[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]