    [House Hearing, 118 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                    COMMITTEE FUNDING FOR THE 118TH CONGRESS

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                               COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                                 ADMINISTRATION

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 MARCH 1, 2023

                                   __________

          Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 www.govinfo.gov
                               www.cha.house.gov

                                   _______

                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    53-701                  WASHINGTON : 2023

                       Committee on House Administration

                        BRYAN STEIL, WISCONSIN, Chairman

    BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia            JOSEPH MORELLE, New York,
    H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia              Ranking Member
    GREG MURPHY, North Carolina          TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
    STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             DEREK KILMER, Washington
    MIKE CAREY, Ohio                     NORMA TORRES, California
    ANTHONY D'ESPOSITO, New York
    LAUREL LEE, Florida

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                               Opening Statements

    The Honorable Bryan Steil, Representative from the State of
      Wisconsin......................................................     1
    The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Representative from the
      State of Washington............................................     2
    The Honorable Frank Pallone, Representative from the State of New
      Jersey.........................................................     6
    The Honorable Joseph Morelle, Representative from the State of
      New York.......................................................     9
    The Honorable Mike Gallagher, Representative from the State of
      Wisconsin......................................................    11
    The Honorable Raja Krishnamoorthi, Representative from the State
      of Illinois....................................................    15
    The Honorable Glenn ``G.T.'' Thompson, Representative from the
      State of Pennsylvania..........................................    19
    The Honorable Patrick T. McHenry, Representative from the State
      of North Carolina..............................................    28
    The Honorable Maxine Waters, Representative from the State of
      California.....................................................    32
    The Honorable Mike Rogers, Representative from the State of
      Alabama........................................................    40
    The Honorable Adam Smith, Representative from the State of
      Washington.....................................................    43
    The Honorable Mark E. Green, M.D., Representative from the State
      of Tennessee...................................................    49
    The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, Representative from the State
      of Mississippi.................................................    52
    The Honorable Michael Guest, Representative from the State of
      Mississippi....................................................    57
    The Honorable Jason T. Smith, Representative from the State of
      Missouri.......................................................    71
    The Honorable Richard E. Neal, Representative from the State of
      Massachusetts..................................................    75
    The Honorable Michael T. McCaul, Representative from the State of
      Texas..........................................................    80
    The Honorable Gregory W. Meeks, Representative from the State of
      New York.......................................................    84

                              Prepared Statements

    Cathy McMorris Rodgers...........................................     4
    Frank Pallone, Jr................................................     8
    Mike Gallagher...................................................    13
    Raja Krishnamoorthi..............................................    16
    David Scott......................................................    21
    Glenn ``G.T.'' Thompson..........................................    24
    Patrick T. McHenry...............................................    30
    Maxine Waters....................................................    34
    Mike Rogers......................................................    41
    Adam Smith.......................................................    44
    Mark E. Green, M.D...............................................    50
    Bennie G. Thompson...............................................    53
    Michael Guest....................................................    59
    Susan Wild.......................................................    64
    Jason T. Smith...................................................    73
    Richard E. Neal..................................................    76
    Michael T. McCaul................................................    82
    Gregory W. Meeks.................................................    85
    Roger Williams...................................................    90
    Nydia M. Valazquez...............................................    93

                PART 2: COMMITTEE FUNDING FOR THE 118TH CONGRESS

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2023

                     Committee on House Administration,
                                      House of Representatives,
                                                        Washington, DC.

        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:02 a.m., in
    room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bryan Steil
    [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Steil, Loudermilk, Griffith,
    Murphy, Bice, Carey, D'Esposito, Lee, Morelle, Sewell, Torres,
    and Kilmer.
        Staff present: Tim Monahan, Staff Director; Caleb Hays,
    Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel, Acting
    Parliamentarian; Hillary Lassiter, Chief Clerk; Janet Schwalb,
    Deputy Staff Director of Advice & Guidance, and Operations;
    Nick Crocker, Deputy Staff Director; Jordan Wilson, Director of
    Member Services; Cade Alcock, Assistant Clerk; Jamie Fleet,
    Minority Staff Director; Khalil Abboud, Minority Deputy Staff
    Director; Matthew Schlesinger, Minority Oversight Counsel; Owen
    Reilly, Minority Professional Staff Member; Eddie Flaherty,
    Minority Chief Clerk; and Andrew Garcia, Minority Staff
    Assistant.

     OPENING STATEMEMT OF HON. BRYAN STEIL, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
         WISCONSIN, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

        The Chairman. The Committee on House Administration will
    come to order. I note a quorum is present.
        Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any
    time.
        I would like to thank my colleagues for their attendance
    for day two of our Committee funding hearings. In consultation
    with the Ranking Member, we are going to move right into
    today's business. Today, we will hear from the Chair and
    Ranking Members of 10 committees, beginning with Chairwoman
    Cathy McMorris Rodgers for the Energy and Commerce panel. We
    are going to then continue as we did yesterday. We will be
    giving 5 minutes to the Chair and the Ranking Member for
    opening statements, then 5 minutes each for the majority and
    minority to ask questions in total, as we did yesterday.
        Cognizant of time, we are going to dive right in.
        Thank you for being here with us, Chair Rodgers, and we
    will yield to you for 5 minutes for an opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, A REPRESENTATIVE
                IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

        Mrs. Rodgers. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
    Morelle, and to all the members. Thank you for this opportunity
    to testify in support of the Energy and Commerce Committee's
    funding request for the 118th Congress. Our request reflects
    the anticipated needs of the committee's majority and minority
    to best fulfill our Article I responsibilities.
        A well-functioning legislative committee is the best way
    that we assert our Article I powers on behalf of the people
    that we represent.
        I am proud of E&C's rich history of plowing the hard ground
    necessary to legislate, deliver results, and improve people's
    lives. Millions of Americans are depending upon us to tackle
    today's greatest challenges so they have the opportunity for a
    brighter future.
        I am also grateful for the relationship that we have built,
    that I have been able to build together with the Ranking Member
    now, Mr. Pallone. It is a relationship that is built on trust
    because I know that when--that trust is when the magic happens,
    and it is foundational to everything that we do.
        Last Congress, we worked closely together to maximize every
    penny of the committee's budget so both the majority and the
    minority could meet their needs. We also worked to improve how
    the committee operates. For the first time in the history of
    Congress, we held a bipartisan staff retreat. While Frank and I
    disagree on many things, we always agree to be good stewards of
    the committee's resources to better Energy and Commerce, the
    House, and deliver for taxpayers.
        Our committee has hit the ground running. By March 31st,
    Energy and Commerce will have completed 31 committee
    activities, including hearings in the field and Rayburn,
    markups, roundtables. We have managed five rule bills on the
    floor, including the first open rule this Congress, which
    considered 78 amendments in real time.
        In addition to supporting the fast pace to produce quality
    legislation, our request will give additional resources needed
    to increase our oversight capacity, improve Member involvement,
    modernize how we operate, and retain high-quality staff.
        There are several highlights of our funding request that I
    would like to share with you today: No. 1, boosting our work to
    conduct oversight and investigations of this administration and
    woke corporations under the leadership of Representative
    Griffith. He is our subcommittee Chairman of Oversight and
    Investigations.
        In addition to more staff, I have identified software to
    scrutinize more than $500 billion--half a trillion dollars--
    that we have identified that is within our jurisdiction. This
    software would help us track this spending and really help us
    expose waste, fraud, and abuse.
        I am committed to organizing more field hearings and site
    visits. There is no substitute for the members actually going
    on the ground outside of Washington, DC, to hear directly from
    those that are impacted. Last month, we held two field hearings
    in Texas where we had the participation of 20 Members from both
    parties. Our ability to significantly increase these activities
    is really a matter of resources.
        I am thrilled that Chairman Steil established a
    subcommittee focused on modernization efforts. I have requested
    funds to work with the CAO to build software which would
    drastically improve our productivity and effectiveness and
    hopefully becomes software that will help all committees. For
    example, the ability to create dynamic letter-tracking and
    automated notices would significantly improve our oversight and
    investigations.
        Finally, the quick and dramatic increases in the salary cap
    for House employees last Congress has really significantly
    changed the employee marketplace. The starting salaries for new
    staff in the 118th Congress is averaging between 6 to 12
    percent higher than budgeted. Our budget requests reflect these
    higher salary expectations for current staff and future hires
    to make sure that we attract and retain the best.
        I really appreciate the opportunity to testify in support
    of our funding request and look forward to answering whatever
    questions that you might have.
        [The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Chairwoman McMorris Rodgers.
        Ranking Member Pallone is recognized for 5 minutes.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

        Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Chairman Steil, and Ranking Member
    Morelle, and members of the Committee, and in particular, Mr.
    Griffith, of course, who is a member of our committee.
        I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on the
    proposed budget for the Energy and Commerce Committee for the
    118th Congress. I am pleased to join committee Chairwoman
    Rodgers here today and thank her for seeking me and my staff's
    input in the preparation of the proposed budget request.
        As you know, the Energy and Commerce Committee has the
    broadest jurisdiction of any authorizing committee in Congress.
    It legislates on healthcare, biomedical research, food safety,
    clean air, climate change, safe drinking water. The list goes
    on. With this broad jurisdiction, last Congress, 2,515 bills
    were referred to the committee, and of those, 26 measures
    became laws as a result of the committee's work. While that
    number may seem low, most measures included a compilation of
    dozens of bills.
        In fact, the committee was extremely productive in the
    117th Congress. All five of the major laws that were signed
    into law last Congress--the American Rescue Plan, the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS and Science Act, the
    Inflation Reduction Act, and the Fiscal Year 2023 omnibus--
    included key provisions from the committee.
        These laws will modernize our nation's infrastructure,
    lower healthcare and prescription drug costs, make
    unprecedented investments in climate action, tackle rising
    inflation, and boost American manufacturing and
    competitiveness.
        We also had major bipartisan wins to combat the mental
    health and substance-use disorder crisis, keep dangerous
    products off the market, make communication devices more
    secure, and ensure drugs and medical devices are safe and
    effective with the reauthorization of the FDA user fee program.
        Now, these were major achievements that are going to make a
    real difference in the lives of American people, and it is now
    critical that we ensure these legislative achievements are
    being implemented by the administration as Congress intended.
        Our proposed budget, which requests a 14-percent increase
    in funding for the committee above Fiscal Year 2023 levels,
    will greatly assist us in fulfilling our legislative oversight
    and investigatory duties over the expansive areas within our
    jurisdiction. The Energy and Commerce Committee has a long and
    proud history of bipartisan collaboration in the spirit of
    serving all Americans. In order to advance the committee's
    goal, it is critical that we retain a strong and experienced
    staff.
        Over the last several Congresses, the institution has taken
    tremendous steps to increase staff pay across the board,
    instituting a minimum annual pay of $45,000 for junior staffers
    and boosting the maximum pay for senior staffers. These pay
    increases are essential to attract and retain a diverse
    workforce that remains on Capitol Hill. In order to keep
    experienced staff, we have to continue to boost staff's
    salaries to be competitive with federal agencies in the private
    sector. Otherwise, the legislative branch is at a disadvantage,
    a distinct disadvantage, and we simply cannot allow that to
    happen.
        Long-time committee staff who intricately know and
    understand the legislative history and the laws that previous
    Congresses have passed are critical to ensuring that the
    legislative intent of these laws is known over time. This
    legislative history can't be underestimated and I think is
    vitally important for the committee and the Congress.
        Staffers with investigative expertise in particular are
    critical to our oversight of the administration and industries
    within our jurisdiction. We also have to ensure that the
    committee staff have the tools they need to do their job. This
    includes access to essential technical support and
    subscriptions to informational resources of current affairs,
    policy, the law, economic trends, and technology.
        I want to note that, last Congress, I made the decision to
    move away from an unfair and unworkable budget ratio that
    traditionally splits the committee budget between the majority
    and minority two-thirds to one-third respectively. Instead, I
    provided the minority with 40 percent of the total committee
    budget. This agreement worked well last Congress and is a more
    reasonable approach to the needs of both sides, in my opinion.
    I am pleased that Chairwoman Rodgers has committed to retaining
    that new split this Congress.
        Chairwoman Rodgers and I will also continue to work
    together to reduce and consolidate our costs wherever possible
    and as proactively as we can while also promoting a committee
    culture of accountability and respect for the American
    taxpayer. I think the committee has a lot of work to do over
    the next 2 years, and I firmly believe this funding request
    will provide us with the resources we need to get the job done.
        I just join with Chairwoman Rodgers in voicing my strong
    support for this budget request. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman
    and the members of the Committee, for hearing us this morning.
    I appreciate it.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3701.043

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3701.044

        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Pallone.
        The majority and minority will now have 5 minutes each to
    question the witnesses.
        I will take the 5 minutes and yield immediately to the
    esteemed member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr.
    Griffith.
        Mr. Griffith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairwoman McMorris Rodgers, you talked about it a little
    bit in your testimony, but explain why field hearings are so
    important and how it is different than just doing it in
    Washington, DC.
        Mrs. Rodgers. I think field hearings are extremely
    important. It makes all the difference to be able to go to a
    Member's district, to a state, and see firsthand what the issue
    may be. We saw that last week--or the week before last when we
    were down in McAllen, Texas, on the border focusing on fentanyl
    and the issues around fentanyl that is coming across the
    border. Then being able to go to Midland, Texas, and highlight
    American energy and how foundational American energy is. To
    have Republicans and Democrats join in these field hearings,
    see together, to hear the stories and see firsthand makes all
    the difference.
        Mr. Griffith. It is not just that the field hearing is in a
    different location, it is that, on top of the hearing, you can
    also go and visit sites like we did when we were in McAllen. Is
    that correct?
        Mrs. Rodgers. For sure, yes. We were able to go--yes. You
    don't just have the hearing. We were able to go down to the Rio
    Grande River after the hearing late at night and be able to see
    the activity at the river in real time. It makes all the
    difference, and I think it is an extremely valuable piece.
        We would like to do a lot more field hearings. The reality
    is, they also cost a lot more money because you are taking on a
    lot more expense around the travel and just beyond here.
        Mr. Griffith. You believe that is money well spent to
    educate the Members of Congress both on the Republican side and
    the Democratic side?
        Mrs. Rodgers. For sure. No doubt about it.
        Mr. Griffith. Absolutely. Now, you also talked about----
        Mr. Pallone [continuing]. if you would yield to me.
        In the last Congress when I was the Chair, I was--because
    of the cost, I was reluctant, as you know, to have field
    hearings because I just thought we didn't have enough money. I
    mean, there is no way to do----
        Mr. Griffith. You also had to deal with the COVID issues?
        Mr. Pallone. What was that?
        Mr. Griffith. You had to also deal with the COVID issues,
    which made travel difficult.
        Mr. Pallone. Yes, I guess you are right about that. I
    hadn't thought about that.
        What I am saying is that I knew that we were going to have
    a hard time doing field hearings because of the lack of
    funding. I just totally agree with Chairwoman Rodgers that, if
    we are going to be able to do more field hearings, which I
    think are important, we are going to need more money;
    otherwise, we are not going to be able to do them.
        Mr. Griffith. Right.
        Now, you also mentioned in your testimony, Chairwoman
    Rodgers, that you wanted to be able to try to track the 500
    billion in new spending that is under our committee's
    jurisdiction, and you were going to work on the modernization
    side to get the software that is right and so forth, but that
    costs money as well.
        Can you elaborate on what the committee has identified so
    far and what level of assistance you are looking for from the
    CAO to provide help in this endeavor?
        Mrs. Rodgers. Yes. Yes. Well, it is--we are talking half a
    trillion dollars that we have identified of new spending within
    this committee's jurisdiction. It is energy and climate, new
    spending around energy and climate, public health. We are going
    to be at the forefront of pandemic preparedness, as well as
    asking the--doing the review of the response to COVID and how
    we prepare for the next pandemic. Big Tech, and also the
    record-breaking investment in closing the digital divide in
    broadband spending. That is all part of that $500 billion.
    Having the staff as well as the software necessary, I think, is
    critical. Obviously, that is--it is a lot of money.
        Mr. Griffith. Let me shift to staff.
        Mrs. Rodgers. Okay.
        Mr. Griffith. In order to be able to track all of that, the
    committee is going to need additional staff to help out, say,
    on oversight because, already, we are doing numerous letters
    trying to track that money, but the letters just don't
    magically appear. It takes staff to help draft them and then
    Members to go over them and so forth. Isn't that correct?
        Mrs. Rodgers. Yes. We have some extraordinary staff with
    expertise that have been a part of the oversight and
    investigation subcommittee. The reality is, with this
    additional--especially with the additional spending and so many
    agencies and boards and commissions that have more spending, it
    takes a staff to do the follow up and to really understanding
    the details and be able to ask the questions and make sure that
    we are holding them accountable.
        Mr. Griffith. It is my understanding--either one of you can
    answer this. It is my understanding that, at one point in time,
    when Chairman Dingle was Chairman of the oversight and
    investigation subcommittee of Energy and Commerce, he had over
    100 people working on oversight.
        Is that something that you--I see staffers saying that is
    right, but do you all recall that?
        Mr. Pallone, do you recall--Ranking Member Pallone, do you
    recall?
        Mr. Pallone. Absolutely. I mean, maybe you don't remember,
    but I do. I mean, the majority of the work of the committee at
    that point was oversight.
        Mr. Griffith. Yes. Your request might be a little shy on
    the number of people needed.
        Mrs. Rodgers. It sounds like it. I think I need to amend
    our request here.
        Mr. Griffith. I appreciate it.
        I yield back to the Chairman.
        The Chairman. I am not going to ask what year Mr. Dingle
    was Chair of a subcommittee at Energy and Commerce.
        I now take 5 minutes to yield to Mr. Morelle.

    OPENING STATEMEMT OF HON. JOSEPH MORELLE, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
      NEW YORK, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will say the
    comment by Mr. Griffith was spoken like a true member of the
    Energy and Commerce Committee in terms of increased
    allocations.
        I do want to--I appreciate everyone being here, Chair
    McMorris Rodgers and Ranking Member Pallone. I do think just
    as--I will say this public service announcement. I think the
    staff here are amazing in the House. I don't think there are
    enough of them to support the incredible work we have to do. I
    know people are always conscious about spending money and
    taxpayers' dollars, but to get real value out of the Congress,
    I agree with you, Mr. Griffith. I think we should all be
    thoughtful about how--that is what you are saying--I think you
    said. I want to agree with you.
        Thank you both for being here. Thanks for your incredible
    work in a committee that is clearly critically important to the
    House.
        I want to, if I can, Mr. Pallone, I do want to commend you
    for your leadership as Chair in addressing the inadequacy of
    the split between the majority and minority. I think it was
    very commendable. I think--you know, just to casual observers
    outside of Congress, I think they would agree that the one-
    third/two-third split--I think people would just intuitively
    say it doesn't seem fair considering the ratios of the
    committee or the full House. In practice, a deep discrepancy
    makes it hard for the two sides to operate appropriately and
    frankly to cooperate, which is what we would like to see more
    of. Bipartisan cooperation on as many issues as we can.
        I understand that is not the only limitation on the funding
    split. I appreciate certainly the Chair agreeing to the old 60/
    40 split. I wanted to just ask you, is it true that the
    committee--the total amount of the staff slots is part of the
    issue here. It is not only the allocation, 60/40, which you
    have agreed to. The 2-1 split makes it hard to actually have
    the 60/40 materialize. Could you just comment on your
    perspective on that, Mr. Pallone?
        Mr. Pallone. Yes. As you suggest--but maybe I should make
    it clear if you don't know, though you probably do--that, you
    know, the budget is one thing, and the idea of the two-thirds/
    one-third is not set in rule or regulation, right? In other
    words, Chairwoman Rodgers can say: Okay, I have this budget.
    You know, I will do 60 percent, and you, Ranking Member
    Pallone, can do 40.
        She can decide that, right? The two-thirds/one-third is
    just custom. Do you know what I mean? We can change it, which
    we did when I was Chair, and she has agreed to do in this
    Congress. The same is true for the slots, right? In other
    words----
        Mr. Morelle. Yes. Just in terms of clarification for
    anybody who might be paying attention, it is that the dollars
    are allocated 60/40, but the slots, which are----
        Mr. Pallone. Well, it is similar. It is similar, Mr.
    Morelle, in the sense that, if you don't increase the number of
    slots the way you increase the overall budget, then she doesn't
    really have the ability to do a 60/40 split with the slots
    either. Do you know what I am saying?
        In other words, the problem is that you have increased the
    budget over the years, but you haven't increased the slots. We
    have money that we can't reallocate based on the slots. She
    could say to me, ``Okay, we are going to do the slots 60/40,''
    but if she doesn't have an increase in the number of slots,
    then she, practically speaking, can't do that because there is
    only so many slots.
        What we are basically saying is that we would like you to
    increase the slots at the same level that our budget increases
    this year. We would ask that the Committee add an additional 12
    slots, bringing the new total to 134. Then she could split
    those slots in proportion, 60/40, if she desires or if we agree
    to do that. Otherwise, she has more money, but she can't give
    me more slots because she has got work to do, and she can't
    just say, ``Okay, I am going to give you more slots,'' because
    then she won't have more slots. Does that make sense?
        Mr. Morelle. Yes, it does and I feel bad. I probably should
    have asked you, Madam Chair, first because we are talking about
    you like you are not in the room.
        Would you comment on that your perspective as well?
        Mrs. Rodgers. Well, I am very much a fiscal conservative.
    To my Republican colleagues, I would just appeal to you that it
    takes--in order for us to fulfill or Article I responsibilities
    of oversight and exercising the power of the purse and holding
    the administration, Article II, all of the spending within the
    federal government for us--in order for us to be effective, we
    have to have the people.
        Consider how much spending--we are talking money. It is
    also a lot of people within the federal government, boards,
    agencies, commissions. For us to be able to fulfill our
    responsibilities, we have to have the people to be able to do
    it.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you.
        Mr. Chair, I yield back.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much. I thank the Chair and
    the Ranking Member for joining us today. Your testimony is
    really helpful in regards to our markup next week. We are
    keeping this brief and quick today, but we appreciate your time
    here and your commitment to joining us in returning the House
    to regular order and transparency to our taxpayers. Have a
    wonderful day.
        Mr. Pallone. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Chairman Gallagher, Ranking Member
    Krishnamoorthi, thank you for joining us today. This is our
    commitment to returning the House to regular order and
    providing transparency to taxpayers. You will each be given 5
    minutes for an opening statement. There will be 5 minutes of
    questioning in total, 5 from the majority, 5 from the minority,
    to question the witnesses.
        To keep us going, I am going to yield immediately to
    Chairman Gallagher for 5 minutes for the purposes of an opening
    statement.

       STATEMENT OF THE HON. MIKE GALLAGHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN

        Mr. Gallagher. Thank you, Chairman Steil.
        Thank you, Ranking Member Morelle.
        Thank you for inviting us to testify here today in terms of
    the budget for the Select Committee on the Strategic
    Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist
    Party in the 118th Congress.
        We had our first hearing last night, and it was a very
    bipartisan event, and we are off to a good start. Of course, we
    need resources to proceed. My partner on our committee Ranking
    Member Raja Krishnamoorthi and I are both aware of the current
    constrained budget environment we face. Therefore, the work we
    do must be efficient and effective. We need to be efficient and
    effective with taxpayer money that you provide to us.
        As you will see in our submitted budget documentation, this
    budget would build and resource the entirety of the select
    committee from scratch. This includes salaries for 24 majority
    staffers and 12 minority staffers, as well as planning for and
    traveling to approximately four field hearings each year.
        Mr. Krishnamoorthi and I are aware of the challenge facing
    our committee. The Chinese Communist Party poses a serious and
    highly complex threat to the future of the United States. I
    would argue that this competition, this fight, is existential.
    In all areas of geopolitical competition, be it military, be it
    economic, be it diplomatic, the CCP is working to undermine our
    national interest.
        With the resources provided to this committee, the
    committee will work to, one, restore supply chains and end
    critical economic dependencies on China; two, strengthen the
    military to build a credible deterrent to prevent conflict;
    and, three, end the CCP's theft of American personal data and
    intellectual property; and, four, work to address the human
    rights violations committed at the hands of the CCP; and,
    finally, five, make a compelling argument to the American
    people that the CCP's techno-totalitarian state is a danger to
    the values of the free world, among other important work we
    must do.
        This, as you can tell, is no small task. Our committee will
    play a central role in driving China policy in Congress and
    working with the standing committees of jurisdiction to do so.
    My staff and I are committed to delivering actionable policy
    recommendations that will safeguard U.S. national interests and
    reduce the threat of the Chinese Communist Party.
        Please accept my thanks for your time and your
    consideration of the committee's request. I yield back my 2
    minutes and 53 seconds.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Gallagher follows:]

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Chairman Gallagher.
        I now yield 5 minutes to the Ranking Member, Mr.
    Krishnamoorthi, for the purposes of an opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you,
    Chairman Steil, Ranking Member Morelle, and members of the
    Committee. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify
    before you today regarding the Select Committee on the
    Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese
    Communist Party and our budget submissions for the 118th
    Congress.
        I want to begin by thanking Chairman Mike Gallagher for his
    leadership as well as his collaboration. We are trying to
    create a genuinely bipartisan effort, and I think last night
    illustrated that. We have been working very closely with the
    majority staff on a number of issues, including this budget. As
    you know, we are starting from zero. We are building from
    scratch, from ground up.
        As we work together to meet the challenges posed to this
    committee, I am very pleased to join Chairman Gallagher in
    supporting this funding request. Of course, as you know, the
    challenges that we are trying to deal with are pretty serious.
    The CCP poses major economic and security threats to our Nation
    as well as to democracy and prosperity around the world.
        Those dangers are clearly illustrated by the CCP's threats
    against Taiwan's democracy, its theft of hundreds of billions
    of dollars' worth of American intellectual property, and its
    numerous human rights abuses, including transnational
    repression of people here in the United States who have the
    temerity to advocate against, for instance, the genocide
    against Uyghur people in the People's Republic of China.
        Using the resources provided to this committee, we will
    study and develop the policy tools we need to protect our
    Nation and outcompete the PRC through developing our high-tech
    and manufacturing sectors, upscaling our workforce,
    strengthening strategic cooperation with our partners across
    the Indo-Pacific region, and countering the CCP's antimarket
    policies that hurt American workers.
        We will pursue this agenda while rejecting the dangers of
    xenophobia, suspicion, and division in America, which the CCP
    not only welcomes but also actively works to sow in our
    society. The tasks before this committee are significant, but
    Chairman Gallagher and I know that the budget that we have
    proposed will enable our committee to deliver the actionable
    policy recommendations necessary to ensure the security and
    prosperity of our nation in the face of serious threats from
    the CCP.
        Thank you, again, for your time and consideration of our
    committee's request. I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Krishnamoorthi follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        The Chair and Ranking Member will now each control 5
    minutes for the purpose of asking questions. I will start with
    myself.
        Mr. Gallagher, you are starting off with a new committee.
    Last Congress, I was the Ranking Member on a select committee
    with then Chairman Himes on Economic Disparity and Fairness and
    Growth. You are the only committee that has a reduction in
    budget in the second year. I think in large part that stems
    from the fact that you are really standing up and creating a
    new select committee that has never existed before in the
    House.
        I want to dive into some of the challenges you face, in
    particular on the recruitment of staff. Where many committees
    come in, they already have a standing staff; they are coming
    into kind of a rotation period. You are building this out of
    scratch. Can you kind of comment on what the challenges are you
    are facing? Because there has got to be really specific areas
    of expertise that you need regarding supply chain,
    intelligence, et cetera.
        Mr. Gallagher. Well, first, Mr. Chairman, let me say how
    grateful I am that you were willing to sit down with me from
    the start and just talk about lessons learned in running a
    select committee. It is not easy, particularly when you are
    dealing with an issue that transcends really every standing
    committee's jurisdiction. I really appreciate that. Your staff
    has also been phenomenal in working with both of our staffs in
    order to make sure that we are able to build the plane as we
    are flying it.
        The challenges range from the highly mundane and practical
    of where do we actually conduct our business, where does our
    staff work--you have been great in accommodating that space--to
    the how do we get equipment on the cheap. We tried to be very
    efficient in actually taking old equipment from a previous
    select committee that operated in the last Congress.
        To your comment on staff, obviously we need to balance two
    things that reflect really our two core functions. One is we
    want to be the Speaker and minority leader's policy incubator
    and accelerator for smart, strong, bipartisan China-related
    legislation in this Congress. The second, because we don't have
    unique legislative jurisdiction and in some ways more difficult
    and more important, is we want to have a strong communications
    function. We want to communicate to our colleagues and the
    American people why they should care about the threat posed by
    the Chinese Communist Party and why this is a threat that
    affects all Americans.
        We have benefited from a lot of expertise that has come
    from other committees, but you are right. We are having to
    recruit a lot of people with highly technical, highly
    specialized knowledge.
        The final thing I would say is, on the economic component
    of this competition, in my mind, that is the most complex. I
    know we all deal with it. You are on the Financial Services
    Committee. Finding really talented people that can understand
    how we derisk our supply chains from China, how we put in place
    adequate safeguards for American capital going to China, that
    is hard. It is not cheap. You need really talented, experienced
    people.
        The Chairman. I appreciate that. I think this is going to
    be an ongoing dialog this Congress. I think it is really
    important that we get this right. You have an incredibly
    important area of jurisdiction here as we work, in particular,
    on the supply chain side.
        I think one of the challenges we see with some of our
    select committees in particular on the hiring of really
    critical and thoughtful staff is that the duration of time that
    you can offer employment is 2 years. It is a little different
    than some of our other more traditional standing committees.
    Although maybe if somebody is an employee at will, there is a
    likelihood that individual, if proven productive, is going to
    be able to maintain a longer period of time and have a career.
    I think it is one of the challenges we face with our select
    committees where that term of service has a specific end date,
    and sometimes it is harder to recruit really talented people
    into that.
        One of the things I would like to just encourage you is to
    continue that dialog in particular with this committee where we
    can be helpful as you are looking to operate and get stood up.
    Because getting your committee stood up, operational out of the
    gates I think is going to be essential to the success of this
    Congress in making sure that we are dealing with the strategic
    threat posed by the Communist Party of China.
        I will reserve the balance of my time, and I will yield 5
    minutes to the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle.
        Mr. Morelle. Thanks so much, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Gallagher and Ranking Member Krishnamoorthi, thank
    you for being here. Thanks for your good work as you begin to
    address a clearly strategic threat to the United States.
        I was at an event back home the other day and said what I
    often say, which is I am not sure at any time in American
    history our economic security and national security are more
    completely aligned than they are today. The work you have to do
    and the work in front of you is important.
        It is also important, in my view, that to the greatest
    degree possible, Congress speak with a single voice on the
    world stage, internationally, as well as to the American public
    about the threats we face. I appreciate your work. I have very
    few questions. We are moving this along pretty quickly.
        One I do want to ask relative to the distribution of
    resources, and this will be directed to you, Mr. Chair. I want
    to just get assurances that, when it comes to the minority in
    terms of their allocation, that they will be unimpeded in their
    desire to spend the resources that they have without any
    interference from the majority. I would ask for your commitment
    to that.
        Mr. Gallagher. You have my assurance on that, Ranking
    Member Morelle. I appreciate that. I hope in our early going
    that you would hear from the Ranking Member that we have been
    fully transparent and above board. There was a request for
    additional resources in terms of staffing on the minority side
    that we tried to accommodate. We have also shared some of our
    IT resources. We are going to look for efficiencies.
        You know, we are not naive enough to believe that we are
    going to agree 100 percent on everything when it comes to the
    strategic competition with China, but we are looking to
    identify, you know, what is the 75 percent that Congress can
    speak with one voice on? What is that 75 percent of the world
    can support? I think we will reflect that in our daily practice
    and how we allocate resources.
        Mr. Morelle. I don't know if the Ranking Member wanted to
    comment on that relationship as well.
        Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Yes. It has been terrific. Thank you
    for asking about that, Ranking Member Morelle. You know, I
    think that Chairman Gallagher and his staff have been a
    pleasure to work with and have really tried to--you know, we
    started just a little bit later than----
        The Chairman. I don't believe your mike is on. We can hear
    you fine, but I don't believe anybody on the live feed will be
    able to hear you.
        Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Sorry. The Chinese could hear, I am
    sure.
        Mr. Gallagher. The tens of viewers.
        The Chairman. Don't underestimate the Committee on House
    Administration, Chairman Gallagher, particularly before the
    markup on the budget.
        Mr. Gallagher. Strike the last word.
        Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Strike the last word.
        No, but just one other point that makes our hiring slightly
    more technically complicated is I think both of us are trying
    to hire Mandarin speakers as well so that people can be able to
    read the original text of what the CCP actually issues. We want
    to be as insightful as possible for you, the members of this
    committee, but also our colleagues and try to put before them
    the very best information we can from original sources. That
    kind of complicates the hiring as well.
        Mr. Morelle. I appreciate that. I would just also join with
    the Chair in offering our support as you go through this
    important journey and your important work.
        With that, I yield back. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Chairman Gallagher, Ranking Member
    Krishnamoorthi, thanks for joining us today. This is our
    commitment to returning the House to regular order and
    providing transparency to the American people. Congratulations
    on your hearing last night. We look forward to big things from
    the select committee this year. Thank you, and have a great
    day.
        Mr. Gallagher. Thank you.
        Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Chairman Thompson, thank you for joining us
    here today. Thanks for joining our commitment to returning to
    regular order and restoring transparency to the American
    people. We are giving our witnesses 5 minutes to make an
    opening statement. The majority and minority will each then
    have 5 minutes to ask questions regarding the budget requests.
        I will jump right in and yield 5 minutes to your opening
    statement. Thanks for joining us, Mr. Thompson.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. GLENN ``G.T.'' THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE
               IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. Chairman, thank you so much.
    Good morning, Chairman Steil, and Ranking Member Morelle, and
    members of the Committee.
        First of all, I would like to just--my Ranking Member sends
    his apologies. He is not able to make it. I would like to ask
    unanimous consent to be able to submit for the record his
    written testimony.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. David Scott of Georgia
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. I appreciate that. Thank you
    for inviting Ranking Member Scott and I here to share the
    Committee on Agriculture's bipartisan proposed budget for the
    118th Congress.
        As Chairman, I commit to ensuring this committee maintains
    its storied history of an effective and financially responsible
    body. The approaching expiration of the farm bill legislation
    impacts the Nation's entire agriculture value chain, and, quite
    frankly, our communities across the country, rural and urban
    alike, requires our shared prioritization.
        As many of you know, farm bills require tremendous effort
    every 5 years. Ongoing impacts related to supply chains, the
    crisis in Ukraine, and fluctuation of commodity prices and
    input costs further complicate our work. For Members, staff,
    and stakeholders, education to policy development, our
    immediate agenda impacts every Member of this chamber. This
    task and backdrop is our chief motivation in requesting
    additional resources.
        Personnel is imperative to our preparation and execution of
    hearings, listening sessions, roundtables, program audits and
    accounting, legislative drafting, and economic modeling and
    forecasting. We also need resources for extensive travel,
    including at least six bipartisan farm bill listening sessions
    across the country, among other activities outside of D.C.
        Additionally, there are more multiple reauthorizations and
    legislative priorities outside of the farm bill that require
    dedicated staff, not to mention a heightened workload due to
    pandemic-related packages and their outstanding implementation.
    Each intensify the committee's mandate to protect and serve
    rural America and consumers across the globe, and each require
    extensive travel outside of Washington, DC, to hear from the
    individuals impacted by every decision we make, from farm to
    nutrition, research to rural development.
        As shared in the Committee's questionnaire, we are seeking
    a 10 percent increase for staff salaries and related
    activities. These additional resources will allow both the
    majority and minority to attract, maintain, and reward staff,
    something of extreme importance to both of us. The
    institutional knowledge of the committee and its members relies
    heavily on the expertise, education, and diversity of the staff
    serving it.
        Unfortunately, the committee budgets have yet to recover
    from decreasing between 2012 and 2016, but they also have not
    kept pace with outsized inflation, both of which continue to
    plague our ability to attract and retain highly specialized
    employees. Frankly, we are not able to compete with the
    executive branch or the private sector and struggle to retain
    staff.
        We certainly have a lofty agenda ahead, and we will work
    tirelessly to enact that agenda with tenacity and financial
    responsibility. We appreciate your consideration of this
    request. I am happy to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Chairman Thompson.
        The majority and minority will each now have 5 minutes for
    questions. I will begin with the majority's time.
        Uniquely, this year, the farm bill comes up. It is once
    every 5 years. It has got to be a pretty different year in your
    committee. The funding request is actually only up 5 percent
    over the previous year. This is where a lot of the action takes
    place in your committee.
        Could you kind of just walk through how this is going to be
    different from a funding perspective for this year? Or do you
    view that steady state as being appropriate?
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. No. Actually, an increase is
    warranted when you look at--well, the baseline of--there was an
    announcement today of, you know--and this tends to happen, but
    the timing could have been unfortunate for Mr. Scott having, I
    think, a number of staff who are seeking greater opportunity in
    the executive branch. I am not sure--maybe somebody is going
    downtown. I am not sure everywhere they are going, but I know
    the USDA was one of those places. That tends to occur from time
    to time. That is kind of the baseline of what we are doing.
        Then you look at the farm bill year where you need the
    expertise. We need to bring in talented folks. We need
    economists, you know, to be able to look at the economics,
    short term and long term, on the policies that we put forward.
    And that is an expertise we have to invest in.
        When you look at the need--and we have always traditionally
    done this. It is not something new. In addition to doing
    intense hearings here in Washington, we are doing farm bill
    listening sessions, which is a fairly efficient way of
    achieving things versus a, you know, formal hearing. It is
    getting the voices from across rural America. We have always
    done those. As I said in my testimony I presented, we are
    looking at the need for at least six of those. It needs to be
    regional around the country because agriculture, where it
    shares a lot of things in common, quite frankly, there are a
    lot of differences regionally. We need to be able to represent
    that as we work on this--you know, this language that will be--
    that will serve not just our communities and those who--I like
    to phrase it this way: those who produce, those who process,
    and those who consume. That would be everybody, you know,
    across this country.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much. Never shortchange
    yourself on dairy expert as we go into the farm bill year.
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. Amen.
        The Chairman. If I can go from the big picture into a
    little bit on the mundane, I know, inside your budget, you have
    around $140,000 for subscriptions for both sessions. One of the
    things that this Committee is going to be committed to this
    cycle is looking for ways to save taxpayers' money and where we
    have a lot of committees engaged in subscription services and
    other committees doing it separately, looking for kind of an
    economy of scale. Does anything jump out to you in particular
    that you may benefit that other committees are engaged in a
    similar manner?
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. Yes, it is--I mean, the
    subscriptions are incredibly important, right? That allows us
    to be able to respond to the issues immediately as things come
    across our desk. We do appreciate--I believe it is the
    Enterprise subscription system, which provides a lot of
    different resources. There are two in particular that fall
    outside of that, if that could be encompassed: the Bloomberg
    BGov and POLITICO Pro. In the scope of what we do with our
    committee, it would be very helpful to have that.
        You know, these subscriptions--it is challenging. It seems
    like there is a difference of what committees have to pay for
    compared to a Member's office. Those two in particular
    certainly stand out.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much. That is something this
    committee is going to look into. I appreciate your testimony.
        I will now yield 5 minutes to be controlled by the Ranking
    Member, Mr. Morelle.
        Mr. Morelle. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Nice to have you
    here. I agree that the incredibly important work of the
    Agriculture Committee grows even larger when you have the farm
    bill to consider. I appreciate all the hard work you have to
    do.
        I come from Upstate New York. I noticed you are having a
    field hearing in New York. I don't know where, but I hope it is
    Upstate. I remind people all the time, and they may find this
    surprising, that depending how you sort of measure it,
    agriculture is either the No. 1 or two industry in New York
    State.
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. That is right.
        Mr. Morelle. Which I don't think people often think of us
    as an agricultural state, but we are. My region is certainly
    right in the center of that agricultural activity. I appreciate
    your hard work.
        I just want to quickly, in addition to putting a plug for
    Upstate New York as part of your field hearing, want to--you
    had indicated in your written submission to us that you would
    follow the practice of not impeding in any way the minority's
    ability to spend their allocation. I assume that you are going
    to be committed to that rule?
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. Yes, absolutely. We are very
    blessed to have just a long-term, great working relationship
    with Ranking Member Scott. The allocations would be--and this
    is a bipartisan proposal. It is basically on precedent of what
    we have done.
        Mr. Morelle. Very good. I am going to take my cue from the
    Chair and just ask for a much more mundane question, which is,
    in the last Congress--I know we created a process by which
    field hearings would be conducted where we bring in things like
    the Sergeant at Arms, Capitol Police, the Clerk's Office, all
    sort of coordinated together to help reduce the cost of those
    hearings. Is that the process you expect to use when you are
    conducting your field hearings?
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. Yes. We want to do it in a
    very efficient way, obviously, as we are planning laying these
    out, that are strongly bipartisan. We basically want to
    replicate what we did in past farm bills and specifically in
    the 2018 farm bill, which was highly effective, bringing the
    voices of American agriculture to the table so that they have a
    voice at the table as we prepare this bill.
        Mr. Morelle. Alright. Thank you, again, for your hard work,
    for your work with the Ranking Member, and I wish you all the
    very best.
        With that, I yield back.
        The Chairman. Chairman Thompson, thanks for being here
    today. You have got a big year ahead of you with the farm bill.
    We appreciate all the work that you are doing and all the work
    that you are about to do on behalf of all of America's farmers.
    If we are making pitches for field hearings, keep Wisconsin in
    mind.
        In serious sense, we appreciate your time here today and
    your commitment to reestablishing regular order and
    transparency to taxpayers. Have a wonderful day.
        Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania. Alright. Very good. Thank you
    very much.
        The Chairman. Chairman McHenry, Ranking Member Waters,
    thanks for joining us today. This is our commitment to
    restoring regular order to the people's House and transparency
    to America's taxpayers. We are going to move along pretty
    quickly. We will give each of you 5 minutes for an opening
    statement, then myself and the Ranking Member will each control
    5 minutes to ask questions of the witnesses. We appreciate you
    being here.
        Without ado, I will yield to Chairman McHenry for 5
    minutes.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. PATRICK T. MCHENRY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

        Mr. McHenry. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
    Ranking Member Morelle, and members of the Committee. I am very
    glad to see one, two, and a third member of the Financial
    Services Committee on this committee and good friends and
    colleagues across the board. I appreciate you giving Ranking
    Member Waters and I the opportunity to present our budget
    request for the Financial Services Committee.
        We are at a pivotal moment for our financial system and the
    economy as a whole. Ranking Member Waters and I worked together
    to develop a thoughtful request that reflects this reality and
    allows us to deliver on the critical work we will undertake
    this Congress.
        We are requesting a 5-percent increase for the 118th
    Congress. This request is based on our massive workload that
    focuses on issues that directly impact all of our constituents.
    We have provided specific details about how these additional
    resources will be utilized in our written documents. I would
    like to briefly walk you through a few examples that highlight
    why this additional funding is so important.
        Too many Americans feel unheard and cutoff from the
    legislative process. Field hearings give us the opportunity to
    meet our constituents where they are and help show Members the
    unique needs of different regions of the country. They require
    time and money from travel, which is more expensive now, and
    lodging, which is more expensive now, to research, materials,
    and production. It is my goal for each of our six subcommittees
    to conduct a field hearing to hear the diverse viewpoints
    across the U.S. using the new funding.
        Next is staff. Hiring and retaining talented staff to work
    on behalf of our constituents requires paying them a decent
    wage. We know rampant inflation has made the cost of everything
    rise, including wages and labor. Additionally, changes to the
    rules governing staff pay that were put in place last Congress
    put further pressure on wage inflation for congressional
    employees. Job creators in the private sector have been reeling
    from these challenges, and the House is no different.
        In light of this inflationary environment, a 5-percent
    budget increase to cover staff salaries alone is a very modest
    request. I would also like to discuss the pressing issues I
    intend to address this year and how this increased funding
    would help the committee achieve its objectives.
        Advances in technology have benefited consumers, but they
    have also created gaps in our consumer financial data privacy
    laws. We must modernize and strengthen our existing protections
    to ensure consumers control their data. Last night, the
    committee considered my Data Privacy Act to do just that.
        The second pressing issue is enhancing capital formation
    opportunities just as we did a little over a decade ago with
    the bipartisan JOBS act. It is my hope that we can build on the
    successes of the JOBS act to deliver the type of growth that
    has proven enduring. That was a bipartisan bill, and my hope is
    we can have a similar bipartisan package this Congress.
        Finally, digital assets. Americans have lost billions of
    dollars in digital assets due to bad actors. This technology
    also has the potential to bring more Americans into the
    financial system and hold the promise of the next building
    blocks for the future internet.
        It is our job as legislators to provide clear rules of the
    road for this technology to protect consumers while allowing
    innovation to thrive here in the United States. I think we can
    achieve that balance, which is why I created a Subcommittee on
    Digital Assets Chaired by Congressman Hill of Arkansas. Digital
    assets are a new technology. Bringing regulatory reform to
    these assets will require extensive education of Members and
    staff alike, not just on the committee but off the committee as
    well, as well as a great deal of oversight of this marketplace.
    Both of these priorities require us to have the staff expertise
    and educational resources necessary to make solid public
    policy.
        Republicans will also return the committee's attention to
    responsible but rigorous oversight of the executive branch.
    Oversight and investigations require a great deal of resources,
    including hiring top-notch oversight attorneys and the software
    like Clearwell that is needed to process and analyze enormous
    document productions.
        Let me conclude with this. The next 2 years of policy will
    set the terms of debate for the next decade in the Financial
    Services Committee. The Financial Services Committee is ready
    with solutions to foster innovation and create economic
    opportunities for all Americans, but we need the resources to
    deliver.
        With that, I am happy to answer questions. I would like to
    thank the Ranking Member. Just as she reached out in the two
    previous Congresses when I was Ranking Member to make sure that
    we have a similar budget request and we have alignment before
    the House Administration Committee, I am grateful that she
    reciprocated in that relationship as well.
        Thank you to the Committee members, and I am happy to
    answer your questions. I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McHenry follows:]

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Chairman McHenry.
        Ranking Member Waters is now recognized for 5 minutes.

       STATEMENT OF THE HON. MAXINE WATERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Ms. Waters. Thank you very much. Good morning, Chairman
    Steil and Ranking Member Morelle. I am pleased to be testifying
    alongside Chairman McHenry this morning to discuss the funding
    needs of the Committee on Financial Services.
        This is my second tour as Ranking Member of the committee
    having previously served from 2013 through 2018. Given this
    previous experience as Ranking Member and my more recent
    experience as the committee's first Chairwoman, I believe that
    I have a unique perspective on the committee and the funding
    level it needs in order to be effective.
        Our committee splits its funding without restriction with
    one-third for the minority and two-thirds for the majority.
    This split has been very helpful in budgeting and meeting our
    needs, and I see no reason for it to change.
        The Committee on Financial Services has jurisdiction over
    our nation's financial institutions, capital markets, housing
    programs, monetary policy, and certain aspects of our nation's
    national security. These issues are highly complex yet critical
    for the effective functioning of our nation's economy.
        As a result, the committee must and has under Democratic
    and Republican leadership undertaken strong oversight of our
    nation's financial and housing systems. We are also on the
    front lines of any economic crisis. During the 2008 subprime
    meltdown, our committee was at the forefront of passing
    legislation to save our financial system from imploding.
    Several years later, we enacted legislation to prevent any
    future financial market meltdowns.
        Under my leadership as Chairwoman, our committee once again
    was called upon to draft and pass legislation to protect the
    economy at the onset of the pandemic and, later, to improve its
    implementation, including by strengthening the PPP program so
    that more community development, financial institutions, and
    minority depository institutions could fairly participate.
        Later, I worked with Chairman McHenry to secure historic
    capital and emergency investments into these institutions. When
    a wave of evictions threatened to create millions of new
    homeless Americans, our committee quickly drafted legislation
    to fund emergency rental assistance programs, which was signed
    into law by President Trump and again by President Biden.
        Today, as the cryptocurrency markets melt down, the
    Financial Services Committee will once again be the leader in
    drafting legislation to protect consumers and investors while
    encouraging responsible innovation and safeguarding our
    financial system from the threats of unscrupulous actors in the
    cryptomarket.
        All of this work requires staff. I am honored to have a
    staff that consists of the smartest, brightest, and most
    informed public policy professionals in Washington. They are
    true public servants and have strong values in advocating and
    legislating for policies that lift the most vulnerable. They
    worked tirelessly during the pandemic and transitioned
    seamlessly to a hybrid working environment, never once dropping
    a step. This is why I am pleased that, during our transition to
    the minority, the vast majority of staff were retained. Due to
    sound management of our committee funds at current funding
    levels, we do not foresee any pay cuts or furloughs. However,
    maintaining the status quo is simply not sufficient given the
    scale of the work in front of us.
        My Chairman has laid out an ambitious agenda that will
    require us to increase our staffing and expenditures to ensure
    that we are able to properly engage with him on the important
    issues he needs to take on. While I don't foresee any pay cuts
    or furloughs at our current staff levels, we also don't have
    funding available for any pay raises and bonuses either.
        In addition, as the Chairman has indicated that he would
    like to hold field hearings, which I think is so very
    important, we would require additional funds to pay for the
    travel of staff and Members to these events to ensure that
    Democratic Members can participate. I am also aware that he is
    planning a robust legislative and oversight agenda, which will
    require my staff to also work hard to keep up.
        In short, without additional funds, we will not be able to
    expand our operations or reward staff for their solid work
    through bonuses at the end of the year. Therefore, I certainly
    support the Chairman's request for a 5-percent budget increase
    for our committee. This is a reasonable amount and will allow
    the entire committee to function at its full potential.
        While there are many things that the Chairman and I will
    disagree on over the next 2 years, it should say a lot to this
    Committee that funding and staffing is the one thing that we
    will always agree on.
        I strongly encourage the Committee to appreciate and give
    additional weight to our unity on this important issue and to
    fund the committee accordingly. Thank you, and I look forward
    to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Waters follows:]

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Waters.
        In the attempt to make this more efficient than a Financial
    Services markup, the Chair and Ranking Member will control 5
    minutes in total each.
        I will now yield to Mr. Loudermilk for the purpose of
    asking questions.
        Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman McHenry, we have had several conversations of the
    challenges that we face in the committee, one of those being
    the calendar. We have more work to do than we have time to do
    it, especially in the first quarter.
        What other challenges do you see facing Financial Services
    Committee?
        Mr. McHenry. Well, the combination of that tight calendar--
    the tight legislative calendar and a big agenda, the oversight
    agenda and the legislative agenda, means that the staffing
    resources become foremost, right? You have staff that has to
    work very intensely in a very narrow window. We marked out 12
    bills yesterday in a 3-day workweek. We have had six committee
    hearings in 2 days--six subcommittee hearings in 2 days. In
    order to do that, you have to have staff commensurate with
    that.
        Then we find ourselves with the subscriptions that
    apparently media outlets have figured out that Congress doesn't
    know how to negotiate, and they try to pick us off committee by
    committee. We have the same problem in Financial Services. We
    want to make sure our staff has the best inputs, best
    information possible. Access to that information is really
    important.
        Bloomberg is the biggest racket. There is not standardized
    pricing. What we have for Financial Services versus what you
    have at House Administration versus what the Ag Committee--
    there is no standardized pricing. They will tell you what it
    is. It is the oldest of old-school rackets. POLITICO Pro is the
    same thing. They are looking for us as an avenue to make their
    profits.
        Look, I am not opposed to profits. We can have the debate
    about capitalism versus socialism and all this other stuff. The
    fact is we should get a value for our taxpayer dollars, and
    that is what I am trying to do with staffing levels. That is
    what I am trying to do with how we communicate with information
    and things of the sort.
        Mr. Loudermilk. Another area that has been a big focus in
    this Congress is oversight. How do you intend to ensure our
    oversight goals are met?
        Mr. McHenry. Well, first, we have hired talented staff--
    highly capable, very competent staff. There is a lot of
    competition for that on the Republican side and the Democrat
    side, for that matter. We hired very well.
        The competitive pressures with the higher cap for Hill
    salaries also put pressure on our budget. We have go to
    compete, and we have a very talented staff that can do very
    well outside of government service but want to serve the
    American people and want to serve this institution. That
    staffing pressure and the payroll pressures is real.
        We also have important software that is necessary.
    Clearwell and Concordance are two of the viable options.
    Concordance is like driving a beat-up Kia, and Clearwell is
    like the brandnew BMW. What we kind of want to have for
    committee is like a Honda. Like, we just want to have, like, a
    mid-level, really reliable, good car, but nobody prices that.
        Making sure the software is there so you can go through
    these major document requests. This is something both sides
    use. It is technology that is politically agnostic. We want to
    make sure, you know, that software is available.
        Mr. Loudermilk. Okay. Very thorough with the answers. I
    think you answered all my other questions, and other than a
    concern that you never brought up a Ford F-150, I yield back to
    the Chairman.
        The Chairman. I reserve the balance of the time, yield 5
    minutes to the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, first of all, Chair McHenry and
    Ranking Member Waters, for being here and for your
    collaboration. I am going to reserve my time and yield to Ms.
    Sewell.
        Ms. Sewell. Thank you so much, Ranking Member.
        First of all, let me just say, having been on the Financial
    Services Committee, it is a pleasure to not only see both of
    you here today but also to reiterate the importance of your
    committee and importance of the funding of your committee.
        My question is actually with respect to the distribution of
    it. As I understand, most committees have two-thirds to the
    majority and one-third for the minority. I assume that is the
    same in your committee as well?
        Ms. Waters. Yes.
        Ms. Sewell. I guess I just really want to understand if the
    one-third split gives the minority Ranking Member unfettered,
    you know, unrestricted access to those resources, and would
    like to just understand that a little bit better.
        Mr. McHenry. Yes. Because of the two previous Congresses,
    there are things that I raised with Chairwoman Waters 4 years
    ago and 2 years ago that it was my intention to fix because
    that is what I wanted at the time.
        Ms. Sewell. Yes.
        Mr. McHenry. I have tried to meet that standard of whatever
    my complaint was 2 and 4 years ago, though modest, frankly, and
    on budget requests and staffing, we actually have a--I think we
    have treated each other equitably. She has certainly treated me
    equitably, and her staff director treated my previous staff
    director and current staff director quite equitably.
        The staff converses quite well. On sharing of technology
    and things of that sort that we have to do, the basic
    functioning of the committee, the clerks have worked well
    together. All that stuff, we have tried to make--as Chair,
    Chairwoman Waters offered to me that same level of kind of
    agreement on those items, and I intend to follow that this
    Congress as well in our relationship.
        We can debate policy, and we want to do that. Frankly, we
    do that.
        Ms. Waters. A lot.
        Mr. McHenry. A lot, but on this, as the Ranking Member
    said, we have at least have good alignment here so we can then
    have those debates.
        Ms. Sewell. Ranking Member Waters, do you have anything to
    add to that?
        Ms. Waters. Well, no, except that what you see between the
    two of us is a good working relationship. As a matter of fact,
    I think he has adequately described how we treat each other and
    how we respond to each other's requests.
        I am here today in strong support of the request for a 5-
    percent increase. I think we are deserving. We have a very
    complicated and complex committee. We didn't even talk about
    the work we must do dealing with all of Wall Street and all of
    our financial institutions.
        Of course, we are looking forward, as the Chairman is, to
    getting out on some field trips so that we can say----
        Ms. Sewell. Can I ask about those field trips, actually? I
    was wondering--I saw that the budget calls for 22 members and
    staff. Are they going to be bipartisan field trips, and so will
    we have good participation by both sides with respect to that?
        Mr. McHenry. That is my intention. That is my intention.
        Ms. Waters. Yes. I think we should treat it the same way we
    treat CODELs, where we invite members from the opposite side to
    participate. That is very important because, as we travel
    across this country, it is important that we see it from
    different angles.
        When Democrats go to some of the Republican areas, we learn
    something about what is going on in those communities. Of
    course, you know, one of my great hopes and wishes is that we
    have real bipartisan work on housing for rural and urban. I
    want to go to both rural and urban communities with both sides
    of the committee and see what is going on and respond to those
    requests.
        Ms. Sewell. Well, thank you both for coming today. I can
    tell you that getting out of Washington and into the field
    really is important, and just encourage you all to do what you
    can to both agree on where you go but also making sure that it
    is truly bipartisan.
        Thank you, and I yield back.
        Ms. Waters. You are welcome.
        Mr. McHenry. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you both for being here today. This
    concludes your testimony. I appreciate you coming in. We know
    the importance of the work the committee is going to do. We are
    definitively going to be looking into the subscription piece.
    This Congress, we think we have some opportunities for dramatic
    improvements in that. Appreciate your commitment to restoring
    regular order and transparency to the American taxpayer.
        Ms. Waters. Thank you.
        Mr. McHenry. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Have a wonderful day.
        Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, thank you for coming
    before us today. This is our commitment to restoring regular
    order to the House and transparency to the American taxpayer.
        We are going to give each of you up to 5 minutes for an
    opening statement. Then myself and the Ranking Member will each
    control a total of 5 minutes each for the purpose of asking
    questions.
        I will now yield 5 minutes to Mr. Rogers for an opening
    statement.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. MIKE ROGERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA

        Mr. Rogers. Thank you, Chairman Steil and the Ranking
    Member Morelle, members of the Committee, for having us here
    today.
        I am here with Ranking Member Smith, my partner on the
    Armed Services Committee. We appreciate your consideration of
    our budget request for the 118th Congress. Rest assured, we
    take the expenditure of taxpayer dollars seriously. Every
    dollar entrusted to us will be used to advance our nation's
    security interests.
        The Armed Services Committee authorizes and oversees over
    half of all discretionary spending in the fiscal year, yet our
    committee is not funded accordingly. The growth of defense
    spending has outpaced HASC's ability to conduct proper
    oversight. The American people expect us to review every dollar
    the DOD gets and every authorization they use.
        For 62 straight years, our committee has produced an NDAA
    to implement oversight and authorize the DOD. That doesn't mean
    the task is easy. Members both on and off the committee are
    more engaged in the process than ever before, which is great.
        During the Fiscal Year 2020 NDAA, Members submitted around
    a thousand proposals and nearly 1,200 amendments. Yet, in
    Fiscal Year 2023, those numbers grew to 1,500 proposals and
    2,100 amendments. The amount of effort and time it takes to
    evaluate all of those proposals outpace the amount of time our
    members and staff have. Thus, we are shortchanging this body
    and the American people.
        The Armed Services Committee has not seen a cap increase
    since 2009, yet the workload has exploded. This is one of the
    reasons we are seeking more staff. We cannot let the workload
    hamper the demands of the members on and off the committee.
        HASC is also permitted seven legislative subcommittees in
    the House rules. In the last Congress, Chairman Smith, with my
    concurrence, created a seventh subcommittee, yet we were not
    provided additional staff and resources to fully support that
    subcommittee. In fact, we took one subcommittee to help staff
    and fund the new one. With additional resources, we would be
    able to fully support members on these subcommittees.
        HASC also does not have a travel budget. This is a growing
    interest in holding field hearings across the country. Under
    our current budget, the committee doesn't have the ability to
    do that. We are seeking additional funding so that we could
    hold field hearings outside D.C. As Members, we all know how
    important it is with the work we do.
        HASC is very fortunate to attract people that are
    predisposed to serve this country. On our staff, we have former
    fighter pilots, marines, sailors, soldiers, Ph.D.'s, and
    lawyers. Don't hold it against us; we have lawyers.
        These people all attract--are attractive to the executive
    branch and the private sector. We must be able to recruit and
    retain the best staff we can. A budget increase would ensure we
    have the staff to support our work our members require of them.
        Thank you for consideration, and I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Rogers follows:]

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Chair Rogers.
        Ranking Member Smith, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

        Mr. Smith of Washington. Thank you.
        Briefly, I agree with everything Chairman Rogers said. We
    have worked together on this for a long time. I have a
    statement which I will submit for the record. I just really
    want to emphasize the point about how the budget hasn't grown
    since 2009 for our committee and, in particular, the importance
    of the staff as the size of the defense budget and the
    oversight responsibilities have grown. That in and of itself is
    overwhelming.
        As we all know, the NDAA has become a vehicle for a lot of
    other issues that aren't necessarily directly in our
    jurisdiction, which is fine. By and large, the other committees
    work those issues, but it is still our staff that then has to
    make sure that we know what is going on when we put it into the
    bill. I mean, every year, our staff members, they have the
    expertise that Chairman Rogers described. Then they get to
    become experts in all manner of different other issues that are
    coming their way.
        At the end of the day, what we need more than anything is
    more staff in order to properly serve the House. I think it is
    outstanding that, in our bill, pretty much all 435 Members
    participate at one level or another. Chairman Rogers gave you
    the statistics on the volume of the amendments submitted. That
    is great, but we need the staff to be able to properly vet that
    and properly handle it.
        I hope you will consider that request, and I yield back.
    Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith of Washington
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Smith.
        The Chair and the Ranking Member now each control 5 minutes
    for the purposes of asking you questions.
        I will yield to Ms. Bice.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        It is great to see both of you at this Committee this
    morning.
        You mentioned the additional staff members that you are
    requesting in this proposal. Having been on the new
    subcommittee that was created under HASC last year, CITI
    Subcommittee. We did a remarkable job, I think, with limited
    resources, and the staff was incredible to work with.
        Can you talk a little bit about why you think those
    additional 10 slots are needed, Mr. Chairman?
        Mr. Rogers. Well, because we have had to pull from existing
    subcommittees to do that. As I said, since 2009, we haven't had
    any additional staff, and the volume of our work has exploded.
    They were already strained, and I know everybody expects us to
    do good oversight.
        Well, the NDAA is oversight. You know, nobody else in this
    body passes an authorization bill every year. In fact, nobody
    else in this body passes an authorization every decade. We have
    enormous amounts of work. Pulling staff away from existing
    subcommittees to take on this new responsibility, which is very
    important--as you know, the theater of warfighting is evolving,
    and having this specialized technology needs to be focused on,
    and we have to do that with these subcommittees. We can't do it
    adequately, in my view, without additional staff.
        Mrs. Bice. Do you think that additional staff will help
    with oversight as well?
        Mr. Rogers. I know it will.
        Mrs. Bice. Mr. Ranking Member?
        Mr. Smith of Washington. Again, I agree with everything he
    said. I mean, I think the complexity that goes on here, just to
    give you one example, I mean, the Pentagon has not done a full
    audit, as we all know, which means literally they don't know
    for sure exactly all of the assets that they have. There is a
    reason for that, and the reason is because the Pentagon is the
    mother of all bureaucracies. I mean, it is an enormous amount
    of money. It is an enormous amount of responsibility.
        Our job is to try to make sure that they get to the point
    where they can do that audit and, in the meantime, monitor
    everything that they have even without that. The level of
    expertise required in the staff, I mean, we all can come up
    with the ideas. We can say ``we ought to do that,'' Okay, and
    it is the staff that then has to dive into the code, dive into
    all manner of--I don't even know the terminology, to be
    perfectly honest with you, to understand the regulations and
    the law and the history, so how you can do that effectively.
    That staff expertise is what makes our committee go, without
    question.
        Mrs. Bice. Absolutely. How has the increased participation
    in Members crafting NDAA and the significant increase in the
    number of amendments that are being submitted impacted the
    committee's ability to handle the legislative load?
        Mr. Rogers. It has been pretty overwhelming. You know,
    again, I emphasize, we authorize over half of all discretionary
    spending. This--just in its own jurisdiction, this bill is big.
    Because it passes every year and everybody knows that, the rest
    of the House depends on this vehicle for the larger body's
    legislative activities. I just--the Ranking Member said that
    the staff is expected to become experts in things other than
    just our subject matter, and we just are overwhelmed. We need
    more--we need more folks.
        Mr. Smith of Washington. The only thing I would add to that
    is the number--you know, I think it was 2019 when, you know, as
    these ideas keep coming in, we keep processing them through.
    Then, of course, we also have to go through the floor. I
    remember my staff telling me that there were, like, I think,
    two Parliamentarians in the House who literally quit because,
    you know, you guys can come up with these ideas. We are the
    ones that have to write them and have to make them fit, and
    they just--they were overwhelmed. They couldn't handle it.
        The only final thing I will say about that, there is a part
    of this that is a really good thing. You know, Mr. Chairman,
    you mentioned, you know, the voice of the people and democracy
    and all that. It is an outstanding thing that all 435 Members
    are participating in this process. It really is. It is good for
    our constituents. It is good for the country. It is good for
    how people perceive the legislative process. We have to have
    the people in order to make sure that we can do it effectively
    without driving people to quit.
        Mrs. Bice. Well, having been a member of the House Armed
    Services Committee last Congress and sitting through the markup
    of the NDAA through dozens or hundreds of amendments, I agree
    with you wholeheartedly.
        My last and final question is: It is my understanding that
    you have invested in software to be able to manage the
    amendment process because there are so many amendments that are
    being submitted by Members of this body.
        Can you talk a little bit about the importance of that and
    why you have shared that with, actually, Senate Armed Services?
        Mr. Rogers. Yes. That software has been really valuable to
    us. I don't know how we would have handled all that input,
    whether it is proposals or amendments, without it. It also has
    a cost itself.
        This last year, because we had such a large uptick in
    amendments and proposals, we spent $600,000 to use that
    software, whereas we had been spending, like, 150 to 200
    before. The software is great. I am glad we got it, but it
    costs money to use it.
        Mrs. Bice. Okay.
        Mr. Smith of Washington. Of course I miss the days of
    passing out all the papers so that, by the end of the day, in
    markup, we had a stack of paper----
        Mr. Rogers. It would be about this tall, yes.
        Mr. Smith of Washington.--under your desk all spread out
    all over the place, but the software is more efficient.
        Mr. Rogers. The forests appreciate the fact that we don't
    do it anymore.
        Mrs. Bice. The forest does appreciate that.
        Mr. Rogers. Yes.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your
    time this morning.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        The Chairman. I now yield 5 minutes to Ms. Sewell for the
    purpose of asking questions.
        Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        As a new member of HASC, I am--I can truly attest to the
    fact that you both work very hard to work together, and the
    partnership is very important. I can also attest that we in the
    Alabama delegation are very proud of you, Mr. Chairman, as a
    fellow member of our delegation. Roll Tide.
        Mr. Rogers. Roll Tide.
        Ms. Sewell. My question, actually, is really just about
    the--how you guys decide or utilize your budget. I understand
    that lots of committees do two-thirds of a budget go to the
    majority and one-third go to the minority. I just want to
    understand how that is working and whether or not Mr. Smith,
    Chairman--Ranking Member Smith will have the opportunity to
    have unrestricted access to his one-third.
        Mr. Rogers. Yes. We have historically had a lot of
    professional staff that stayed no matter which side is in the
    majority, and we have continued that practice. I don't see us--
    I don't think we have done anything different this cycle than
    Chairman Smith did in the last cycle.
        Mr. Smith of Washington. Yes. That is a crucial point. We
    don't do two-thirds/one-third. We have a general budget, and
    then we decide between us on how to do that. The overwhelming
    majority of our staff is viewed as bipartisan. A number of
    people who worked in our majority in the previous Congress are
    now working in their majority.
        Again, it is not--it is not about partisanship on the
    committee. It is about expertise. Once you get people who have
    that knowledge that I keep talking about, you know, it is not
    partisan. We need--and we need that expertise and that
    background and experience.
        Ms. Sewell. I look forward to using--utilizing this new
    software for my very first NDAA.
        Mr. Rogers. Pay for it, please.
        Ms. Sewell. I just want to say what a pleasure it is to
    serve on a committee where there really is true partnership and
    bipartisanship. We would want to see that in our national
    security and for our defense. Thank you both for being who you
    are, and continue the great work of this committee.
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Chair Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, thank you
    very much for being here. Appreciate your willingness to come
    here and testify as we return to regular order.
        Have a wonderful day.
        Members of the Committee, we are going to do one more panel
    before we travel down to votes. We are going to do this as
    efficiently as possible. I know Chairman Green is a true
    believer in efficiency and will work with us to do that.
        Chair Green, Ranking Member Thompson, thank you for being
    with us today. This is our commitment to restoring regular
    order and providing transparency to the American people. We
    will give each of you up to 5 minutes--no need to use it all--
    for your opening statement. Then the--myself and the Ranking
    Member will each control 5 minutes for questions. We may use
    less than that in full due to the pending votes.
        Chair Green, you are now recognized.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. MARK E. GREEN, M.D., A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

        Mr. Green. Thank you, Chairman Steil, Ranking Member
    Morelle, and members of the Committee.
        I want to start by congratulating both of you for your
    respective appointments to lead this important Committee, which
    plays a critical role in the daily operations that keep the
    House of Representatives running and of course our complex
    secure.
        In the 118th Congress, the Homeland Security Committee will
    expand our important work overseeing the Department of Homeland
    Security and its components, including Customs and Border
    Patrol, U.S.--or Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Border
    Patrol, the Transportation Security Administration, the
    Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the Federal
    Emergency Management Agency, and many others.
        DHS is the third largest department in the federal
    government with a $70 billion budget and around 250,000
    employees. The mission of DHS is critical to protecting America
    from a litany of threats stemming from terrorism, adversarial
    cyber actors, the Chinese Communist Party, natural disasters,
    and, of course, the crisis along our southwest border. By
    investing in the Homeland Security Committee, you are making an
    investment in the security of the American people.
        Primarily, the committee's budget request will be invested
    in recruiting and retaining the top talent needed to sustain an
    aggressive tempo of investigations, legislative deployment, our
    development, and committee oversight activities. Additionally,
    the Committee on Homeland Security must maintain the resources
    needed to go where the mission takes us--across the homeland to
    hear from those serving in the front lines.
        We have planned a robust cadence of site visits, field
    hearings, and investigative travel to hold DHS accountable and
    provide oversight to its wide and varying mission set, from our
    largest cities facing threats from terrorism to underserved
    rural communities facing natural disasters and everywhere in
    between. We will maintain a steady presence along our southwest
    border, which faces unprecedented challenges.
        We will also investigate the Chinese Communist Party's
    threats to our supply chain at our Nation's commercial ports
    and DHS' role in enforcing provisions of the Uyghur Forced
    Labor Prevention Act, and we will continue maturing the
    Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency as it supports
    state and local government and private-sector businesses across
    the country. All this work requires the right investment for
    our mission.
        Thank you for taking the time to examine our funding
    request, and I look forward to answering any questions that you
    have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Green follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Chair Green.
        Ranking Member Thompson, you are now recognized.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. BENNIE G. THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

        Mr. Thompson of Mississippi. Thank you very much, Chairman
    Steil, Ranking Member Morelle. I appreciate the opportunity to
    come before you to present the and support my Chairperson's
    funding request for Fiscal Year 2024.
        As you know--well, for me, it is my 20th year on the
    committee. We started as a select committee, got jurisdiction.
    As the Chair has already indicated, we are now the third
    largest committee in Congress with significant missions dealing
    with cybersecurity; we have to secure our air, land, and sea
    borders; emergency preparedness; response and recovery.
        More importantly, the people who work at this agency do the
    Lord's work. They respond to disasters in Selma, Alabama, which
    is ongoing right now, and it is a major undertaking. Our
    budget, there is no disagreement in the request from the
    Chairman and myself.
        There are some areas we need to look at--counter unmanned
    aerial surveillance, DHS countering weapons of mass
    destruction, as well as chemical plant security. We look
    forward to--with the proper funding, to do the necessary
    oversight in these areas.
        With that, I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson of Mississippi
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member Thompson.
        I will now take the Chair's time and recognize Mr.
    D'Esposito for the purpose of asking questions.
        Mr. D'Esposito. Well, thank you.
        Chairman, one of the things, as a new member of homeland
    security, that I have appreciated most from your leadership
    thus far is your thought process and mission that we should
    have our ears open, eyes open, and boots on the ground, which
    is one of the reasons why, in part of your budget, you have
    scheduled so many field hearings, so many trips.
        Why do you believe that is so necessary in order for us to
    accomplish our mission of keeping this great nation safe?
        Mr. Green. Well, it stems from two sources. First, the new
    Speaker has basically said he wants to take Congress to the
    American people. All these field hearings, we have to cover the
    expense of that.
        I also believe, you know, from my time in the military, if
    you don't have the right intelligence, you can't make a good
    decision. We are going to put eyes and ears on the border. We
    are going to go to ports and look at our ports. We are going to
    go visit CISA and CYBERCOM and all these places and learn and
    know what is going on so we can all, both sides of the aisle,
    make informed decisions.
        That is the purpose of that plus-up, and I appreciate your
    support of it.
        Mr. D'Esposito. Thank the Chairman.
        My next question was going to be how your priorities are
    different this Congress than from the last Congress, but I
    think you answered that in the first question. Our Speaker has
    laid out, you know, a robust agenda for our committee, so I
    think that was answered.
        Chairman, I yield back.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        I now recognize Ms. Sewell for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Welcome. My question is really about the budget
    distribution. Just want to confirm that--that this budget is a
    shared budget and that two-thirds of it--a lot of committees do
    two-third/one-third, two-thirds majority/one-third minority. If
    you could just talk a little bit about that.
        Also, just wanted to confirm that Ranking Member Thompson--
    I was about to say Chairman--Okay. Ranking Member Thompson.
        Mr. Green. Don't worry, I do it in committee because he was
    my Chairman when I was a freshman, and so I call--I think two
    or three times now, I have called him Chairman.
        Ms. Sewell. Absolutely. Will Representative Thompson have
    unfettered, unrestricted access to his one-third?
        Also, I wanted to ask a little--a question about the field
    hearings, but I will wait to ask that next.
        Mr. Green. Sure. Absolutely. Yes. We have kept that
    arrangement, and, you know, I--Bennie and I are--I grew up
    about 40 miles from him in a little, small town in Mississippi.
    We are going to work well together. We are going to disagree on
    some issues. I mean, that is the nature of the people who sent
    me here and the people who sent him here.
        The last thing I am going to do is disregard him because,
    if I do, I am disregarding 760,000 Mississippians who decided
    to send him to Congress. The last thing I will do is be that
    guy.
        We are going to work well together, and that means on the
    budget, too.
        Ms. Sewell. Great.
        Mr. Thompson, do you have anything to add?
        Mr. Thompson of Mississippi. Well, the formula is the same.
    When I Chaired, it was two-third/one-third.
        Ms. Sewell. Okay.
        Mr. Thompson of Mississippi. That is what is proposed in
    this budget request.
        Ms. Sewell. Very good.
        On field hearings, will there be bipartisan support at
    those field hearings? Will we have bipartisan staffing as well
    as an opportunity for all members to participate; and Is that
    the plan?
        Mr. Green. Yes, absolutely. In fact, I hope--I hope that is
    how it works out. We are going to do everything we can to make
    sure that the resources are there, the requests are there. Just
    as we would run a committee hearing here, we are going to do
    everything to run the committee exactly the same in those
    locations where we go remote. That is the case with
    congressional delegations as well, where we are going on a
    factfinding mission and not necessarily a hearing, we will
    always have invites for both sides.
        Ms. Sewell. Mr. Thompson, anything to add?
        Mr. Thompson of Mississippi. Well, we look forward to it. I
    can say the Chairman's enthusiasm, we have to temper with
    reality. There are some areas people want to go, it takes a
    couple days to get there, even in this country. With proper
    notification and planning, we can make it happen.
        Mr. Green. Fair enough.
        Ms. Sewell. Sounds great. Well, I know that both of you
    know that the task ahead is very important to this country, and
    we look forward to your continued partnership and support of
    each other.
        Thank you. Yield back.
        Mr. Green. Thank you.
        Mr. Thompson of Mississippi. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you both for being here. You guys have
    a big task in front of you. We have a serious crisis at the
    U.S.-Mexico border, and so I know you are going to be doing
    some field hearings, so I hope we do have an opportunity to
    have a real bipartisan or nonpartisan look at the challenges we
    are facing there.
        I appreciate both of you testifying today, Ranking Member
    Thompson and Chairman Green. Thank you for being part of
    returning regular order to the House and transparency to the
    American taxpayers.
        We will rush to votes.
        This Committee will be then coming back quickly following
    votes for our next panel of witnesses.
        This Committee stands in recess subject to call of the
    Chair.
        [Recess.]
        [11:25 a.m.]
        The Chairman. The Committee on House Administration will
    come back to order.
        Mr. Guest, thank you very much for joining us.
        This is our commitment to returning to regular order and
    transparency to the American taxpayer.
        I know Ranking Member Morelle is moments away, but,
    cognizant of the tight timeline we have, we will recognize you
    for 5 minutes for an opening statement. You don't have to use
    the whole time. Myself and the Ranking Member will each share 5
    minutes total to ask questions.
        With that, I will recognize you for 5 minutes for an
    opening statement.

       STATEMENT OF THE HON. MICHAEL GUEST, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

        Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, members
    of the Committee.
        In an effort to be efficient with your time, I am going to
    condense down the opening statement that has been submitted for
    the record.
        First, I want to thank each of you for the work that you
    do, not only for Congress but on behalf of the Committee on
    House Administration. Thank you for having me today to allow me
    to justify the budget request on the House Committee on Ethics.
        My partner on the Committee on Ethics, Ranking Member Susan
    Wild, was unable to join us today because of illness but does
    agree with the recommendations that will be presented here
    today. These recommendations were drafted originally by the
    nonpartisan staff that serve on this committee.
        As many of you know, Ethics Committee is unique, and so is
    our budget request. I can confirm, again, that everything that
    I am going to be presenting before you today has the support
    not only of the nonpartisan staff--and, as many of you are
    aware, Ethics Committee is an equally divided committee, five
    Republicans, five Democrats. The staff is nonpartisan in nature
    except for legal counsel that both I have and the Ranking
    Member. All the staff is, in fact, nonpartisan. We do a very--
    we work very hard to try to keep politics out of the Ethics
    Committee.
        As the--looking here, the opportunity to serve the House
    community continues to grow and modernize. To fulfill that
    opportunity, the Ethics Committee is requesting an additional
    $658,600, or a 17-percent increase in funding, for 2023. Now,
    that is to do two things specifically--to acquire additional
    technology to help modernize the committee's adversary
    resources--advisory resources and to hire additional staff to
    assist with the increased caseload and the modernization
    process.
        Key to modernization is maintaining a current ethics
    manual. I am sure that this is familiar with many of you as we,
    for many years have been operating under a 2008 House manual
    that I have here, red in color. This was the manual that has
    existed for a number of years, but I am proud to say that I
    have here with me today and will be happy, if anyone would like
    a copy, to present to you the 2022 House ethics manual.
        It took a number of years to go from the red to the new
    version, but the committee staff has worked very diligently to
    bring the printed version up to date. I am proud of the work
    that they have done.
        Also with the fact that this is available online, we are
    doing everything within our--possible to make sure that the
    information that we have there in the Ethics Committee is
    provided to Members so that information can be easily searched
    and easily accessed online. As there are future updates, we
    will immediately update those--the availability of that
    information online.
        Many of you may also be aware that, as part of our recent
    rules package, that a task force will be established to conduct
    a comprehensive review of the House ethics rules. That is
    something that has not been done in more than 30 years. It is
    past overdue. Part of the funding that we are requesting is
    going to be to assist those Members, again, an equally
    appointed task force, half the Members being appointed by the
    Speaker, the other half by the majority leader, to do what we
    believe is a very important comprehensive review.
        The rules, when they were written, many of those 30 years
    ago, did not take in some of the things that we deal with
    today. We are trying to move the rules into the 21st century
    and trying to make those rules easier for our Members to be
    able to not only access by having that information online, but
    easier to follow.
        Very quickly--trying to make sure I touch on this--as it
    relates to 2024--I know that was something that we were asked
    to address. At this point, we would be asking for additional
    funds in 2024 of a little over $240,000, or roughly a 5.4-
    percent increase.
        As it relates to the funding that we are requesting and the
    staff positions, these are staff positions that are currently
    authorized but are not funded. We are not asking for this
    Committee to authorize additional staff, just to fund staff
    positions that are currently, at this time, unfilled.
        House Ethics, like many of the other House staff, because
    of the private sector and the executive, we are constantly
    losing good people to the executive branch. We want to make
    sure that, if at all possible, we can maintain those people who
    have a wealth of knowledge so that we are not constantly in
    this cycle of bringing new people in, training new people--just
    as we get them where they are effective or efficient to be able
    to carry out their job duties, someone else comes in, pays them
    more money, and we lose them, and we start that process over
    and over again.
        That is why we believed that--and, again, the technology
    that we are asking for, Mr. Chairman----
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Guest follows:]

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [The prepared statement of Ms. Wild follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Mr. Chairman, on risk of cutting you off, I
    just want to make sure we are cognizant of time, and we will
    take your full extended remarks into the record.
        I can feel your energy to make sure that this place is run
    in an ethical manner. We really appreciate the work. I don't
    think everybody always fully appreciates the time and efforts
    that go into Members who serve on Ethics, but, in particular,
    the Chair and the Ranking Member, the unique amount of time
    that you put in, in particular, Chairman Guest.
        If alright, I am going to take the 5 minutes for the Chair
    and yield to Dr. Murphy for questions.
        Mr. Murphy. Okay. Alright.
        The Chairman. Then we will come back to----
        Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Guest, for coming here. This is difficult to
    ask hard questions to Ethics because God forbid I ever had to
    go before Ethics.
        I just want to follow up. You have asked for a significant
    increase in funds. Can you elaborate a little bit into the uses
    and the needs for additional technology and how it is going to
    allow you to do your job better?
        Mr. Guest. Yes. One of the things that we are going to
    strive to is to--you know, we are required to provide annual
    training to Members of Congress, to staff. We would use this
    technology to bring some of that training into a modern-day
    era. Much of what we have done before--and I know you have
    been--sat through much of that training--I think has been very
    unhelpful where you have sat there and basically read rules and
    maybe answered a few questions.
        We want to be able to bring in things that would help us
    with that training, to be able to have more presentations, to
    make it more engaging, to make it something that hopefully
    people will take away and remember some of that training versus
    just sitting through that training because they are required to
    do that as part of their annual educational requirements.
        Mr. Murphy. Okay. You said you were going to basically look
    at rewriting the book----
        Mr. Guest. That is right. There is a task force that has
    been or will be established, and we will completely----
        Mr. Murphy. Do you anticipate additional funds being needed
    to do that, or are you using other funds that you normally
    would have used to do that with staff resources, et cetera?
        Mr. Guest. Well, we intended to use the staff resources
    that we have to assist the task force.
        Mr. Murphy. Okay. One last question. It has to go really
    with modernization. How do you guys anticipate just talking
    about a little bit of follow-up you have with the Members? What
    does that look like? How does--how do I as a Member receive
    your message a little bit more clearly in--in the future in
    something that is a little bit more technologically savvy? What
    does that look like?
        Mr. Guest. Again, we are going to try to make as much
    information as possible available online. We are going to start
    developing a series of short videos that Members or staff
    members can watch of common questions. As we are putting forth
    the information, you know, you will routinely get information
    that we send out on the pink sheet. Again, we do this as a way
    for this to stand out.
        We are also putting things out there in different formats
    so that people can regularly understand that. One of the things
    that the committee is doing--and, again, this is low tech, and
    it is just developing checklists so that people have a better
    understanding of what the rules entail.
        The rules are very much like--you know, there are rules,
    and then, with many rules, there are exceptions to the rules,
    such as the gift requirement. You know, Members of Congress
    can't accept gifts unless, and there are a long laundry list of
    what those exceptions----
        Mr. Murphy. What--Okay.
        Mr. Guest [continuing]. are. We want to make sure that
    information is available online and that information is
    understandable for all Members because our hope is that we are
    like the Maytag repairman, that we are sitting around with
    nothing to do and that we can focus, instead of on the
    investigative side, we can focus on the advice and the
    training.
        Mr. Murphy. Excellent.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is all I have. I yield back.
        The Chairman. Mr. Morelle is now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Guest, I just--I don't really have any questions.
    I appreciate your submission. I appreciate the hard work that
    you have to do, and I know that I speak for the members here
    that, for you and Ms. Wild, we are very grateful for your
    service.
        With that, I yield back.
        Mrs. Torres. If I could ask a question?
        Mr. Morelle. I am sorry.
        The Chairman. Please.
        Mrs. Torres. Hi, Chairman. Thank you for coming to our
    Committee.
        I just want to ask about the 10 vacant positions that you
    have on the committee. Are you having a tough time hiring
    people, or is it just folks that recently left?
        Mr. Guest. Well, some of the vacancies are the fact that
    those positions are unfunded. We have recently lost three
    employees. One was appointed to the federal bench and was just
    recently confirmed. Two others have left at the end of the last
    calendar year to take, unfortunately, better-paying jobs.
        You know, a lot of the staff members we have, have legal
    backgrounds, and so their salaries are going to be higher than
    people without those types of degrees, and so sometimes it has
    been difficult at times for us to attract good people with the
    salaries and the requirements that we are looking for. Right
    now, if I am not mistaken, I think we are only down three
    positions that are currently funded. Tom is nodding his head;
    that is correct.
        Mrs. Torres. Are you reassessing the salaries for the staff
    to ensure--I mean, I think you have two tough years ahead, lots
    of things up in the air. I just want to make sure that, you
    know, you are in a good place.
        Mr. Guest. Yes, ma'am. Part of the request is not only to
    hire additional staff but also to bring salaries up to a more
    competitive level.
        Mrs. Torres. Great. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Appreciate your time, Mr. Chairman. I know how much time
    and effort you put into Ethics, and it is greatly appreciated
    by this Committee and by the whole House. Thanks for
    participating in our work here to bring back regular order and
    transparency to the House.
        Have a great afternoon.
        Mr. Guest. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Neal, thank
    you for joining us today. We are going to try to be efficient
    with your time. I will give each of you 5 minutes for an
    opening statement. You don't have to use the whole time. Your
    written statement will be inserted into the record. Myself and
    the Ranking Member then will each control a total of 5 minutes
    each for questions by the panel.
        I will now recognize you, Chairman Smith. Thank you for
    being here.

       STATEMENT OF THE HON. JASON T. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI

        Mr. Smith of Missouri. Thank you, Chairman Steil, Ranking
    Member Morelle, members of the Committee, for having us and for
    the opportunity to appear before the House Administration
    Committee to discuss our funding request for the 118th
    Congress.
        Americans watching the hearing should know that the Ways
    and Means Committee will be fighting to help workers, seniors,
    job creators, and others struggling with the various challenges
    facing the American economy.
        Our committee will be focused on protecting American
    taxpayers and restoring transparency and accountability in
    their government, whether that be shedding more light on the
    IRS, whether it is looking at the Department of Health and
    Human Services and concerns over its plans to restrict Medicare
    coverage for innovative medications, whether it is the Treasury
    Department and its ongoing negotiations of an international tax
    agreement without congressional approval, the absence of a more
    robust trade policy at USTR that is needed to protect the
    interests of American workers.
        Oversight over the IRS, an agency that has chronically
    damaged its own integrity and abused the trust of the American
    people, alone will consume a substantial amount of time and
    resources.
        The Ways and Means Committee also has a broad jurisdiction
    over the health and retirement security of America's seniors,
    including Medicare and Social Security. These programs need to
    be protected.
        These issues and others will mean this committee will need
    to spend substantial time executing on our oversight
    responsibility. Congress must serve as a check and balance
    against unrestrained executive power so that there is
    accountability and scrutiny of policies coming out of the White
    House.
        The new House Republican majority has made it our
    commitment to act boldly on their behalf, and our committee--
    our committee, particularly the Ways and Means Committee, are
    the tip of the spear.
        We will combat today's inflation crisis and looming debt
    crisis, secure our nation's supply chains and promote greater
    economic, financial, health, and energy security for American
    families.
        When it comes to developing these solutions, we must humbly
    admit that we do not have all the answers here in Washington.
    As Chairman, I have made it a priority to take the Ways and
    Means Committee work outside the Halls of Congress, away from
    the politically connected voices of Washington lobbyists and
    into the communities of the American people, whose voices have
    for far too long been ignored.
        We will hold field hearings across the country, and already
    held the first at the beginning of February in Petersburg, West
    Virginia. We heard from small business owners about their
    struggles as well as their solutions. We will be in Oklahoma
    City next Tuesday to learn more about how to provide relief and
    deliver results for working families.
        More funding will be needed to ensure these voices, the
    voices of regular Americans, get heard, and so we can turn
    their ideas into policies that will make their lives better.
        Additionally, the committee will need to recruit and hire
    staff with experience and expertise needed to both carry out
    our constitutionally required oversight duties, and also help
    legally craft the ideas brought back from our field hearings.
        New pay orders in the House give us a competing shot at
    attracting some of the top minds, but now we need the resources
    to be able to meet the moment.
        For all these concerns, the committee requests a 17-percent
    increase in our budget for 2023, and, because today's inflation
    crisis appears to be continuing to rage, as economists like
    Larry Summers and Jason Furman have warned, we request an
    additional 10 percent increase for 2024 in order to build on
    this year's work. We will look out for the American taxpayer,
    and our committee will respect the resources they give us to
    carry out our duties.
        Thank you for your time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith of Missouri follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Chairman Smith.
        Ranking Member Neal, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

      STATEMENT OF THE HON. RICHARD E. NEAL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

        Mr. Neal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the
    Ranking Member as well. I noticed there are three members of
    the Ways and Means Committee here. I think we have got a shot.
        Voice. Don't push it.
        Mr. Neal. We are in support of the Ways and Means Committee
    budget submission. We were consulted on this, and we are
    pleased that the Chairman sought our input. I think there is
    broad unity here.
        I also want to acknowledge former Chairperson Zoe Lofgren
    for the increase in the last Congress. While previously we had
    received incremental increases, the Ways and Means Committee
    did receive an increase that put the allocation back to where
    it was in 2010.
        For some of us who have a long memory, up until 1994,
    members of the Ways and Means Committee, they had an allocation
    for an individual tax attorney or a CPA in their offices that
    was paid for from the Ways and Means budget. I thought that was
    very helpful to attracting the sort of talent that comes with
    very complicated matters and very complicated issues.
        Once that was eliminated, we saw kind of a downward spiral
    as to the funding for the committee, so we are grateful for
    what has happened recently. For the first time in over a
    decade, we were able to offer competitive salaries and staff
    increases.
        I want to point something out as well. We worked with then
    minority Republicans and signed two letters with then Ranking
    Member Brady asking to dip into the reserve fund. This was a
    first for our committee. Both times, we gave the minority half
    instead of the usual one-third. We thought that was very
    important for comity and also for amicability, and we continue
    on that path in the minority as well.
        We understand there is no such thing in a modern age as a
    permanent majority. We want to make sure that we continue to
    work together, again, on very technical issues.
        Our workload has surpassed that for which we have been
    funded. The current majority has asked for an increase in order
    to support field hearings. If there are any lessons that the
    historic pandemic taught us, it was clear that we were able--
    able ourselves to hold virtual hearings that the committee
    might bring in witnesses to participate to make it a bit easier
    for the members, as they want to participate fully in this
    process.
        I also would suggest that the Committee on Ways and Means
    has a long history of splitting the allocation at two-thirds/
    one-third, and, at this time, I am pleased to report that this
    will remain the practice.
        It has been one place where both sides can come to an
    agreement, and I thank you all for your time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Neal follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        The Chair now controls 5 minutes for the purposes of asking
    questions, and I will yield to Mr. Carey.
        Mr. Carey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Neal, appreciate your
    testimonies.
        Mr. Chairman, my question is going to be for you. You
    mentioned in your budget submission that the committee is
    planning on purchasing document management software for this
    Congress. Do you already know which document management
    software you will be purchasing? Are you in the process of
    researching different programs?
        Mr. Smith of Missouri. What we are looking at there is
    Relativity is the document that we are looking at purchasing.
        Mr. Carey. Okay. Okay. I yield back.
        The Chairman. Do you have a question, Mr. Murphy?
        Mr. Murphy. Yes, I sure do.
        The Chairman. I yield to Mr. Murphy.
        Mr. Murphy. Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member, for
    serving on the most illustrious--second most illustrious
    committee--oh----
        The Chairman. Correction noted.
        Mr. Murphy [continuing]. in Congress.
        I thank you. We have important work to do, and I appreciate
    both of you putting your full force and effort into this. The
    committee is an important one for the well-being of this
    nation.
        I do, in this time of budget overruns and budget deficits
    and impending debt ceilings, just want to make sure we are
    spending our money wisely, as I am sure you both do. It is not
    a question of this. It is noteworthy that we make sure that we
    understand that, as the Ways and Means Committee, we are held
    to, I think, a little bit higher standard of making sure that
    our money is spent correctly.
        In that, I applaud the Chairman's desire to take our
    committee out into the country, and I think it is very, very
    important that people see the work that we are doing. I would
    like, though, to make sure that we are spending our money
    wisely. If you could speak to that, Chairman, just with these
    field hearings, these oversight hearings, to make sure that we
    are being good stewards of the taxpayer dollars, especially in
    these times of budget crisis.
        Mr. Smith of Missouri. Thank you, Representative.
        Rest assured that we are attempting to spend diligently,
    appropriately on these field hearings. I do want to thank the
    House Admin Committee because our current field hearing that we
    are going to be having on Tuesday, you all were very helpful,
    because our first field hearing that we had in West Virginia,
    we were added--we had an extra expense of roughly $10,000
    because the House Recording Studio said no in coming 2 hours
    away, so we had to pay for it.
        They tried to say it was because of the day that we were
    also in session that they would not be there. We have found it
    to be very convenient in fly in and fly out dates to do a field
    hearing, and so this one is also on Tuesday morning, and then
    we will fly back. You all helped accommodate that, which will
    save us at least $10,000, because the House Recording Studio is
    going to be a part of that hearing.
        We are trying everything, but I also appreciate everything
    you all are doing to help with that.
        Mr. Murphy. Yes, sir. It is, you know, substantial. If you
    look at the number here, we are asking for essentially in this,
    118th, a 30-percent increase over the last, 117th. That is a
    big number. Both goes with the Chairman and the Ranking Member
    that we make sure that our money is spent appropriately. I
    think it goes without saying that is an important thing for us,
    and we appreciate your diligence in that regard.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Appreciate your commitment to, in particular, doing the
    field hearings. I think it is really important to get outside
    of the echo chamber here in D.C., and we stand committed to
    making sure that we are supporting your committee but other
    committees as well that are going to be on the road this
    Congress and making sure that all the House entities are
    operating to the benefit of the committees but ultimately to
    the American people.
        I will now yield 5 minutes to the Ranking Member.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Smith, thank you for being here. We had the
    privilege of serving together on the Budget Committee, and wish
    you all the best in your new responsibilities.
        To Ranking Member Neal, who I think did an extraordinary
    job in your years as Chair, and appreciate all that you
    continue to do.
        I am going to reserve time and yield to my colleague and
    friend and a member of the distinguished Ways and Means
    Committee, Ms. Sewell.
        Ms. Sewell. Thank you so much, Mr. Ranking Member.
        I want to welcome Chairman Smith and Chairman--oh, I have
    two chairmen--I am sorry--Ranking Member Neal for coming before
    the Committee. I too sit on this illustrious and one of the--
    you know, the oldest committee in Congress. We have huge
    responsibilities and jurisdictions that are under our watch.
        I know that the budget has traditionally been two-thirds
    majority/one-third minority. Just want to assure--I think you
    said in your opening that you would honor that, but also that
    the Ranking Member would have unrestricted access to that
    budgeted amount?
        Mr. Smith of Missouri. So glad that you are on the best
    committee in Congress, too, Representative. But----
        Ms. Sewell. I have two best committees.
        Mr. Smith of Missouri. The intention is to operate how we
    have always done in the past. You know, 6 weeks on the job, but
    definitely taking the guidance from the folks that have been in
    the past, and that is how it should be done.
        Ms. Sewell. Thanks.
        Chairman Neal?
        Mr. Neal. Well, I think one of the things that we need to
    acknowledge--and I am supportive of the Chairman's request in
    the budget here, but these field hearings are going to be
    pricey. This was accomplished in the past through subcommittees
    traveling. Mr. Mills, when he was the Chairman of the
    committee, he did not allow for subcommittees.
        Then Mr. Rostenkowski became the Chairman and subcommittees
    were embraced. Then Mr. Archer stayed with it, and Mr. Archer
    actually, as the Chairman, he allocated time for the
    subcommittees to travel. The subcommittees, because I think in
    each instance, the subcommittees for a specific purpose, they
    generate an awful lot of expertise. I think it is helpful to
    the overall debate. Not to suggest for 1 second we don't want
    people to participate if they desire to, but this formerly was
    the role of subcommittees to participate in, and whether you
    are on the Tax Subcommittee or Health or Trade, I think that
    there is ample opportunity to pick, for example, key trade
    jurisdictions.
        I mean, you might want to visit the Port of Louisiana in
    New Orleans, or you might want to visit the largest port in
    America, Los Angeles. I think, on the Tax Subcommittee, you
    might want to participate with taking a lot of questions across
    the heartland of the country.
        I think there is ample opportunity for some specialties to
    be embraced. I do think that it is a reminder here that this is
    going to be costly as time goes on when you are moving a number
    of Members and staff across the country.
        Ms. Sewell. Well, thank you. I do know that you all enjoy a
    tradition of bipartisan support on this committee. It is
    critically important that we continue to embrace that. I know
    that both of you are committed to that.
        I also would just like to put in a shameless plug for
    continuing our bipartisan health and--Rural and Underserved
    Communities Health Task Force, of which Arrington and Dr.--I
    just went blank--was a part of it. I think that is something
    that was very well done. Danny Davis was the member that I--and
    I was--I represented the rural part.
        Look, I think that the idea of going to the heartland and
    going into--leaving the District and going straight to people
    is going to be very important. I too just want to make sure
    that we are utilizing our money wisely. I know it is the hope
    that it is truly bipartisan and we all participate.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        again, thank you both for being here today.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Neal, thank you very much
    for being here.
        Mr. Smith of Missouri. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Appreciate your transparency and commitment
    to returning to regular order.
        Have a wonderful afternoon.
        Mr. Smith of Missouri. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Chairman McCaul, Ranking Member Meeks, thank
    you very much for being here. This is our commitment to making
    sure that we are returning the House to regular order and
    transparency for the American people.
        We will give each of you up to 5 minutes for an opening
    statement. Myself and the Ranking Member then will each control
    5 minutes total for questions from the panel.
        Without ado, I will recognize Chairman McCaul for the
    purpose of an opening statement.

     STATEMENT OF THE HON. MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                    CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

        Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Chairman Steil, Ranking Member
    Morelle, and members of the Committee.
        I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on the
    funding needs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs for this
    Congress along with my good friend, Ranking Member Meeks.
        Before I outline our budget request, I want to briefly just
    tell you a little bit about the history of this committee. It
    goes back to the Continental Congress. Obviously France being
    an ally was a big issue. I find interesting Benjamin Franklin
    was the first Chairman along with Chairman Meeks. I am not
    making any comparison between Ben Franklin and the two of us,
    but I think it is very interesting from the historical
    standpoint.
        It really emphasizes how important, though, the committee
    is. We deal with issues of war and peace. We deal with issues
    regarding the AUMF, declarations of war. We have oversight of
    State Department, USAID. We have export control jurisdiction.
    We sign off on all foreign military sales to our allies.
    Obviously, with the situation in Ukraine, we have been very
    busy on that front.
        I believe that the world is becoming a more dangerous place
    as--before our eyes. All you have to do is turn the TV on to
    see what is happening. I just got back from the Ukraine, by the
    way--Kyiv and Bucha and Poland to see our--the Ukrainians being
    trained with the Leopard tanks to go in to fight Russian
    aggression.
        We had the China spy balloon issue. Chairman and I, or
    Ranking Member and I had a--still trying to adjust to the
    majority--had a hearing on China and a markup, very bipartisan,
    with one exception, on China and the threat that they posed to
    the United States. Also, Iran, North Korea. The world is
    becoming, I think, more and more dangerous from our foreign
    adversaries.
        We want to make sure America is safe, and we need to--we
    are the voice of foreign policy for the House of
    Representatives. We are respectfully requesting a 13-percent
    budget increase for this Congress. This increase is, in part--
    large part due to the creation of a seventh subcommittee, the
    Oversight and Accountability Subcommittee with the hiring of an
    additional four staffers for the majority and one for the
    minority, including several attorneys. We want to make sure
    that taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely and identify where
    it is not.
        We also would like to conduct field hearings that we can
    get into more detail. Since the pandemic, we haven't been able
    to do these, and I think it is important to go to our
    communities out there to show why the Foreign Affairs Committee
    is important, what we are doing.
        We would like to hold our first one in New York with
    Ranking Member Meeks on the United Nations. We would also like
    to hold one in Texas on research and development for our
    weapons systems, defense industrial base; and another one on
    Miami, as Miami is really the gateway to Latin America.
        We need to--we are going to be very focused on China and
    the strategic competition and the great power competition that
    we find ourselves in today.
        We are witnessing right now the largest land invasion since
    World War II, and Chairman Xi and Putin are very much aligned.
    We are seeing threatening action from Chairman Xi with respect
    to Taiwan and the Pacific.
        I hearken back to my dad's generation. He is a World War II
    veteran, bombardier in a B-17. I haven't seen a threat to the
    European Continent or Pacific area, region since that time,
    since World War II, and the threat is certainly there.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McCaul follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Ranking Member Meeks is now recognized for 5 minutes.

      STATEMENT OF THE HON. GREGORY W. MEEKS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

        Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Chairman Steil, and thank you,
    Ranking Member Morelle, and members of this Committee on House
    Administration. I thank you for this opportunity to appear
    before the Committee with Chairman McCaul in support of the
    House Committee on Foreign Affairs' budget request for the
    118th Congress.
        As Chairman McCaul has indicated, we are a very important--
    I know the other committee was in here, but we are the very
    important committee of the House giving out a message of the
    significance and importance of foreign affairs.
        For example, in the 117th Congress, the Foreign Affairs
    Committee conducted unprecedented oversight and pushed an
    ambitious legislative agenda, including moving a State
    Authorization bill that was enacted for the first time in
    nearly two decades. Chairman McCaul has expressed through the
    committee oversight plan and the budget request an intention to
    pursue a State Authorization for this Congress--tremendously
    important--and an oversight agenda that includes adding a
    seventh subcommittee as well as robust plans for field
    hearings, as we have heard.
        I look forward to this work and believe an increased budget
    would enable the staffing and supporting resources to maximize
    the quality and output of our efforts.
        Our nation's national security interests are squarely at
    the center of the committee's jurisdiction at a time when
    global challenges will continue to require our most skilled
    staff and innovative thinking to reinforce our alliances and
    tackle issues like Russia's illegal war on Ukraine and
    strategic competition with China, as indicated by the Chairman,
    in deepening our diplomatic engagement in our hemisphere and on
    the continent of Africa.
        The minority in the 117th Congress and by past practice
    controls one-third of the committee budget. I appreciate and
    thank the Chairman for his intention to honor that practice and
    allow me the autonomy to use the minority budget to best meet
    the unique needs that come with being in the minority.
    Unfortunately, because of a smaller budget, it makes it
    difficult to keep and have the talent that you need.
        I will close with just this. In the post-9/11 era,
    diplomacy and development have regrettably not received the
    attention and resources they deserve. That must change. That is
    why I look forward to working with Chairman McCaul and with
    your help to have the resources needed to get that message
    through. I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Meeks follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much. The Chair and the
    Ranking Member will now each control 5 minutes from the Chair's
    time.
        Chairman McCaul, if I can ask you, looking back at last
    Congress, the total travel budget, I think, in actual
    expenditures was about $19,000. This year, you talked a little
    about how you want to utilize travel getting out of Washington,
    DC, $140,000.
        Can you dive into a little bit more about the importance of
    that and where you are looking at going inside of that? We
    spend a lot of time on this Committee thinking about how we are
    going to support the vast number of committees that are going
    to actually travel outside of Washington because it is really
    important. We just had a conversation with Chairman Smith with
    Ways and Means about some opportunities for improvement. Can
    you just give us a little more color----
        Mr. McCaul. Yes. You know, because of COVID, we didn't
    really have a chance to do this. That is why we asked for an
    increase. I think it is important. I mean, these are the issues
    really facing the nation of war and peace. I think the American
    people deserve to know from their elected Representatives what
    we are doing and engaging in foreign policy and how that
    impacts us here at home: Why is Ukraine important? Why is
    Taiwan important? Why are we doing the things we are doing
    overseas?
        I think, again, the first trip we outlined was to New York.
    I think the United Nations is a very--kind of a logical first
    step. I think Miami to look at what is happening in Latin
    America, the threat of China and the Chinese expansion. We have
    the migration phenomenon. We would like to look at how we can
    impact Central America, for instance--Mrs. Torres--in terms of
    private investment.
        This committee, with the State Department, we have the
    Development Finance Corporation, and we look at ways to get
    private investment in areas like Africa, as the Ranking Member
    mentioned, but also Central America where we can raise the
    economies of scale that can help get to the root cause of
    problem of why are people fleeing Central and Latin America to
    come to the United States. I think that would be an important
    hearing.
        Finally, our defense industrial base is broken. As you look
    at the weapons going into Ukraine and the ones--I signed off on
    four military sales 3 years ago to go into Taiwan that have yet
    to go in country, in theater. That is primarily because our
    defense industrial base is broken.
        We want to have a hearing that deals with not only
    semiconductors with the CHIPS Act that, you know, we were able
    to pass bipartisanly but talk about how we can look at
    hypersonic weapons, how we can look at the development of new
    weapon systems that this country needs if we are going to
    defend ourselves from the rising tide of threats that we see
    primarily from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much. The work you guys are
    going to have in front of you over the next 2 years is
    absolutely essential for the sake of the country, and I
    appreciate the work you guys are doing in that regard.
        I will now yield 5 minutes to the Ranking Member.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Chairman
    McCaul and Ranking Member Meeks, for being here. I appreciate
    your work.
        I always appreciate my friend Greg Meeks, who I think
    represents the United Nations because Queens is like the United
    Nations. I appreciate both of your service.
        I do also want to echo what others have said and so
    appreciate. In an increasingly dangerous world, the more that
    we present a unified front to the world internationally about
    what America's priorities are, what our values are, and our
    complete commitment to democracy and self-governance and
    respecting the wishes of sovereign people is so important. You
    know, I want to just continue to thank you for your bipartisan
    work in what I--as I said, is an increasingly dangerous world.
        Thanks for the budget request. We are obviously, I think,
    grateful that you have an agreement between the two members on
    expenditures.
        In your submission, Mr. Chairman, you indicated that you
    didn't have any plans to change the self-determination on the
    minority in terms of spending their allocation. I just want to
    confirm that I understand that and appreciate your willingness
    to continue to respect that----
        Mr. McCaul. Sure.
        Mr. Morelle [continuing]. that division. I gather we can
    rely on your commitment to do that.
        Mr. McCaul. Of course, yes.
        Mr. Morelle. Yes.
        To the Ranking Member, any--you have confidence that has
    continued to be the case and will continue to be the case?
        Mr. Meeks. Yes, no--Mr. McCaul, you know, we, not only as
    Chair and Ranking Member this go and the reverse last time--we
    developed a friendship. We have worked closely together to try
    to make sure we understand diplomacy, and we understand that at
    home and abroad. His commitment, his word, it means everything.
    He has always given that word, and we have always, likewise,
    tried to make sure. I have absolutely no hesitation, no doubt
    in my mind, about his commitment to make sure that we continue
    that one-third/two-thirds piece.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you. I am going to reserve and just----
        Mr. McCaul. What you said is very important. Look, we are
    not going to agree on anything, but we will agree to disagree.
    I think when it comes to foreign policy, I always say it stops
    at the water's edge. I just think it is important, if we are
    going to send a message to our adversaries, that we try to be
    as united as possible. I think we have done that. I think the
    Ranking Member and I have attempted to do that, you know, over
    the years.
        I think the 419 to zero vote on the spy balloon was another
    good example of how--a united voice is always better than a
    divided one because they love to see us divided along political
    lines--China would, and Russia--and I don't want to fall into
    that trap.
        Mr. Morelle. No, I completely agree. You know, as you said,
    there is going to be differences between us. There will be
    differences even within our own ranks. You know, each party has
    differences of opinion on how to do this. Ultimately, just
    recognizing the outside world, despite our differences, despite
    our challenges, we are unified in purpose about what the role
    of the United States is in the world and how we see the world
    order.
        Mr. Meeks. Can I just say to that--because, especially
    post-9/11, you know, where diplomacy and development have
    regrettably not received the kind of attention and resources
    that I think that they deserve--and I believe that we are going
    to avoid wars and global threats and expand our soft power.
    That is what we do here. Increase America's competitiveness and
    global standing. There is no committee--zero, none--of greater
    importance to do that than HFAC.
        Mr. Morelle. I would just say--and I am going to yield to
    my friend, Mrs. Torres, I also think that, in a world where we
    need to communicate the complexity of international relations,
    that things that might not be immediately obvious to the
    average citizen is really important. The two of you and the
    other members of the committee have a real responsibility to
    educate people about the real multidimensional elements of
    foreign policy and how to protect our interest even at times
    when there may be--that people think there is a much simpler
    answer. I appreciate that.
        I do want to yield to Mrs. Torres.
        Mrs. Torres. Thank you. I just want to thank both of you
    for being the face of Congress abroad and to ask that, as you
    continue to travel abroad, that, you know, we really need to
    focus and bring more people to the table to talk about the
    issue of refugees. It is a global issue that we must work
    together globally to address.
        The other thing, I want to thank you for hosting HDP and
    continuing to support HDP.
        With that, I will yield back.
        The Chairman. Chairman McCaul, Ranking Member Meeks, thanks
    for being here today. This is our commitment to return to
    regular order. Your testimony is helpful for us as we go to
    mark up the budgets next week. Thank you both for being here,
    and have a wonderful afternoon.
        To members of the Committee, I want to thank you for all
    the work over the last 2 days.
        I also want to insert and seek unanimous consent that the
    written testimonies of the Chair--of Vice Chair Luetkemeyer, as
    well as Ranking Member Velazquez of the Committee on Small
    Business, will be made part of the record. Due to the votes,
    they were unable to attend today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Williams for Mr. Luetkemeyer
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [The prepared statement of Ms. Velazquez follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. As I mentioned yesterday, conducting these
    hearings is one of the most impactful roles of the Committee. I
    think the staff in particular did a spectacular job, both the
    majority and minority side of House Administration, to keep
    this moving. We applaud all of the hard work that went in by
    the full team.
        Without objection, each Member, including our witnesses,
    will have 5 legislative days to insert additional remarks into
    the record or to revise and extend their remarks. If there is
    no further business, I thank the members for their
    participation.
        Without objection, the Committee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:11 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                      [all]