miss her.
        She started, her first 2 months out of high school, with us
    in the Ohio senate and worked her way up and became an LD out
    here and then a policy person. So this is Maria Robinson's last
    official day with us. Just wanted to note that--half a day.
        Mr. Larson. I just wanted to ask one more follow-up
    question on this, and again--and to all three of the panelists,
    but specifically directed to Mr. James.
        In your opening statement, you talked about what you are
    intending to do to help close that revenue gap as we move
    forward. The DOD is, number one, your largest customer, but
    also sometimes problematic in not, shall we say, necessarily
    going through the GPO.
        What are your ideas on improving that? And if all three of
    you can answer that, what are some of the things you think we
    can do, and whether legislation is needed in any of those
    areas.
        Mr. James. It is a very good question. I certainly spent my
    first year in determining how we could best cut expenses. As
    you know, we have to put points on the scoreboard to win the
    game.
        We are now in a position to be able to focus on increasing
    revenues. And almost all of my time is now spent on how are we
    going to replace the revenues we have lost, how we can expand
    future revenues; and I think that you ought to give us a
    chance. I mean, I think this does not require a sledgehammer. I
    think this requires just operating our unit, our business, if
    you will, in a professional way. I think we can get the job
    done, and I say that based on my experiences in talking with
    employees throughout Government. I thinkthat, by and large,
    people want to cooperate if they understand.
        Mr. Larson. How long a time frame would you say that was?
        Mr. James. We will see results in the next fiscal year,
    2005. We will see results from this. Within 3 years, we should
    be doing what we need to be doing.
        Mr. Larson. Ms. Koontz.
        Ms. Koontz. First of all, GPO, as it intends to do, needs
    to look at its mission and what it is doing and to make sure
    that what it is doing fits currently what customer needs are
    and what the needs of the public are. So that is sort of first
    and foremost.
        There are opportunities, I think, for GPO that were
    indicated by our executive branch customer surveys that they
    are going to follow up on. For example, we found there were
    some agencies who were not aware of some of the emerging
    electronic services that GPO provides, and they were less
    likely to use those services. We pointed out that we thought
    that was an opportunity for perhaps GPO to grow its business in
    that way; and I think there are probably other opportunities
    like that as they reexamine what they are doing.
        They have to look at their expenses and to look at their
    people. And I think they are moving forward on all fronts in
    order to determine how to stem the losses that have occurred
    over the last years.
        Mr. Larson. And you wouldn't think legislation is needed
    either?
        Ms. Koontz. At this time, I wouldn't be able to make any
    recommendations in that area.
        Mr. Nichols. I would agree with what the Public Printer and
    Ms. Koontz have said and just reiterate that, from our vantage
    point, when there are problems dealing with customer agencies,
    it is to deal with the Inspector General at the Defense
    Department.
        I know that OMB has indicated a willingness to hear from
    us, as well, on any Title 44 problems. So we can use them as a
    resource as well.
        Mr. Larson. Thank you all very much.
        The Chairman. I want to thank you and I appreciate your
    testimony. We will call the second panel and will begin in
    about 3 minutes.
        [Recess.]
        The Chairman. I want to thank you. We will start with Panel
    2. Let me introduce the panel.
        First, we have Mr. Ben Cooper, who is the Executive Vice
    President of the Printing Industries of America; also, Mr.
    George Lord, Chairman of the Joint Council of Unions at the
    GPO; Mr. Bill Boarman, President of the Printing, Publishing
    and Media Workers section of the CWA; and finally, Janice
    Johnston, President of the American Association of Law
    Libraries.

       STATEMENTS OF BEN COOPER, PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA;
         GEORGE LORD, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT COUNCIL OF UNIONS,
      GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; WILLIAM BOARMAN, COMMUNICATIONS
    WORKERS OF AMERICA; AND JANIS JOHNSTON, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
                          AT CHAMPAIGN-URBANA

        The Chairman. Thank you and welcome to the panel, and we
    will begin with Mr. Cooper.

                        STATEMENT OF BEN COOPER

        Mr. Cooper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
    opportunity to appear before you today, and I want to thank you
    for the work you have done in this committee, and the members
    of this committee. You have provided a great deal of
    leadership.
        And also want to pay special thanks to Bruce James, who
    came out of our industry. We certainly expected Bruce to be a
    leader in the Government Printing Office, and he has not
    disappointed us to that extent.
        And also want to acknowledge and appreciate being with Mr.
    Lord and Mr. Boarman today. We have been involved in Government
    Printing Office issues for more years than any of us would care
    to recollect. Bill and I go back to 1978; we were just
    reminiscing about that. It is fun to be with my friends and to
    appear before the committee.
        Contrary to published reports, print is not dead. The
    printing industry this year will exceed $155 billion in sales,
    and we are expecting a growth rate this year of upwards of 4
    percent.
        These are challenging times. There has been a tremendous
    growth in electronic communication; nevertheless, people still
    prefer to get their communication by print. And we find that--
    as other forms of technology arise, we find that print still
    serves an enormous market in this country.
        In addition to the substantial role of print in the private
    sector, print is also a very big part of the public sector. I
    would like to point out that in the Federal budget, the print
    sector in 1996 was $1.75 billion. We are expecting $2.1 billion
    in print in the Federal budget in fiscal year 2004. So while
    GPO volume in print may be declining, the growth in print in
    the Federal Government has not declined and, in fact, is
    continuing to grow.
        Our objective, and I think the objective of most of the
    witnesses here, is to figure out ways to more effectively move
    that print volume into the GPO so the GPO can continue to
    provide that work more efficiently and more effectively.
        Why is print still relatively strong in the face of new
    technologies? It is simply because for many private sector and
    government communications, print is the most effective and
    reliable way to reach the end user. It is very interesting that
    the challenges we face in the private sector are not very
    different from the challenges faced by the Government Printing
    Office.
        Our industry has always managed information. Our output has
    historically been on paper and a good portion is still on
    paper. But modern printers are now creating, managing and
    distributing information in all formats for their clients.
    Also, printers are managing files, storing and distributing
    print information for their customers as well. For the GPO to
    remain viable, it will have to change to these kinds of
    technologies as well; and from what we have heard from the
    Public Printer today and watching his actions over the last 16
    months, we are confident he is moving rapidly in that
    direction.
        There are some changes needed, however, and we have been
    talking to GPO about these changes, as well as with people from
    the Office of Management and Budget and a number of folks on
    Capitol Hill.
        Over time, we have had three fundamental issues that
    havebeen consistent in all of our testimonies and all of our efforts to
    reform government printing. Those three issues are that Federal
    agencies other than the Government Printing Office should not be in the
    printing business other than providing routine office copying.
        Secondly, the GPO must modernize the way it buys printing
    for its agency customers to conform to the rules used
    throughout the rest of the Federal Government and by GPO to
    make some of its own purchases.
        And third, the Federal Government should implement a
    planning process which determines printing and information
    needs for the coming fiscal year.
        We had hoped that many of these issues would have been
    resolved in 2003 by what became known as the OMB-GPO Compact.
    Regrettably, despite apparent universal agreement on the need
    for these changes, little progress is being made in these
    areas. While all three are important, I want to focus today on
    the planning process and the need to modernize GPO procurement
    regulations.
        The planning process that we have proposed for some time
    has been to simply require agencies or subagencies to develop,
    in conjunction with their budget submission, a plan for the
    coming year and their printing and information needs. An
    officer in that agency could be designated for this purpose.
    Agencies are required to have a chief information officer;
    whether that person is appropriate or not, I would leave that
    to the judgment of Congress and the Federal agencies.
        But it would seem to us that if an agency had to lay out
    its plan for printing and information and communication to the
    Congress as part of its budget planning process, then the GPO
    would better be able to understand what it needed, how to use
    its people more effectively. We would also be able, in that
    process, to have the agencies identify what its printing
    capacities are and what its needs are so that, in looking at
    the larger picture, we might be able to more effectively plan
    the process.
        We know that this is somewhat of an undertaking for Federal
    agencies, but one presumes there is some planning process that
    is already in place and that printing and information is not
    whimsically decided at the last minute.
        The next area of concern that I want to address is the
    reform of procurement. GPO's Federal agency customers have the
    same need for flexibility in selecting solutions in print and
    related services as our private sector customers. Given the
    technology changes, all customers need to hear new ideas to
    take advantage of new technologies, methodologies and
    solutions. Unfortunately, under current GPO regulations, if a
    printing company proposes an exciting new alternative, even
    when it reduces overall costs, its bid can be declared
    nonresponsive and rejected.
        In this new environment, GPO's classic ``low price wins''
    methodology and rigid procurement methods are simply too
    restrictive. Purchases of all other products and services
    throughout the Federal Government can be made using a variety
    of purchasing methods under the Federal acquisition
    regulations. This flexibility allows the contracting officer
    and his customers to structure a procurement based on the
    complexity of the project and the needs of the government while
    still obtaining competition. It not only allows, but also
    encourages, creative, cost-saving solutions.
        Ironically, when GPO buys products and services for itself,
    it uses a materials management acquisition regulation which
    mirrors the Federal acquisition regulation and provides it with
    a variety of purchasing options, including the option to
    consider not only price, but quality, experience, delivery
    service, et cetera, when awarding contracts. But none of these
    modern purchasing methods is applied to print and related
    purchases GPO makes for its agency customers.
        I should note that some believe that the electronic
    procurement system being developed under the OMB-GPO Compact
    will solve this problem. That is not the case for three
    reasons:
        First, whether procurement is done on paper or on the Web,
    the system will continue to decline if the underlying
    procurement regulations are not brought in line with the rest
    of the government and best practices.
        Second, based on agency decisions since the Compact, most
    print purchases will not go through the new GPO Direct program
    because agency print procurement departments do not have the
    contracting authority to use that future GPO buying vehicle.
        Finally, GPO Direct has a $100,000 limit, so the larger,
    critical jobs will still go through the traditional GPO
    procurement system. The solution is for GPO to adopt the
    current MMAR regulations as the procurement regulations
    applicable to purchases for its agency customers, not next
    year, but next month.
        I would like to talk about simplified purchase agreements.
    In the summer of 2000, GPO launched a new simplified purchase
    agreement contract vehicle. Under these agreements, GPO sets up
    a blanket purchasing agreement with multiple vendors whose
    quality, service and pricing meet government requirements and
    allow Federal agency buyers to purchase printing directly from
    the approved vendors. This saves the agency time and
    administrative costs and allows them to have direct contact
    with a vendor. At the same time, GPO provides its contracting
    authority in full support of the agency buyer when needed.
        This is in contrast to the OMB-GPO Compact electronic model
    where agency contracting authority is used and GPO charges
    extra for support services. Under this program, agencies can
    make the purchase decision based on price and other factors.
    Other factors include responsiveness, business practices,
    convenience, courtesy, attention to detail and elements of past
    performance, including work quality, reliability and schedule
    compliance. This flexibility is in contrast to GPO's
    traditional ``low cost wins'' methodology.
        This program offers agencies a flexible, full-service,
    alternative option to the Compact electronic purchasing model
    that is fully compliant with the goals of the Compact. It is
    very popular with agencies and vendors. It has spread from GPO
    central office in Washington to regional offices throughout the
    country. The only complaint about the program has been, the
    $2,500 purchase limit was too low.
        In June, 2003, after talking to agency customers and
    printers, PI requested that GPO increase the purchase limit to
    at least $10,000. In support of that request, we surveyed 150
    agency print buyers and managers in August, 2003. Nine out of
    10 respondents wanted the limit increased. Over half wanted the
    limit at $10,000 or more. We have included a copy of that
    survey for your information.
        Based on the survey and their own analysis, GPO management
    agreed to raise the limit to at least $10,000, butthe limit
    today remains at $2,500. We now believe that the limit should be
    increased to $25,000.
        Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. And I would like
    to say just in conclusion, the printing industry is changing
    dramatically. One of the primary ways it is changing is in the
    growth of what we call ancillary services.
        One of the fastest growing areas of ancillary services is
    in distribution and fulfillment. Many of our print--many of the
    members of our organization would enjoy talking to agency
    customers about providing that level of service. We want to do
    this under the context of GPO procurement authority. We firmly
    believe that if we will address this agency plan issue, be more
    flexible in contracting, that the net result will be to bring a
    significant amount of business back into the GPO and provide
    work not only for the folks represented by the gentleman
    sitting next to me, but serve the taxpayers well.
        Thank you very much.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Cooper follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.002

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.004

        The Chairman. Mr. Lord.

                        STATEMENT OF GEORGE LORD

        Mr. Lord. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and to all members of
    the committee. I want to say how honored I am to appear before
    this committee to share with you the hopes and dreams and fears
    of the men and women whom I represent, that are employed at the
    U.S. Government Printing Office.
        We have served the Congress, the executive and judicial
    branches for well over 100 years. During that time, the
    employees have served and served well. We have fulfilled our
    mission year after year, no matter what, with honor and
    distinction. We take enormous pride in those accomplishments.
        These employees that I have represented have a high sense
    of duty and they have willingly met every challenge, whether
    the challenge was technological or financial. We have mastered
    the technology. We have made changes that saved the GPO and the
    American taxpayer huge amounts of money when warranted and
    legitimately needed. This history is why I am before you today.
    These employees over the years have given their sweat and labor
    for the survival of this fine institution.
        We believe some of GPO's financial resources have been
    wasted, thereby reversing those sacrifices I have mentioned.
    Some of the wasteful spending items we consider are huge
    expansion of GPO's overhead costs because of the creation of
    additional executive positions; increased expenditures for
    offices for those executives; and the wholesale reduction of
    employees that have chargeable hours, thereby reducing the
    revenue; finally, increased travel expenses for those
    executives and support staff.
        We believe the Public Printer needs to be more committed to
    the GPO mission and not squander scarce Federal dollars that
    should be used to plan for, enter into the new electronic age,
    including the impact of the new technology on ink-on-paper
    printing, which is still, even today, our greatest source of
    revenue.
        Earlier. In testimony, there were questions fielded about
    the human capital office and the programs. While we are still
    waiting for the skills assessment and the skills needs to be
    done, GPO has placed people into key positions, and has changed
    our job series, which is a job classification standard which
    allows people to compete for the job that I have been doing for
    25, 30 years. We believe that is wrong and we believe that it
    needs to be resolved because, by the time these programs and
    evaluations are in place, jobs, critical jobs, jobs for
    growth--and everybody wants to grow for any employer that they
    devote their career to--will be filled and they will be left
    with a lower paid job and a lower skill.
        We also mentioned about the new technology. As I said in my
    written statement, GPO employees have had a fine record and
    tradition of being retrained for whatever the technology is. I
    say to you today that if you survey the current employees in IT
    occupations within the Government Printing Office, you will
    find probably at least half, if not more, of those employees
    working in IT fields today came out of the craft areas of
    yesterday. So GPO put forth a challenge the employees have met
    every time.
        We also have a concern because of the shifting of ink-on-
    paper to electronics that GPO gets its resources still, to this
    day, by the printed product. As we are doing the typesetting
    and the coding for the Congressional Record and we complete and
    create that digital file, it is nothing to take that file and
    put it out on the Web. So the revenue that is generated are--
    the hours that our people work on that are charged back to the
    revolving fund.
        In conclusion, I don't want to leave you with the
    overwhelming impression that Mr. James and organized labor is
    not getting along or are battling over the various items,
    because on a lot of issues we are, in fact, in agreement. This
    is, however, a concern that the employees have been
    communicating to me over the last 14 months, and I appreciate
    the time and the opportunity to express them to you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Lord follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.006

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.007

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.008

        The Chairman. Mr. Boarman.

                      STATEMENT OF WILLIAM BOARMAN

        Mr. Boarman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and good morning. And
    good morning to members of the committee. Thank you for holding
    this hearing and thanks for the invitation to my organization
    to appear and to give our views.
        My name is Bill Boarman and I am Vice President of the
    Communication Workers of America, over 730,000 members,
    including a broad spectrum of workers in the communications
    industry and the printing and publishing industry as well.
        Our union's history within the Government Printing Office
    reaches as far back as the Civil War. That history provides us
    with an intimate insight into GPO's operations and its
    evolution. My own experience with GPO goes back 30 years, first
    as an employee, later as a local union representative, and
    today, as a national Vice President of the CWA. I think over
    this period, I have testified at least a dozen times before
    either the Joint Committee on Printing, the Senate Rules
    Committee, House Administration and various committees on the
    appropriations side. And I also, as Ben Cooper has mentioned,
    served on an ad hoc committee back in the late 1970s along with
    a member of your staff, Charlie Howell--I think we are the
    three survivors--where we were appointed by Congress to look at
    major changes and overhaul to GPO.
        It is notable that, through the years, GPO's talented
    personnel continue to meet their grueling daily deadlines in
    producing the Congressional Record, the Federal Register and
    thousands of other complex and significant documents and
    records of our government's work. The most important role that
    GPO plays is in the maintenance of our Nation's commitment to
    participatory democracy and accountability by the government.
    That is GPO's fundamental mission, to ensure universal citizen
    access to the products of their Federal Government.
        By collecting and distributing government research and
    reports through its network of 1,300 libraries, GPO serves a
    unique role for the Nation. Perhaps because GPO has been so
    effective at this function, the average citizen may not be
    aware of just how important it is.
        Some 20 years ago, GPO began a profound transition from a
    traditional ink-on-paper operation into a state-of-the-art
    information entity. That transition presaged changes that many
    other major publishers have followed, first in digital
    composition and pagination and currently in the masterful use
    of the Internet to enhance information flows throughout the
    Nation and the world.
        When I worked in the GPO, I might note there were 8,000
    employees. And today, there are probably less than 2,500. And
    that has been done because of technology that allows us to do a
    lot more than we could before with a lot less people, and it
    has been done basically through attrition. And unfortunately,
    there has been some work loss because some Federal agencies are
    seeking other places to have their work done.
        GPO's leadership and achievement have been widely
    recognized with a prestigious number of awards and honors.
    Today, however, we are concerned about a different problem for
    this venerable agency, an issue of management philosophy that
    we believe could lead to a serious divergence unless it is
    addressed analytically.
        Our unique perspective with experience in the information
    industry both in the private and public sector--as you know,
    CWA represents people who work for General Electric, Verizon,
    ABC and Disney, just to name a few of our large employers that
    employ CWA members--that unique perspective tells me that any
    information enterprise depends upon the productive capacity of
    the organization, not the number of highly paid executives it
    has on its plan to analyze. We are frankly concerned that the
    GPO is heading in another direction along the lines of an
    organizational structure that is top heavy with management
    officials whose costs cannot be absorbed and whose presence may
    not add to the productive capacity of the agency.
        As those costs grow, we are fearful that GPO will not be
    able to maintain its efficiency. This could and may result in
    cuts to the workforce and/or pay and benefits.
        As the members of the committee know, GPO by law must
    recover all of its costs. Historically, GPO has operated on a
    traditional pyramid structure, a strong, broad foundation of
    productive personnel at the primary level holding up the
    strong, lean management layer dealing with the administration.
    We have noticed that there appears to be a new layering of
    management positions with highly paid executive salaries,
    virtually inverting the pyramid. That change, we believe,
    imperils GPO's capacity because it results in a reapportionment
    of the agency's resources away from productive capacity.
        Given GPO's costs and accounting structure, any diversion
    of resources away from productive and billable positions could
    force the agency to choose between investment and additional
    productive capacity or growing executive salaries.
        We encourage this committee and other committees in the
    House and Senate with jurisdiction over GPO operations to
    remain vigilant. Sustaining this national treasure and
    preserving its vital function won't earn you headlines and
    sound bites on the 6 o'clock news.
        I can assure you as a parent, citizen and elected leader of
    an organization which seeks to advance the economic well-being
    of working families, a fully functional Government Printing
    Office enriches our Nation's wisdom and awareness in ways that
    are immeasurable on a balance sheet. Your oversight is critical
    in making certain that GPO is never forced to retrench or cut
    corners, compromise quality and efficiency or lose productive
    personnel in order to maintain a management layer.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity for CWA
    to give its views on these issues. And I would be happy to
    answer any questions that you or members of the committee may
    have.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Boarman follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.009

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.010

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.011

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 94003.012

        The Chairman. Ms. Johnston.

                      STATEMENT OF JANIS JOHNSTON

        Ms. Johnston. Good morning. I am Janis Johnston, Director
    of the Law Library and Associate Professor of Law at the Albert
    E. Jenner, Jr., Memorial Law Library, University of Illinois at
    Urbana-Champaign. I am President of the American Association of
    Law Libraries.
        I am very pleased to appear before you this morning on
    behalf of the American Association of Law Libraries, the
    American Library Association, the Association of Research
    Libraries, the Medical Library Association and the Special
    Libraries Association. Together, we represent more than 90,000
    librarians, as well as the more than 1,200 libraries that
    participate in the Federal Depository Library Program.
        We commend you, Chairman Ney and Ranking Member Larson, for
    holding this important oversight hearing on the Government
    Printing Office. Our communities have a very strong interest in
    Federal information policy, a fervent commitment to public
    access to government information and a Federal robust library
    program for the 21st century. I ask that you please include my
    long statement in the record of today's hearing.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        Ms. Johnston. I would like to summarize a few key points
    from that statement.
        First, we commend Public Printer Bruce James for bringing
    energy and enthusiam to the GPO as he works with Congress and
    all stakeholders to make its operations more efficient and to
    strenthen the FDLP. During his first year as Public Printer,
    Mr. James has accomplished several important initiatives to
    improve the public's access to government information.
        Last June, he and then-OMB Director Mitch Daniels announced
    an historic compact for government printing that allows
    agencies flexibility to select their own printers through the
    GPO procurement system. Printers will not be paid until they
    provide GPO with one electronic version of each document
    ordered and two print copies, thus ensuring improved public
    access to agency publications.
        We applaud Mr. James for his many successful outreach
    efforts, including the equally important MOU signed last August
    with the National Archives and Records Administration.
        Second, we believe strongly that the FDLP and depository
    libraries will continue to be crucial access and service points
    for the public in the 21st century, and we are committed to our
    role in this important partnership with Congress.
        The FDLP is a very successful partnership not just between
    GPO and participating libraries, but also with Congress,
    Federal agencies, the courts and the American public.
    Librarians know firsthand on a daily basis the importance and
    impact that access to government information has on the health
    and lives of all Americans, our Nation's economy and on public
    participation in government.
        The more than 1,200 Federal depository libraries come in
    all shapes and sizes--public, academic, law, special, Federal
    agency, research and medical libraries. Depository libraries
    spend millions of dollars annually for staff, space and,
    increasingly, for the technological infrastructure, the
    hardware, software, training, expertise and other services
    necessary to effectively connect users to electronic resources.
    In addition, we purchase costly commercial indexes, software
    and access to networks to make government publications more
    accessible to your constituents.
        Some depository libraries are dropping out of the FDLP for
    a number of different reasons. GPO has decreased significantly
    the number of print titles distributed to programs over the
    past several years, mostly as a result of the increased amount
    of born-digital information.
        We are pleased that GPO has begun to recognize that
    different types of libraries have different needs and different
    users. We believe GPO should strive to provide documents to
    depository libraries in the most suitable format to meet their
    users' needs.
        For example, the users of legal government information
    often require access to authenticated legal materials.
    Important legal titles available electronically through the
    Internet, whether through GPO access or on agency,
    congressional or Web sites are not authenticated. Note the
    following disclaimer for the electronic version of the U.S.
    Supreme Court slip opinions on the Court's own Web site, quote:
        ``these electronic opinions may contain computer-generated
    errors or other deviations from the official printed slip
    opinion pamphlets,'' end of quote.
        Last year I was very pleased that GPO responded to a
    request from the AALL executive board to reinstate print
    distribution of the slip opinions to law and regional
    depository libraries. AALL has also proposed an expanded list
    of essential titles for law libraries that would ensure that
    core legal titles would be distributed to law libraries in
    authenticated print versions.
        Today, only the largest of the Nation's map libraries have
    the ability to provide full-sized colored copies of maps
    delivered on line. There are technological issues with maps as
    well. Frequently on-line maps are not accessible in a way that
    allows downloading and copying of the full image. Therefore,
    many libraries need paper copies of maps to meet their users'
    needs.
        Congress should be concerned that the move to an all-
    electronic Federal Depository Library Program may fail to meet
    the needs of those who live in rural or minority communities
    where there is little technological infrastructure and
    libraries may lack adequate high-speed Internet access.
        Third, the Federal Government must ensure the authenticity
    and permanent public access to and preservation of electronic
    government information. As we move into an even more electronic
    environment, we urge Congress to work to ensure that electronic
    government information products that have important historical
    value do not disappear, that they are preserved for permanent
    public access.
        In my long statement, I describe at some length the
    problems we have found trying to access information from
    government CD roms that have been distributed to depository
    libraries since 1988. The problem is that many early CDs and
    some continuing CD series use proprietary software and
    proprietary formats or both and are no longer usable at all. In
    addition, vast quantities of born-digital documents appear and
    disappear from government Web sites without notice or without
    any trace. It is alarming that a recent Mellon study found that
    the average duration----
        The Chairman. I hate to interrupt, but your time has
    expired. That is a call for votes, so you have to
    basicallyconclude if you could.
        Ms. Johnston. I am almost there.
        The Mellon study found that the average report on a
    government Web site is only available for 4 months.
        We know process is in place government-wide to ensure the
    entire life cycle of electronic government information and
    permanent public access and preservation.
        Chairman Ney and Ranking Member Larson, the library
    community is committed to working with you and GPO as they
    develop a strategic plan for the 21st century. We are committed
    to our partnership with you.
        Thank you very much for inviting me to participate in this
    important hearing. I am pleased to answer any questions you
    might have.
        The Chairman. Questions?
        Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Given the shortness of
    time--I have several questions, so I would like, with the
    permission of the Chair, to produce written questions for the
    panelists because time may not allow you to answer them
    thoroughly.
        But I would just like a general response, if you can,
    especially from the panelists representing labor and also from
    Mr. Cooper.
        First, Mr. Cooper, you argue that the government should
    generally engage in more formal planning process with respect
    to printing needs. You say there is resistance to such an idea.
    From whom and why?
        Mr. Cooper. I wouldn't call this overt resistance, but it
    is one of those issues we have proposed over many years. The
    difficulty is like, with closing Federal agency printing
    plants, there is no one place to go to get this done, whether
    it is through an Appropriations Committee process, or we
    discussed it with OMB. It is hard to get the one place, to get
    the one answer, to move ahead with it.
        Mr. Larson. Mr. Lord and Mr. Boarman, both of you commented
    at length about your concerns with regard to labor and your
    relationship with GPO, noting as well that it is not all a bad
    picture, but you are raising very salient points with respect
    to this.
        What is the biggest single thing that the Public Printer
    could do to make labor feel he considers them a partner in this
    transformation process now under way at the GPO?
        Mr. Lord. Well, above all, foremost, better communication,
    which is always the case in most situations.
        But also if--many Public Printers that I have served under
    have always advocated partnership with labor. But what my
    experience has showed me, what they mean by ``partnership'' is,
    I am going to make the decision and then I will get you
    together and inform you what that is. That is not our idea of
    partnership.
        I believe that a lot of the problem of the current
    administration, however, is timing more than it is--they need a
    deeper understanding that where GPO is today didn't just
    happen, that there was a lot of transition, a lot of sacrifices
    made; and employees just don't want to see the clock turned
    back by having to face another financial crisis, because what
    we see is huge amounts of spending for things that we don't
    believe are warranted or needed. And that is their biggest
    fear.
        I mean, we see some things that money is being spent on
    that we don't believe should be a top priority, especially at
    the same time you are talking about retraining huge amounts of
    people. We don't see the money is going to be there when it
    comes to our time to retrain at this rate of spending.
        We all see what has happened to the volume of work. But
    even if the Congress gave us a billion dollars to put in a
    revolving fund for any fiscal year, we can't get to it if we
    don't have chargeable hours. And overhead does not generate
    chargeable hours; it is just the opposite.
        And then the wholesale reductions that we see through the
    two buyouts that we have had, the overwhelming majority of
    those employees who seized the opportunity to go out are
    bargaining-unit jobs, are revenue-generating jobs, and
    therefore, are further compounding the costs of running the
    printing office. And we just don't see, if that continues, that
    the money is going to be there to do all this lavish retraining
    that Mr. James talked about. That is our biggest fear.
        Mr. Larson. I will defer to my other colleagues and just
    say that I am very concerned about the issues raised by the
    AALL.
        The Chairman. Mr. Brady.
        Mr. Brady. I know we have a vote on, and I will be brief.
        I want to restate something that was in the testimony of
    Mr. Boarman, that our oversight is critical to make certain
    that the GPO is never forced to retrench, cut corners,
    compromise quality and efficiency or lose productive personnel
    in order to maintain a management level layer that adds nothing
    to its output. And I promise you, I will be as diligent as I
    can be to try to make that not happen.
        The Chairman. We have a vote. There are questions that I
    wanted to ask, but I will submit them in writing and then we
    can converse back and forth.
        With that, I want to thank all of our witnesses and both
    panels for very good testimony. I know you have worked hard to
    prepare for the hearing today.
        I also want to thank our ranking member, Congressman
    Larson, Mr. Brady and their staff members who prepared for
    this.
        I ask unanimous consent that witnesses and members have 7
    legislative days to submit material into the record and for
    those statements and materials to be entered in the appropriate
    place within the record. Without objection, the material will
    be so entered.
        I ask unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to
    make technical and conforming changes on all matters considered
    by the committee at today's hearing. And without objection, so
    ordered.
        And that completes our business for today. The hearing is
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12 Noon, the committee was adjourned.]