    [House Hearing, 111 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    MARKUP OF H. RES. 279, H. RES. 303, H.R. 1679, H.R. 151, H.R. 586, H.R.
                               749, AND H.R. 415

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

                                    MEETING

                                   before the

                               COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                                 ADMINISTRATION
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                     HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 25, 2009

                                   __________

          Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration

                           Available on the Internet:
       http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/administration/index.html

                                   ----------
                             U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

    51-252 PDF                       WASHINGTON : 2009

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

                       COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                    ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania, Chairman
    ZOE LOFGREN, California              DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California
      Vice-Chairwoman                      Ranking Minority Member
    MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts    KEVIN McCARTHY, California
    CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas           GREGG HARPER, Mississippi
    SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
    ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama
                     S. Elizabeth Birnbaum, Staff Director
                   Victor Arnold-Bik, Minority Staff Director

      MARKUP OF H. RES. 279, COMMITTEE RES. 111-5, DISMISSAL OF ELECTION
     CONTEST, H. RES. 303, H.R. 1299, H.R. 1679, H.R. 151, H.R. 586, H.R.
                               749, AND H.R. 415

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009

                              House of Representatives,
                             Committee on House Administration,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to call, at 11:07 a.m., in Room
    1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Robert A. Brady
    (chairman of the committee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Brady, Lofgren, Capuano, Davis of
    Alabama, Lungren, and McCarthy.
        Staff Present: Liz Birnbaum, Staff Director; Jamie Fleet,
    Deputy Staff Director; Charles Howell, Chief Counsel; Matt
    Pinkus, Professional Staff/Parliamentarian; Kyle Anderson,
    Press Director; Kristin McCowan, Chief Legislative Clerk; Brian
    McCue, Professional Staff; Gregory Abbott, Policy Analyst;
    Khalil Abboud, Professional Staff; Jennifer Daehn, Elections
    Counsel; Victor Arnold-Bik, Minority Staff Director; Peter
    Schalestock, Minority Counsel; and Karin Moore, Minority
    Legislative Counsel.
        The Chairman. Good morning. I would like to call the
    Committee on House Administration to order.
        Before we start, I would like to recognize and welcome
    students from W.T. Woodson High School in Fairfax, Virginia.
    They are seniors that have been studying government and decided
    to observe our hearings today. Welcome all of you, and you all
    look bright-eyed. Are your teachers here with you?
        Voice. No.
        Voice. A chaperone.
        The Chairman. Can you get rid of the chaperone? I used to.
        Thank you all. We applaud your interest and your being here
    today to watch democracy in practice, so to speak. So, again,
    we thank you and appreciate your being here.
        The committee meeting will come to order. We have a number
    of items on the agenda today. First we will consider H.
    Resolution 279, the primary expense resolution to fund the
    standing and select committees of the House for the 111th
    Congress. Every 2 years the committee holds hearings on the
    needs of House committees in the coming Congress. We then write
    a resolution authorizing funding for those committees. During
    our hearings on February 11th and 25th, we heard from all the
    Chairmen and most of the Ranking Members from other committees.
    We are now prepared to act on the committee funding.
        I will now recognize our Ranking Member, Representative
    Lungren, for an opening statement.
        Mr. Lungren. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I would
    also like to welcome the students here. I would like to begin,
    however, by acknowledging how well the staff on both sides of
    the aisle in this committee have worked through this process. I
    appreciate that very much.
        While we appreciate the access to the committee funding
    information, I know you would agree with me that we believe it
    is crucial for both sides to have as much time as possible to
    review the information and properly scrutinize all the data
    presented to committee members.
        I realize that you got this to us as soon as we had numbers
    that you felt were those that we could go forward with. But I
    would hope in the future, it would be helpful to have more time
    to review all the committee submissions. But considering the
    compressed time frame we have, I appreciate how well both sides
    have worked.
        As I told many of the Chairs and Ranking Members who
    appeared before us, the funding granted for this Congress would
    likely be substantially less than the requests submitted by
    each committee. I understand the genuineness of the request
    made by the Chairs and Ranking Members, but we in this
    committee have an obligation to look at those fairly carefully
    and also look at it in the context of the overall budget
    request from this Congress.
        And just as the American people have had to do more with
    less, we must also stretch the resources available to the
    Congress with a focus on efficiency and by making difficult
    choices on what issues are truly of the highest legislative
    priority.
        So I would like to thank the Chairman for his partnership
    in ensuring that the committee funding request we send to the
    floor will provide adequate funding for the jobs to be done by
    the legislative committees, and yet demonstrates a fiscal
    responsibility in keeping with these difficult economic times.
        I don't think in the numbers that we have had presented to
    us, we are going to restrict any committee from doing the job
    that they need to do; but at the same time, I think we have
    done very careful work in asking the questions and ensuring
    that we can justify the requests that have been made. And, once
    again, I thank the Chairman for his interest and for his
    cooperation on this.
        The Chairman. Thank you. I now would like to call up and
    lay before the Committee House Resolution 279, the primary
    expense resolution for the 111th Congress. Without objection,
    the resolution will be considered as read and open to amendment
    at any point.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. I will now offer the Chairman's mark, an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute which is in the
    members' packets. And, without objection, we will disburse with
    the reading of the substitute.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Let me describe what we have done with this
    amendment. Over the last Congress, the committees of the House
    conducted far more hearings and did far more work than in
    recent years. They have done all this without an increase in
    funding. Last Congress we were not even able to keep up with
    inflation. We realize that all the committees have been
    struggling to operate on limited funds, and they will have to
    even work harder to do so in this Congress due to the
    challenging of our economic situations and other legislative
    priorities.
        At the same time, we know that the economic status of the
    Nation means that we must do more with less. So we are not
    going to be able to give the committees all the funds that they
    have requested.
        The amounts stated in the resolution, as introduced: In
    general, the substitute gives each committee for 2009 the lower
    of either the amount they requested or an increase of 4.78
    percent over the funding of 2008. That percent equals the cost-
    of-living increase for Federal employees in D.C. for the year
    2009.
        There are a few exceptions to this substitute. First, we
    provided additional funds to the Judiciary Committee to
    undertake its mandatory inquiry into judicial impeachments,
    which is not an ordinary cost of that committee.
        Next, the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Financial
    Services Committee and the Small Businesses Committee each have
    undertaken extra responsibilities in this Congress. These three
    committees will each receive an additional $378,000 above
    inflation in 2009.
        The committee on Standards of Official Conduct will receive
    an increase of $81,000 over the COLA.
        Finally, we have not increased funding over the 2008 for
    the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, since we have
    already expanded the oversight work of all committees in this
    Congress by amending the rule in H. Res. 40.
        We add it all up, that keeps the total committee funding
    for 2009 at just 4.78 over the total funding from 2008. In 2010
    the committee will receive an across-the-board increase of 3.9,
    which is our estimate of the inflationary increase needed to
    keep staff paid in the coming year.
        I would like to make one observation as it relates to how
    the Minority funds their operation. I strongly support the two-
    thirds/one-third principle. As the Congress continues working,
    I want the Minority to come to me with any instances at all
    where they have not been treated fairly, where the two-thirds/
    one-third doctrine has been violated. And I promise to our
    members on both sides that I will work with those committees to
    bring the parties together and make sure that the Minority is
    never disadvantaged in performing their work. After all, we are
    in the Majority today; we may not be in the Majority tomorrow.
    So I am not only carrying the flag for the Minority, but I am
    carrying the flag for the Majority at one point in time, too.
        Is there any debate on the substitute?
        Mr. Lungren. Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. I recognize Mr. Lungren.
        Mr. Lungren. I would move to strike the requisite number of
    words. First of all, I want to thank you for the comment on the
    one-third/two-thirds. While I would have preferred that we have
    that actually in the resolution, I appreciate the Chairman's
    commitment to the one-third/two-thirds split.
        This I think worked well when we were in the Majority. I
    think it works well when we are in the Minority. I think it
    gives a certainty out there and it does allow the Minority to
    have sufficient staff so that they can carry out their
    responsibilities.
        I recall when there were times when that was not the case.
    And so for our committee being the committee that authorizes
    the budgets for the various committees of the House, I think
    this is a very important matter.
        Secondly, there might be some press reports about what the
    increases are, that they total 8.67 percent. But remember, that
    is over the 2-year period of time. The Chairman has articulated
    what it is for the first year and then for the second year.
        The amount requested additional for the Standards
    Committee, otherwise known as the Ethics Committee, I hope it
    is sufficient for them to do their job. In the last Congress,
    the only committee that I questioned in terms of the adequacy
    of their budget was the Ethics Committee. The request that we
    have had as of this morning for the additional--I think it was
    $87,000--I think is appropriate. I hope it is what is
    necessary.
        I would just say on that that we have an obligation not
    only to act ethically, but to make sure the American people
    understand, with that degree of transparency, that we are doing
    that. When we have a situation that we don't fund the Ethics
    Committee sufficiently so that, for instance, questions about
    financial disclosures which were filed last year, almost a full
    year ago, have not yet been answered. That is not a criticism
    of the committee; it is an observation over our failure to
    fully fund that committee.
        So, Mr. Chairman, I would just say on the only committee I
    would say this about: If there, in fact, is insufficient funds
    to do the job that they must carry out, I hope we will be open
    to immediately responding to that to ensure that that job is
    done. And with that, I----
        Ms. Lofgren. Would the gentleman yield?
        Mr. Lungren. I would be happy to yield.
        Ms. Lofgren. I would like to briefly address and thank the
    gentleman for his support. Jo Bonner, the Ranking Member and I,
    I think we talked about five times a day and worked carefully
    to put together this proposal, we believe based on the work
    that we have done that this is going to be sufficient. If not,
    we will certainly come back.
        But in the last several Congresses, the budgeted amount for
    the committee was actually not expended. There are a number of
    vacancies that we are working very hard to fill, and we think
    that the funds here, plus the expenditure of what was already
    appropriated is going to provide us what we need.
        And certainly there are some rebuilding efforts necessary,
    and we are actively engaged in that process. And I thank you.
        Mr. Lungren. I thank you for that. I will just say overall,
    I am pleased that this committee was able to bring down the
    requests that were made by all the committees, and we have come
    up with a measurable decrease in the expected or the requested
    increases from the various committees. The only exception I
    make is with respect to the Committee on Ethics because of the
    role it plays in this House and the importance of ethical
    issues right now before us. And with that, I yield back.
        The Chairman. Mr. McCarthy.
        Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, my only one--I guess I phrase
    it as a question. When I go through these numbers and, one, I
    echo what Mr. Lungren said, I am glad we are able to move the
    percentage increase down from what everybody was requesting.
    But one that stands out is Oversight and Government Reform. It
    gets 3.43 percent over 2 years, which I think is great, maybe
    everyone could have got to that place. But this year it gets
    zero. And looking at where this world has changed about
    transparency, looking at what has transpired just in the last
    couple of weeks about things that are being uncovered, I am
    just wondering why; and do they feel it is adequate, and
    knowing that we want greater government transparency, that they
    are zero this year?
        The Chairman. Naturally they do not feel that it is
    adequate. But after reviewing it, and looking at it and
    speaking with all pertinent parties, they felt that they could,
    without question, function in the right and proper manner
    without an increase. Because they have been increased for years
    on end. I understand, but I am not real sure that they have
    maybe given back money in the past. And with the new rule that
    we now have that everybody has regular oversight, that will
    probably take care of some of our own internals for every
    committee that has to come in front of us or send a report for
    all their oversight. So we take some responsibilities from
    them. That was the thought process of that.
        Mr. McCarthy. Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. The
    only thing I see in history, I have one that goes back to the
    106th. They were actually decreased in the 106th and 107th, by
    1 percent. Others were increased. In the world of transparency
    as we look forward if they are to come back, that we are not
    able to look at ways, especially with the TARP and other things
    transpiring, this may be a role, especially under their
    jurisdiction, to be able to look at certain things that we
    hadn't thought of in the past.
        The Chairman. If that would happened? I think that we are
    going to address that in an amendment that Mr. Lungren will be
    offering.
        I now recognize Mr. Lungren to offer amendment.
        Mr. Lungren. I have an amendment at the desk.
        The Chairman. Without objection, the amendment to the
    amendment in the nature of a substitute is considered to be
    read.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. And I recognize Mr. Lungren.
        Mr. Lungren. I thank the Chairman very much. And this I
    think goes to the question that the gentleman had. When we had
    the hearings with the Ranking Members and the Chairpersons, I
    asked each and every one of them whether or not they would
    agree to cooperate with us in coming back after a year for us
    to look at that.
        Additionally, we have in our working with the Majority
    side, I think, come up with a stronger template of reports that
    all the committees are required to lodge once a month, and that
    will be available electronically for people to see, so that the
    members can make a judgment as to whether or not the committees
    are engaged in vigorous oversight, as they are required to do
    under the rules.
        And then at the end of the year, the purpose of my
    amendment is to specifically say that they will come back to
    report to us, so that we will have the regular monthly reports
    that will be available to all. And then at the end of the year,
    they will come back and we can review it here.
        The Chairman was supportive in our questioning of the
    members of the committees as they came before us. And I believe
    that if we adopt this amendment it will be a model of the
    transparency that we are trying to get from both sides of the
    aisle, and both sides of the Capitol, to help us as we go
    forward. That is basically what my amendment is and with that I
    yield back to the Chairman.
        The Chairman. Any other debate on the amendment?
        I support the amendment offered by Mr. Lungren. During our
    2 days of funding hearings, we were pleased that all the Chairs
    and all the Ranking Members agreed to come back. Agreeing to
    coming back and coming back sometimes can be two different
    things. And I also thought it was a good idea that this
    solidifies the effort. And I urge the committee to support it,
    to bring our Chairmen and our Ranking Members to come back just
    to address the issue that Mr. McCarthy raised, that if there is
    a slack somewhere--I am sure we can find funding for our own
    committee--that may not be able to function because of that. I
    urge our colleagues to support the amendment.
        Any other comments? So the question is on the amendment
    offered by Mr. Lungren to the amendment in the nature of a
    substitute.
        All those in favor signify by saying ``aye.''
        All opposed, ``no.''
        The ``ayes'' have it, and the amendment to the amendment in
    the nature of a substitute is agreed to.
        No roll call is needed.
        Mr. Lungren. Mr. Chairman, could I ask you to enter into
    colloquy on the issue that I mentioned before about public
    disclosure of monthly committee reports?
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Mr. Lungren. I thank the Chairman for his indulgence. As
    the Chairman is aware, one of the requirements we have in the
    committee's handbook is that, ``Each committee must submit to
    the Committee on House Administration by the 18th of each month
    an original and two copies of a report signed by the committee
    Chair on the activities of the committee during the preceding
    month.''
        Some of the items required in the monthly report include
    progress on specific investigations, statement of expenses,
    report of travel, as well as staff salaries. In addition, the
    monthly report of each committee, they are currently required
    to be available for public inspection. One of the items in our
    committee rules, rule 4(e) as we adopted, states: To the
    maximum extent feasible, the committee shall make its
    publications available in electronic form.
        Given our committee's commitment to transparency and
    accountability, would the Chairman be willing to work with me
    in order to make those monthly reports available on our
    committee Web site?
        The Chairman. Yes, without question.
        Mr. Lungren. Thank you very much.
        The Chairman. You are welcome.
        Are there any additional amendments?
        Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the
    amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
        The question is on the amendment. All in favor say ``aye.''
        ``No,'' opposed.
        The ``ayes'' have it. And the amendment in the nature of a
    substitute is agreed to.
        The amendment is agreed to.
        Now, I move that the Committee report H.R. 279 favorably to
    the House with an amendment. The question is on the motion.
        All in favor say ``aye.''
        Any opposed?
        The ``ayes'' have it and the motion is agreed to.
        The Chair would announce that he is asking for 2 additional
    calendar days provided by clause 2 of rule 11 to allow members
    time to file additional Reviews. The Chair notices that the
    gentleman will exercise his right for those 2 additional days.
        Mr. Lungren. Thank you very much.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        The next item on the agenda is the committee funding
    resolution. I now call up Committee Resolution 111-5 providing
    the allocation of official mail allowance to committees of the
    House for the 111th Congress. This resolution is limited to
    $5,000 per year for each committee's mail.
        Without objection, the committee resolution is considered
    as read and open for amendment.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Is there any debate?
        Are there any amendments?
        If not, the question is on agreeing to the committee
    resolution.
        All those in favor say ``aye.''
        All those opposed, no.
        In the opinion of the Chair the ``ayes'' have it and the
    Committee Resolution 111-5 is agreed to. Without objection, the
    motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
        I now call up an original resolution relating to an
    election contest in the First Congressional District of Hawaii.
    The text of the resolution is before the members and I ask
    unanimous consent to dispose with the reading. And, without
    objection, it is so ordered.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. I now recognize Vice Chair Lofgren for a
    statement.
        Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman, there has been bipartisan
    agreement that this election contest relating to the First
    Congressional District of Hawaii is completely frivolous. It
    should by dismissed without consuming any additional time of
    the committee. And unless there is further comment, I would
    move that the committee favorably report to the House an
    original resolution, the text of which is before the members,
    to dismiss the election contest in the First Congressional
    District of Hawaii.
        The Chairman. Is there any additional debate?
        Mr. Lungren. We agree.
        The Chairman. We agree.
        If there is no further debate, without objection, the
    previous question is ordered. I recognize again Vice Chairman
    Lofgren for the purpose of making a motion.
        Ms. Lofgren. I just made the motion.
        The Chairman. You made a motion?
        Ms. Lofgren. Yes.
        The Chairman. The committee favorably report the House's
    original resolution, the text of which is before the members,
    to dismiss the election contest in the First Congressional of
    Hawaii.
        The question on the motion offered by the Vice Chair, all
    those in favor say ``aye.''
        Any opposed, ``no.''
        The ``ayes'' have it. The motion is agreed to, without
    objection. A motion to consider is laid upon the table and the
    resolution will be reported to the House.
        Without objection, the staff will be authorized to make
    technical and conforming changes to the resolution.
        The committee now will turn to markup of H.R. 1299, the
    Capitol Police Administrative Technical Corrections Act of
    2009, which the House passed essentially the same bill last
    year.
        As its title suggests, H.R. 1299 does not make substantive
    policy changes for the Capitol Police; rather, it corrects
    drafting errors, modernizes outdated terms and repeals
    inconsistent provisions now on the books. Chief Morse formally
    requested both of these corrections, and the committee staff
    found a few others.
        I urge the committee support the bill once again. And would
    the gentleman from California like to make a statement?
        Mr. Lungren. Mr. Chairman, we have examined the bill and we
    agree this is technical in nature. It does not make substantive
    changes and it corrects a number of things that were oversights
    or drafting errors, and we would agree with the Chairman's
    position that this be supported.
        The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
        I now call--any other comments?
        I now call up and lay before the committee H.R. 1299.
    Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed
    with and the bill is considered as read, and open for an
    amendment at any point.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Is there any debate? Are there any
    amendments?
        If not, I move to report H.R. 1299 favorably to the House.
    The question is on the motion.
        All those in favor say ``aye.''
        Any opposed?
        In the opinion of the Chair the ``ayes'' have it. And the
    bill will be reported to the House. Without objection, the
    motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
        The next item the committee will take up is H.R. 1679, the
    House Reservist Pay Adjustment Act of 2009. This bill will
    replace lost income from military reservists working for the
    House of Representatives when they are active for more than 30
    days.
        I introduced this important bill after discussion with
    several House employees who also serve as members of the armed
    service. When they are called up, these men and women must
    leave homes, families and jobs, often for an undetermined,
    unpredictable amount of time.
        We know that many leading companies have helped reservists
    and their families by continuing to pay the difference between
    their usual salary and their Active Duty pay. This bill would
    do the same for the House employees. It requires the CAO to
    provide that supplement for House employees, if and when they
    are activated involuntarily.
        I am pleased that Ms. Davis and the Republican members of
    the committee have joined me in sponsoring this legislation.
    And I now would like to recognize, again, our Ranking Member,
    Mr. Lungren, for any statement.
        Mr. Lungren. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
    congratulate you for bringing this forward. This is a concept
    that we have suggested as an example of what should be done in
    the private sector, if they can afford to do so. And that is,
    you have men and women who are called up to Active Duty for
    more than 30 days. They have a drastic reduction in pay
    relative to what they are earning in many cases. It puts a
    tremendous burden on them and their families. And it just seems
    that we who encourage this in a private sector, where they can
    afford it, ought to be leaders and do it ourselves.
        I thank the gentleman for introducing it and I am happy to
    join him in sponsoring it and hope that we can have expeditious
    consideration by the full House.
        The Chairman. Thank you, I thank the gentleman.
        I now call up and lay before the committee H.R. 1679.
    Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed
    with and the bill is considered as read and open for amendment
    at any point.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Is there any debate? Are there any
    amendments?
        If not, I now move to report H.R. 1679 favorably to the
    House. The question is on the motion.
        All those in favor signify by saying ``aye.''
        Any opposed?
        In the opinion of the Chair the ``ayes'' have it. And the
    bill will be reported to the House, without objection. The
    motion is reconsidered and laid upon the table.
        The next item on the agenda is H.R. 151, the Daniel Webster
    Congressional Clerkship Act of 2009. This bill was introduced
    by Vice Chair Lofgren and sponsored by Ranking Member Lungren.
        H.R. 151 establishes the Daniel Webster Congressional
    Clerkship Program. Similar programs can be found at the White
    House and the United States courts.
        I would now like to recognize the bill's sponsor, Ms.
    Lofgren, for a statement on the bill.
        Ms. Lofgren. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief since I am
    required to go to the Speaker's Office in 2 minutes.
        Mr. Lungren. Is that like going to the principal's office?
        Ms. Lofgren. It kind of is.
        The Chairman. The woodshed. They can appreciate that.
        Ms. Lofgren. This bill was approved by the House last year.
    It is an important measure that Mr. Lungren and I have worked
    on very satisfactorily. Really, the brain child of the Stanford
    Law dean, actually. I want to give him credit. And it would
    really elevate the legislative branch in the same way the
    executive and judicial branch have the top lawyers in the
    United States in these clerkships. We think it will strengthen
    the legislative branch, and I really hope that we can move this
    through the Senate this year, promptly through the House and
    then through the Senate, so that we can accomplish this.
        CRS is not included in this at the current time. I think we
    can agree we can look at that down the road, and so we will
    make that public commitment to review it later. But I think at
    this point, I don't want to speak for Mr. Lungren, I think we
    are both pretty satisfied with the way this bill is. And I
    thank the gentleman.
        The Chairman. I thank the lady. Mr. Lungren.
        Mr. Lungren. Mr. Chairman, this bill is important for one
    very important reason. Now, in law school, if you are one of
    the more talented law students, one of the goals is to get a
    clerkship either with a court or with an executive branch. More
    for the courts than the executive branch. What that does is
    some of these outstanding students then go on to be outstanding
    members of the bar, but oftentimes become judges themselves.
    And if they have been trained their whole time that the end-all
    and be-all of the government is the judicial branch, and that
    they have the only determination of what is constitutional or
    not, they don't have a full appreciation for the coequal status
    of the legislative branch.
        And the interesting thing is this was brought to our
    attention by the dean of Stanford Law school, who you would
    think would like the way things are now. He noted that he sees
    this with his students and those who graduate. So this is a
    small effort to try and inculcate in students in law school
    that the legislative branch under the Constitution is a coequal
    branch with the others, and that here we have as much an
    obligation to uphold the Constitution in the manner that we
    carry out our responsibilities as does the judicial branch.
        It is a minimal amount of money when you really compare it
    to the overall cost of government. And it is our hope to begin
    an appreciation for the legislative branch in the ranks of law
    schools around the country. And I thank the Chairman.
        The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
        I now call up and lay before the committee H.R. 151.
    Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed
    with and the bill is considered as read and open for an
    amendment at any time.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Any amendments?
        If not, I move to report H.R. 151 favorably to the House.
    The question is on the motion.
        All those in favor signify by saying ``aye.''
        Any opposed?
        The ``ayes'' have it. And the bill will be reported to the
    House, without objection. The motion to reconsider is laid upon
    the table.
        Our next item for the committee is an important bill H.R.
    586, Civil Rights History Project Act of 2009, introduced by
    Mrs. McCarthy of New York and Mr. Lewis of Georgia.
        The civil rights history project is an important step
    toward recording the history of an important era. Gathering
    firsthand accounts from those citizens who fearlessly fought
    for equal rights will lend a unique perspective to what we have
    already known about the civil rights movement.
        Building on the success of the veterans history project,
    the civil rights history project will aim to highlight the
    efforts of those activists who otherwise go unacknowledged.
    While Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks and our own
    colleague, John Lewis, and some of the most well-known figures
    in the civil rights movement and countless others were equally
    instrumental in securing fair and equal treatment for African
    Americans. This project will tell that story.
        I would like to recognize Mr. Lungren for any remarks.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Lungren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this bill,
    having had the opportunity, along with Mr. Davis and others, to
    take the pilgrimage of civil rights down to Alabama just 2
    weeks ago and having had the opportunity to listen to some of
    the still-living legends of the civil rights movement. And
    understanding as you talk with them that they are only going to
    be with us a few more years, because of their age, it is
    important to have this project done as soon as possible.
        And I strongly support it and I thank the gentleman for the
    time.
        The Chairman. Thank you. Are there any amendments? Any
    other comments?
        If not, I will move to report H.R. 586 favorably to the
    House.
        The question is on the motion. All in favor signify by
    saying ``aye.''
        Any opposed, ``no.''
        The ``ayes'' have it and the bill will be reported to the
    House. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is on the
    table.
        Next we take up consideration of H.R. 749, a bill to amend
    the Federal Elections Campaign Act to permit a candidate for
    Federal office to designate someone to distribute the funds of
    that candidate's campaign in the event of the candidate's
    death.
        H.R. 749 will help to assure candidates for Federal office
    that the funds raised by their campaigns will be dispersed in
    accordance with their expressed wishes after they are deceased.
    The bill will not otherwise amend the terms and conditions of
    the disbursement of the funds under the act.
        Last Congress this committee reported this bill favorably
    and it passed the House. As introduced in the 111th Congress,
    H.R. 749 includes the amendments that were adopted by the
    committee during the last Congress.
        I would now like to recognize our Ranking Member Mr.
    Lungren.
        Mr. Lungren. I thank the Chairman for bringing this
    forward. As you know, our colleague from North Carolina, Walter
    Jones, has spoken to both of us on this. Out of a personal
    experience with the death of his father, a former Member, when
    learning that the disbursement of the funds that existed at the
    time of his death would be at the direction of the campaign
    treasurer, he saw that this would not have been in accordance
    with the wishes of his late father.
        And so all this does is give a Member an opportunity to
    think ahead of time that, in the event of death and there are
    funds available, that a person he would designate, most likely
    a member of his family, a spouse or a surviving member of the
    family, would designate those funds presumably to the
    charitable institutions that he would have an interest in,
    which may not be in accordance with the wishes of the
    treasurer, because oftentimes we know we hire treasurers, we
    have them concentrating on the campaign. Very simple, very
    straightforward.
        I thank the Chairman for bringing this up so expeditiously.
        The Chairman. Thank you. Any other comments?
        I now would like to call up and lay before the committee
    H.R. 749. Without objection, the first reading of the bill is
    dispensed with and the bill is considered as read and open for
    amendment at any point.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Is there any debate?
        I would like to quickly echo the comments of the Ranking
    Member. A lot of times, mainly for appearances, we do like to
    find an attorney, no disrespect, or an accountant, no
    disrespect, and we don't want to find a member of the family
    who knows about our wishes much, much better than anyone that
    we would have as our treasurer.
        So all this bill does is, again, at the time of a death of
    a candidate or somebody who is a Member of Congress, that the
    campaign funds that they have would be able to go to the
    designee, a member of the family who best knows their wishes
    than anybody else. So I do agree and hope that this bill
    passes.
        I now move to report H.R. 749 favorably to the House. The
    question is on the motion.
        All those in favor signify by saying ``aye.''
        Any opposed, ``no.''
        The ``ayes'' have it and the bill is reported to the House,
    without objection. The motion to reconsider is laid upon the
    table.
        Finally, the committee will consider H.R. 415, the Fallen
    Heroes Flag Act of 2009, introduced by Mr. King of New York.
    The bill would authorize Members of Congress to give flags
    flown over the Capitol to the families of firefighters, police
    officers and other rescue workers whose lives are lost in the
    line of duty. The flags would be accompanied by a certificate
    signed by the Speaker and the Member, expressing the
    condolences of the House.
        I would now like to recognize Ranking Member Lungren for
    any remarks.
        Mr. Lungren. The Chairman adequately described this. I
    support it and I thank Mr. King for introducing it, and I thank
    the Chairman for expeditiously considering it.
        The Chairman. Thank you. I now call up and lay before the
    committee H.R. 415. Without objection, the first reading of the
    bill is dispensed with and the bill is considered as read and
    open for amendments at any point.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Are there any amendments?
        If not, I move to report H.R. 415 favorably to the House.
    The question is on the motion.
        All in favor signify by saying ``aye.''
        All opposed, ``no.''
        The ``ayes'' have it and the bill will be reported to the
    House, without objection. The motion to reconsider is laid upon
    the table.
        Without objection, staff is authorized to make technical
    and conforming changes to the various measures considered by
    the committee today.
        I thank all of you for your participation, and I understand
    we have a vote in about 5 minutes and we will be able to make
    that. Thank you all and I now adjourn the committee.
        [Whereupon, at 11:39 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]