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


                    LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS
                                 FOR 2025                                 
       ---------------------------------------------------------------                                 

                                 HEARINGS

                                BEFORE THE

                       COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                     ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                              SECOND SESSION
                              
                              __________                            
                            

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

                  DAVID G. VALADAO, California, Chairman

  ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia		ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York	
  JAKE LaTURNER, Kansas			JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
  STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma		MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
  SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida

  NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full 
committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking minority member of the full 
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.

                   Michelle Reinshuttle and April Lyman
                            Subcommittee Staff

                               __________

                                 
                                 PART 1

                   FISCAL YEAR 2025 LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
                         APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTS

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
          
                              __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
56-034                    WASHINGTON : 2024                 
          
--------------------------------------------------------------------------           
 
           PART 1_LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2025
           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------         

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                             ----------                              
                             
                      TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman
  HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky
     Chair Emeritus
  KAY GRANGER, Texas
     Chair Emeritus
  ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
  MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
  JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
  KEN CALVERT, California
  MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
  STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
  CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
  DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
  ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
  MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
  DAVID G. VALADAO, California
  DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
  JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
  JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
  BEN CLINE, Virginia
  GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
  MIKE GARCIA, California
  ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa
  TONY GONZALES, Texas
  JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
  MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
  MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
  RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana
  ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia
  JAKE LaTURNER, Kansas
  JERRY L. CARL, Alabama
  STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
  SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
  JAKE ELLZEY, Texas
  JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona
  CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina

  ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut
  STENY H. HOYER, Maryland
  MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
  SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
  BARBARA LEE, California
  BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
  C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
  DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
  HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
  CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
  MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
  DEREK KILMER, Washington
  MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
  GRACE MENG, New York
  MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
  PETE AGUILAR, California
  LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
  BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
  NORMA J. TORRES, California
  ED CASE, Hawaii
  ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
  JOSH HARDER, California
  JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
  DAVID J. TRONE, Maryland
  LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
  SUSIE LEE, Nevada
  JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York

                   Susan Ross, Clerk and Staff Director

                                   (ii)
                                   
                             C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                             April 10, 2024
                    Government Accountability Office

Hon. Gene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General, U.S. Government 
  Accountability Office..........................................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     4
    Answers to submitted questions...............................    59

                      Government Publishing Office

Hon. Hugh Halpern, Director, Congressional Publishing Office.....    20
    Prepared statement...........................................    21
    Answers to submitted questions...............................    62

                      Congressional Budget Office

Philip Swagel, Director, Congressional Budget Office.............    41
    Prepared statement...........................................    43
    Answers to submitted questions...............................    67

                          U.S. Capitol Police

J. Thomas Manger, Chief, U.S. Capitol Police.....................    71
    Prepared statement...........................................    73

                           Submitted Material

Hon. Adriano Espaillat, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of New York, submitted statement.........................    96

                             April 16, 2024
               John C. Stennis Center for Public Service

Brian Pugh, Executive Director, John C. Stennis Center for Public 
  Service........................................................    99
    Prepared statement...........................................   102

                     Congressional Workplace Rights

Martin J. Crane, Executive Director, Office of Congressional 
  Workplace Rights...............................................   110
    Prepared statement...........................................   112

           Congressional Office for International Leadership

Jane Sargus, Executive Director, Congressional Office for 
  International Leadership.......................................   119
    Prepared statement...........................................   121

                          Library of Congress

Carla Hayden, Librarian of Congress..............................   139
    Prepared statement...........................................   141
    Answers to submitted questions...............................   173

                        Architect of the Capitol

Joseph DiPietro, Acting Architect of the Capitol.................   148
    Prepared statement...........................................   150

                           Submitted Material

Robert Randolph Newlen, Director, Congressional Research Service, 
  submitted statement............................................   161
Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director, U.S. 
  Copyright Office, submitted statements.........................   166

                             April 17, 2022
                        House of Representatives

Hon. Kevin McCumber, Acting Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives.   182
    Prepared statement...........................................   184
Hon. William F. McFarland, Sergeant at Arms, U.S. House of 
  Representatives................................................   192
    Prepared statement...........................................   195
Hon. Catherine Szpindor, Chief Administrative Officer, U.S. House 
  of Representatives.............................................   202
    Prepared statement...........................................   204

                           Submitted Material

Matthew Berry, General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, U.S. 
  House of Representatives, submitted statement..................   225
Joseph C. Picolla, Inspector General, U.S. House of 
  Representatives, submitted statement...........................   232
Ralph V. Seep, Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of 
  Representatives, submitted statement...........................   239
E. Wade Ballou, Jr., Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative 
  Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives, submitted statement....   246

                              Members' Day

Hon. Mark Takano, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  California, submitted statement................................   253
 Hon. Sylvia R.Garcia, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of Texas, submitted statement............................   254
Hon. Derek Kilmer, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Washington.....................................................   300
    Prepared statement...........................................   302
Hon. Jasmine Crockett, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of Texas.................................................   306
    Prepared statement...........................................   307

                           Submitted Material

Joshua Bonet, legislative associate, Issue One...................   256
Zach Graves, executive director, Foundation for Innovation.......   261
Dan Lips, head of policy, Foundation for American Innovation.....   264
Kel McLanahan, executive director, National Security Counselors..   269
Anne Meeker, deputy director, POPVOX Foundation..................   275
Debra Perlin, policy director, Citizens for Responsibility and 
  Ethics in Washington...........................................   280
John D. Rackey, senior analyst, Structural Democracy Project, 
  Bipartisan Policy Center.......................................   285
Daniel Schuman...................................................   290
Aubrey Wilson, director of Government Innovation, POPVOX 
  Foundation, and Taylor J. Swift, director, Government capacity, 
  POPVOX Foundation..............................................   295

 
                   LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS
                                FOR 2025

                              ----------                              

                                          Wednesday, April 10, 2024

                    GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

                      GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

                      CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

                               WITNESSES

HON. GENE L. DODARO, COMPTROLLER GENERAL, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY 
    OFFICE
HON. HUGH NATHANIAL HALPERN, DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
PHILLIP L. SWAGEL, DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
    Mr. Amodei. I want to call this meeting to order of the 
Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee. Subject of 
today's hearing is the fiscal year 2025 budget.
    Thanks for that.
    The request from the GAO, the Government Publishing 
Office--hey, did I miss something on that? I am so old; it was 
the Printing Office. But I guess we are getting more modern 
now. You are Publishing?
    Mr. Halpern. In 2014, they changed the name.
    Mr. Amodei. OK. So I am right up to date on that. Thank you 
for pointing that out. That will conclude your presentation.
    And, last but not least, the Congressional Budget Office.
    For those of you who are attending via digital media or 
streaming or whatever, our colleague from Virginia will be 
using an assistive device. So, if it doesn't sound like Ms. 
Wexton, it is Ms. Wexton. But, anyhow, we are not trying to do 
the bait-and-switch thing on you for that sort of stuff.
    And I want to thank the witnesses for being here, even 
though you may not feel like you have been thanked so far.
    And we will recognize the ranking member when he arrives.
    So, now, Mr. Comptroller General, Mr. Dodaro, the floor is 
yours. Please present.

     Statement of Gene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General, Government 
                         Accountability Office

    Mr. Dodaro. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Good morning to you, members of the committee. I am very 
pleased to be here today to talk about GAO's fiscal year 2025 
request.
    I first want to thank the subcommittee for their past 
support. I believe we provided a good return on investment as a 
result of implementation of our recommendations last year: over 
$70 billion in financial benefits accrued to the Government. 
Over the last 6 years, our return on investment has been $133 
for every dollar that you provide us. And so we are very proud 
of that record, and I appreciate your support.
    The demand for our services remains high. We get about 650 
to 700 requests from Congress each year from 93 percent of the 
standing committees of the Congress. So it is a very wide 
footprint across the Congress.
    We also this year so far provided, you know, 430 technical 
assistants to 215 committees, Members, and offices. So the 
outreach that we have had on technical assistance has helped a 
lot in that area as well.
    Our request for this year is basically to maintain the GAO 
workforce at its existing level of 3,600 full-time equivalent 
positions. We have added the support that you have allowed us 
to in the past. This is just to maintain that work.
    And we are going to continue to focus on five major areas 
that we built up our capacity, thanks to your support over the 
past few years.
    One is national security issues. There are 115 mandates in 
the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act for GAO. We do 
everything from military readiness to weapon system procurement 
on some of the major weapon systems, the modernization of the 
nuclear weapons complex. We are tracking aid to Ukraine, both 
military and foreign assistance as well. So a lot of work.
    And how our troops are treated. We had a big report this 
year about the poor conditions in the barracks and the need to, 
you know, really reform that and support that is given not only 
to the military members but to their families as well.
    The second is fraud. Fraud is a big problem, and, for 
government, it is pervasive. We estimated that, in the 
Unemployment Insurance Program alone, during the pandemic, it 
was $100 billion to $135 billion in fraud in that area. Next 
week, we are going to come out with a government-wide estimate 
on fraud. We are trying to work to get agencies to prevent 
fraud in the first place, which is the only effective way. So 
we have a work program that we would like to institute with 
your support going forward.
    The next area is the science and technology area. We have 
tripled the size of our work in the science and technology 
arena. We have brought in some top-notch scientists in a wide 
variety of disciplines. We have done over 30 technology 
assessments. We are doing much more work on artificial 
intelligence, quantum computing, regenerative medicine, and 
across the board in a number of areas in those areas and 
providing support to the committee.
    The fourth area is healthcare. Healthcare costs are the 
fastest growing component of the Federal budget, save maybe 
interest on the debt. But, also, Medicare, Medicaid, the 
assistance provided to VA, DOD, the Indian Health Service, is a 
big focus of our efforts because it is now--29 percent of the 
Federal budget is healthcare costs.
    And, lastly, cybersecurity. You know, I designated that a 
high-risk area in 1997 across the Federal Government. Critical 
infrastructure protection 2003. In the last 4 years, we have 
made over 1,400 recommendations. 670 are still open. The 
Federal Government is still not operating at a pace 
commensurate with the grave evolving threat in cybersecurity.
    So we are looking at the national cybersecurity strategy, 
how we are interacting with the private sector on the 16 
critical infrastructures across the country, electricity grid, 
telecommunications, and the financial services, and it goes 
across the board. This is a big vulnerability, and the Federal 
Government really doesn't have a good clue of exactly how 
vulnerable things are in these critical infrastructure areas 
that can impact the Government as well as our economy.
    So I thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning 
to talk to you about our request and the work we are doing at 
GAO, and I would be happy to respond to questions at the 
appropriate time.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Dodaro follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you, General. I appreciate that.
    The chair now recognizes the ranking member from the home 
of the Ulysses S. Grant tomb.
    Mr. Espaillat, the floor is yours for your opening 
statement.
    Mr. Espaillat. Good afternoon.
    Mr. Amodei. And, since we are going to go ahead and fully 
utilize you, then when you are done, you have got first crack 
at General Dodaro for questions. Go ahead.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Excuse the 
lateness.
    Mr. Dodaro, Mr. Swagel, and Mr. Halpern, thank you all for 
being here today. Each of your agencies has a tremendous 
responsibility and provides crucial functions to our democracy.
    The Government Accountability Office provides independent 
oversight, obviously, of Government programs and activities and 
nonpartisan support to Congress. The GAO has been voted the 
best place to work in government. I have got to see that smile 
on your face.
    Mr. Dodaro. Three straight years.
    Mr. Espaillat. Three straight years. For the past 3 years. 
That is correct.
    The GAO budget request for fiscal year 2025 is $960 million 
or 12.8 percent above the fiscal year 2024 enacted total.
    The Congressional Budget Office provides regular support to 
the Appropriations Committee through technical assistance and 
cost estimates throughout the annual legislative process. The 
CBO budget request for fiscal year 2025 is $73.5 million or 5 
percent above the fiscal year 2024 enacted total. The CBO has 
been particularly important recently.
    We have witnessed budget cuts perpetrated even after a 
handshake agreement. There are two ways to achieve budget cuts: 
either through decreased vital programs for the low to middle 
class families or to ensure that everyone is paying their fair 
share of taxes. I choose the latter. I prefer that everyone 
pays their fair share of taxes so that nurses and teachers 
aren't paying more taxes than a billionaire CEO. There is a 
larger conversation to be had about that, obviously.
    However, moving on, the Government Publishing Office's 
fundamental functions are to make information about the 
operations of government--particularly, the Congress--readily 
available to the public. The GPO budget request for fiscal year 
2025 is $136 million or 3.1 percent above the fiscal year 2024 
enacted total.
    This subcommittee greatly appreciates each agency's work, 
and I would like to commend each of you and your staff for your 
work in reinforcing Congress' constitutional power of the purse 
and for dedicating the resources necessary to support this 
committee.
    As ranking member, I am committed to ensure that your 
agencies have the resources they need to build on your 
excellent records, to provide timely expert assistance to 
Congress, and to meet the challenges of your missions. I look 
forward to each of you having a very interesting testimony.
    Thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member. Also, we will 
continue to leave the floor with you for any questions you have 
of General Dodaro.
    Mr. Espaillat. OK.
    Mr. Dodaro, at the request of Congress, GAO conducted a 
large body of work on the events of January 6. What were your 
most concerning findings, and have the law enforcement and 
intelligence agencies been responsive in addressing your 
recommendations?
    Mr. Dodaro. Our findings were that a number of agencies--
FBI, DHS, and the Capitol Police--had information but didn't 
process it so that it got into their threat assessments, and it 
wasn't communicated effectively among the community.
    So we made a number of recommendations in this regard to 
better process the information that they get from tips and 
other intelligence gathering sources, get it into their threat 
products that are shared, and have better sharing in place.
    Now, we made a number of recommendations to the Capitol 
Police and the Capitol Police Board, and I was concerned last 
year that they were slow in implementing it. So I reached out. 
I met with the--I talked to the chief. I talked to the Sergeant 
at Arms in the House and Senate. And I am pleased to report all 
but one recommendation is implemented so far.
    What we had them do was to provide more updated policies 
and procedures for when do you go outside the Capitol complex 
for support to bring it in, to help bolster the Capitol Police, 
how they share information among one another, and to give 
training, particularly to the Capitol Police officers. That one 
is the one outstanding.
    They are going to start with their civil, you know, group--
the Civil Disturbance Unit--to start with that. But we 
recommend they give training to everybody because they have to 
bring in additional people. So, you know, progress has been 
made in those areas, Congressman Espaillat.
    Mr. Espaillat. We will have some follow-up questions for 
the Capitol Police during the hearing.
    OK. Thank you for your answer.
    Mr. Dodaro. Sure.
    Mr. Espaillat. Mr. Swagel, the CBO----
    Mr. Amodei. Excuse me, Congressman Espaillat. We just 
completed the testimony of the comptroller general. We haven't 
had Mr. Swagel or the other folks testify yet, but we will give 
you a crack at those folks then.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    Mr. Quigley. Chairman, do you want to have them all testify 
so that we can just ask any of them? Just a suggestion.
    Mr. Amodei. I will take it under advisement. Thank you for 
that.
    Mr. Clyde, the floor is yours.
    Mr. Clyde. You mentioned that one recommendation had not 
been taken--had not been completed?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes.
    Mr. Clyde. What recommendation was that?
    Mr. Dodaro. That was to provide better training to the 
Capitol Police workforce in how to handle civil disturbances.
    Mr. Clyde. OK.
    Mr. Dodaro. And, in that one, what they are doing is they 
are prioritizing giving the training to their Civil Disturbance 
Unit.
    Mr. Clyde. But not all of them?
    Mr. Dodaro. Not all of them yet. I am hopeful--I have 
talked to the chief. I am hopeful they will provide it to 
everybody as soon as they are able to do so.
    Mr. Clyde. OK. All right.
    Mr. Dodaro. And then we will consider that fully closed. 
But I am very pleased.
    Other than that, I had very good conversations with the 
House Sergeant at Arms, the Senate Sergeant at Arms that 
comprise the police board along with the chief, and they have 
been very responsive.
    Mr. Clyde. Thank you.
    That is all I have.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    The gentleman from Illinois, the floor is yours for 
comptroller general questions.
    Mr. Quigley. During the budget cuts and sequestration, you 
lost about 10 percent of the workforce. Is that right?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. It was about 12 percent. I am very happy. 
We were one of the few Federal agencies to accommodate that 
through attrition and other means, and we didn't really have to 
furlough or RIF anybody during that period of time, and I am 
pleased about that. But it set us back, and since then, we have 
been trying to rebuild.
    Mr. Quigley. And you have closed the gap in different ways? 
Technology? Is the technology gap as well--is that still an 
issue?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. No, we are doing much better on 
technology, thanks to recent support from the committee. But I 
did postpone a lot of things. I prioritized our people.
    Mr. Quigley. What is your priority on technology that would 
help you?
    Mr. Dodaro. Right now, we are moving to the cloud 
technology, and we have moved a lot of applications. We are 
going to move some of our major other applications with the 
support of the committee to provide, you know, more flexibility 
and having more modern options once you are in the cloud to be 
able to do things and also to protect computer security. You 
know, we collect information throughout the government of all 
types, and we need to protect it properly. So moving to the 
cloud and computer security.
    And then we are moving all our publications to HTML format 
so that they are more easily searchable than the PDF formats. 
So those are two areas of technology that we are trying to 
catch up and modernize.
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you.
    I yield back, Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    The gentlelady from Oklahoma, Mrs. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Dodaro, for being here this 
morning. I just wanted to maybe touch on two quick things.
    First of all, can you talk a little bit about the New Blue 
project?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes.
    Mrs. Bice. I know that there has been some conversations 
that it has been a little slow and a little over budget. So can 
you give some color to that?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. We have been careful with the project. You 
know, we look at a lot of IT modernizations across the 
government, and I want to make sure we piloted it and tested it 
before we rolled it out because I didn't want it to be 
premature.
    We are pretty much done with the pilots now. We expect, by 
the end of this fiscal year, all GAO products will be in the 
HTML concept, and then we will have realized the first 
potential of the New Blue project. So I am very pleased with 
that. We are on the threshold of having it implemented across 
all our products.
    Mrs. Bice. What do you think the delays--why were there 
delays with trying to get this implemented?
    Mr. Dodaro. Well, you know, some of the problems were, you 
know, first understanding--make sure we were clear on what our 
requirements were going to be for the testimony. I have seen a 
lot of agencies move forward too fast without setting 
requirements. So we made sure that we spent time to set the 
requirements properly. And then, of course, in any software 
development initiative, you are going to have, you know, 
challenges to get it implemented properly.
    But that is why I didn't to want rush it. I have seen a lot 
of people be more schedule-driven across government than, you 
know, be prepared properly. You know, you continue to see 
problems in the government with this. The latest problem was 
with the FAFSA situation in education. They rushed it out, and 
they weren't done. Healthcare.gov, same thing.
    So I tried to be--you know, so we piloted it and made sure 
it worked properly before we went full bore. So we are on the 
threshold of doing that, and I feel good about it.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you for that update. I second your 
comments about, you know, making sure that we are doing things, 
I think, properly. There is also a balance, though, from a tech 
perspective in making sure that you can execute because what 
ends up happening is we bid something out; we take 3 or 4 or 5 
years for implementation, and by the time we actually implement 
it, that product is almost obsolete.
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. We are OK in that regard.
    Mrs. Bice. OK.
    Mr. Dodaro. But it is a good point that you make.
    Mrs. Bice. Yes. And then the follow-up. I think this is to 
Mr. Clyde's comment.
    Is there a reason why Capitol Police have said they haven't 
been able to implement that final recommendation, the training 
piece of that?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. I am not entirely sure about that. It 
could have to do with the resources necessary and the time to 
provide the training to the people. I will follow up with the 
chief. I haven't talked to him recently to see.
    But what the report I got back from our team that has been 
following up on these things is that they just want to 
prioritize that unit first, and I can't argue with that. I 
mean, that is the front-line unit that they need to deal with. 
It might have taken them a while to get the training in place 
and to----
    Mrs. Bice. I yield.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you for that.
    The gentlelady from Virginia has the floor.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you for being here with us today. Thank 
you, Mr. Chairman.
    As some of you may know, last year, I was diagnosed with 
progressive supranuclear palsy, or PSP. I describe it as 
Parkinson's on steroids, and I don't recommend it. PSP makes it 
very difficult for me to speak. So I use an assistive app so 
that I can participate and you can understand me.
    I want to thank the chair and ranking member for allowing 
me to do both today.
    I appreciate the work the GAO is doing to bolster your work 
both on national security and technology. As the founder of the 
Congressional Task Force on Digital Citizenship, I am 
particularly interested in the intersection of these two areas.
    Digital citizenship, or the responsible use of technology, 
applies to anyone who uses computers, the internet, mobile 
phones, or other digital devices to engage with society, and 
has become an increasingly important topic to me and many of my 
colleagues in Congress. Of particular interest to me is 
technology's impact on our children and on the spread of 
extremism online.
    As Congress increasingly examines this space, can you 
elaborate on how the GAO is preparing to ensure your workforce 
is prepared to address these areas and help educate Members 
about how tech companies and platforms operate?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes, please. First, I am sorry to learn about 
your health diagnosis, but I admire your courage and your 
flexibility.
    With regard--we have expanded our science and technology 
assessments analytics group from 49 people a few years ago. We 
have 175 people we will have in place by the end of this year, 
a lot of people with skills in these areas. We have developed a 
framework for auditing artificial intelligence algorithms to 
make sure they are free of bias and they operate as intended.
    Since 2013, I have been urging the Congress to pass a 
privacy framework for, you know, social media and the sharing 
of information and also to provide more flexibilities to the 
government agencies to make sure that the privacy--and people 
understand how their information that they enter into many 
applications is being used and they have a little bit more of a 
say in it. Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case.
    I am hopeful with the current efforts of the Congress to 
focus on artificial intelligence to try to get ahead of that a 
little bit. So we are doing a lot. We are doing work now on the 
cost and benefits and risk of generative AI. And so we are 
going to continue to focus on these issues.
    It is a very important subject. We are going to provide a 
lot of technical assistance to the Congress and look at how--
like, we have looked at how artificial intelligence can be used 
for expediting drug development, helping in diagnosis and 
treatment in the medical area. We did that in partnership with 
the National Institute of Medicine. We are looking at 
applications in many other areas.
    I think more education has to be provided to our children. 
And, in technology, unlike a lot of other areas where they get 
some advice from their parents, I think not all the parents are 
prepared to give that same level of support in the technology 
area. In some cases, they are learning from their children as 
opposed to the traditional way that it goes. I am a grandfather 
of nine grandchildren, and I see how it has become ubiquitous 
to them.
    And so I think that is a very important issue, and we are 
willing to work with you on any ideas you have to further 
expand our work in this very important area. It is important to 
the economy and our competitiveness, but all technology has a 
dark side to it, and what we are trying to do is to highlight 
what some of those risks are.
    And, as I mentioned in my opening statement, I have long 
been concerned about security issues of computer security, and 
we are still not doing a good job in that area as a government.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you, ma'am.
    The chair now recognizes Mr. Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, General Dodaro.
    Actually, my questioning follows along with Ms. Wexton's. I 
am on the Speaker's AI Task Force, and we now are grappling 
with this big challenge of how do we take this transformational 
opportunity that we have that AI is going to present, and what 
is Congress' role in providing the right guidelines? You know, 
the guardrails to protect society but also not provide so much, 
you know, overburdensome regulation that we stifle innovation.
    Mr. Dodaro. Right.
    Mr. Franklin. But, particularly, you know, in listening to 
your five key focus areas--national security, fraud, science 
and technology, healthcare, cybersecurity--every single one of 
those come up in meetings that we are having about AI and where 
this is going. And, as you had mentioned, there is a dark side, 
but there is also a tremendous opportunity.
    So, one, you are going to have--your agency is going to 
have the need to be monitoring others outside and how they are 
using it, but also I am interested in how you, as the GAO, are 
going to be harnessing AI to bring that to bear to assist you.
    How can we help--how can Congress help you and provide you 
with the tools and the guidelines you need? Are there any 
authorities you need? Or where do you see--how are you using it 
to this point? I know you are talking about doing risk 
assessments and things like that, but tangibly are you using AI 
tools now, and where do you see that going?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. I have set up an innovation lab within GAO 
so we can test things out before we apply them, you know, more 
broadly. We have used a large language model, and what we are 
going to start with is inputting--you know, we have issued 
thousands of reports on all different topics, and to do a 
search now involves a lot of manual intervention.
    So we are going to try to see if we can use a large 
language model and artificial intelligence to distill down 
these hundreds and thousands of GAO reports on particular 
topics to expedite our searches and then, once we are 
comfortable with the information, to share--allow Congress to 
use it to be able to search GAO products.
    And, you know, we have started with our own work because I 
know it is accurate. Part of the problem here in the other 
cases is, if you don't get good information----
    Mr. Franklin. Right. You have got to have clean data to 
start with.
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. And this is a problem because a lot of our 
reports talk about the poor quality of government data, and it 
doesn't have good integrity and reliability and good quality 
into it. So we are doing that.
    We are also using it to see if we can use it to do some 
editing on our reports and things of that nature and using it, 
you know, in a number of other areas. So we are dedicating some 
time to come up with some concrete products on how we can use 
it with GAO. That is the prime example right now.
    Mr. Franklin. I just want to touch on the data there. Are 
you finding any common themes? Are there areas that--are there 
ways--as we start establishing standards for how we operate, 
are there things we can do on the front end to start 
establishing standards for how that data is created so that 
these AI models can be used more effectively?
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes, absolutely. You know, I have made 
recommendations--let's take USAspending.gov, for example, which 
provides--is supposed to provide all the information on how the 
government spends its money, all right?
    We continue to find gaps. We found 49 agencies weren't 
reporting at all. It was several billion dollars. One even 
included that the data is not complete, reliable. You know, I 
have worked with the Congress before--there are data standards 
that are set, but there is no data governance structure in 
place to enforce it within the executive branch. We have made 
many recommendations to the Treasury Department and OMB to have 
a more structured, stringent data standards--data governance 
structure in place.
    Also, the requirement for the inspectors general in the 
agencies to audit the information to ensure its accuracy 
expired, and they are not going to go in and audit it unless 
Congress directs them to do it. So I have recommended to the 
Congress that they reinstate the requirement to have periodic 
reviews of the inspectors general in order to make sure the 
quality of that data is much more accurate.
    We have spent, in a number of cases, a lot of time looking 
at the reliability of information when we do individual audits 
to make sure it is reliable before we, you know, use it to draw 
conclusions and findings and recommendations. That shouldn't be 
the case. I mean, there should be much more integrity into the 
Federal Government's information in that area. So that is one 
glaring example.
    But it is a problem because I think it is going to limit 
the Federal Government to be able to use the potential of AI 
without causing distorted effects that are going to happen. 
That is why, also, we created this framework for how to audit 
artificial intelligence, and part of it is, how do you ensure 
the data is right? How do you have an oversight function in 
place? You know, because if it is not done properly, all we are 
going to do is get bad data faster, and that is not going to--
--
    Mr. Franklin. Right. And draw wrong conclusions.
    Mr. Dodaro. Right. Absolutely. And it is going to cause a 
lot of problems.
    So there are many things that could be done now. I would be 
happy to provide the committee with a list of all our 
recommendations in this regard. But, if you don't have that 
foundation, it is going to limit the government's ability to do 
it.
    And the government needs to ensure that--when you are 
looking at regulatory aspects, that we set that same standard 
for the private sector and that they ensure the integrity of 
their information, that it is transparent, and that it is, you 
know, tested properly before the applications are made public.
    Mr. Franklin. I appreciate that. And I would love to get 
those recommendations that you have and then work with you.
    Mr. Dodaro. Sure. Absolutely. And we have a lot. We have 
got a great chief scientist in GAO and a chief data scientist, 
and so maybe they can meet with your task force, and I would be 
happy to as well.
    Mr. Franklin. I appreciate that. Thank you.
    Mr. Dodaro. Sure. Absolutely.
    Mr. Franklin. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    And, as a follow-up to that, Mr. Comptroller General--so we 
are going to appoint a sub-subcommittee of two. One is Mr. 
Franklin, who will be the chair, and then one with whoever Mr. 
Espaillat wants to put on the committee with him to provide 
recommendations back to us both on coordinating with House 
Admin to get that front and center for their consideration and 
also ours for the purposes of writing our report.
    And so the deadline for your sub-subcommittee in getting 
back with the subcommittee is--let's say 45 days.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, sir. Can I have another?
    Mr. Amodei. Not yet, but thank you for asking in such a 
formal manner. That is OK because it--we will pick on Mr. 
LaTurner in his absence, and it will be much worse than 
anything you got.
    Mr. Dodaro. We would be happy to help assist you in that 
regard.
    And I also want to thank Congresswoman Bice for the 
Subcommittee on Modernization in the House Administration 
Committee for setting up space in the Longworth Building. We 
showed up the first day we could get in. It is working well, 
and I am hopeful that that will continue to do that as well--
you know, to reach more Members--individual Member offices in 
addition to the committees that we work with.
    Mr. Amodei. OK. Great.
    We are going to go now to Mr. Halpern from the Government 
Publishing Office.
    But I would ask you, General Dodaro, to hang around in case 
Members want to talk to you afterwards.
    When we get done with all three of you, if there are any 
questions--taking part of the gentleman from Illinois' 
recommendation--we try to accommodate as much as possible--we 
will have questions--any follow-up questions for all three of 
you at the end.
    Mr. Amodei. So, Mr. Halpern, the floor is yours.

    Statement of Hon. Hugh Nathanial Halpern, Director, Government 
                           Publishing Office

    Mr. Halpern. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 
Espaillat, Members of the subcommittee. It is great to be here. 
It is great to see you again. And let me first say, thank you 
so much for your support for the work that our 1,600 
craftspeople and professionals at GPO do for Congress.
    I am pleased to appear here today to testify in favor of 
our fiscal year 2025 appropriations request. In the interest of 
time, I will do my best to keep this short.
    As many of you know, GPO is fundamentally a manufacturing 
operation. We publish, produce, and maintain materials for all 
three branches of government, and we operate much as a business 
would.
    Only about 10 percent of the agency's operating budget is 
directly appropriated, and most of that is to cover the direct 
cost of Congress' own printing and publishing and the operation 
of the Federal Depository Library Program. We recover the rest 
of our $1.3 billion operating budget directly from our other 
customers.
    This year, we are requesting approximately $136 million, 
and that includes $83 million for congressional publishing, 
nearly $42 million for our public information programs--
including the Federal Depository Library Program--and about 
$11.5 million for special projects funded by our revolving 
fund. This represents a 3.1 percent increase over last year's 
enacted levels and basically reflects our increases in labor 
and materials costs.
    Fully funding our request will allow us to continue 
recruiting the next generation of GPO teammates and, 
importantly, fund our ongoing modernization efforts such as 
developing XPub, our next-generation composition engine, and 
adopting digital printing technologies. Likewise, it will 
enable us to expand the depth and breadth of our digital 
offerings, like congressionally mandated reports and the 
Congressional Serial Set.
    Thank you, again, for your support of GPO. Supporting this 
committee and really all of Congress is one of our top 
priorities, and I appreciate the opportunity to testify and 
look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Halpern follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Ranking Member, the floor is yours.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    Mr. Halpern, can you briefly discuss how your recent 
modernization efforts have increased your reach to the American 
public?
    Mr. Halpern. Absolutely. One of the things that we try to 
do is make sure that the information that our customers 
produce--and it is ultimately their information, whether it is 
Congress', the courts', or whoever our customer may be--we want 
to make sure that that information is available in as many 
different formats as possible so that it is readable and 
accessible by folks.
    We do that through a variety of different ways. One of 
those is trying to update the data standards for Congress 
itself so that we can provide your bills and other documents in 
a variety of different formats, not just PDF, but structured 
data as well.
    Similarly, we are going back through our archives and 
trying to make old documents available on GovInfo.gov, the 
world's only ISO-certified trusted digital repository. So we 
just completed digitization of the Congressional Serial Set, 
finished our work on the statutes at large, going all the way 
back to 1789.
    We are trying to make all of that available and, trying to 
do it in as many different formats as we can so it is as 
accessible as it can be for folks, whether they are looking at 
a PDF, or whether they are looking for more of a structured 
data or something that is more compatible with mobile devices 
and easier to read. So we are trying to achieve that on all the 
different levels that we can.
    Mr. Espaillat. For a taxpaying citizen that doesn't have 
English proficiency and wants to access some basic information, 
is there anything available in other languages?
    Mr. Halpern. So it depends. We don't do direct translation 
ourselves, but we have in the past engaged translators when 
requested by customers. But piggybacking off the discussion of 
AI and some of the other tools that are out there, the more 
that we can get into more fundamental readable data formats, 
there are going to be other tools out there that can do the 
translation pretty easily, whether it is Google Translate or 
some other product.
    So my goal is always to try and make that basic data 
available where I can. Sometimes with old documents, it is hard 
to do without having a human being sit there and rekey it.
    Mr. Espaillat. With the new technologies, that may be----
    Mr. Halpern. Absolutely. So let me give you an example.
    I talked about XPub, our new composition engine. Right now, 
that is in user acceptance testing with the House and Senate 
for bills, resolutions, and amendments. So, ultimately, it is 
up to our customer when that rolls out, but my hope is we would 
see that late summer, early fall.
    And one of the immediate changes that you will find is 
instead of the, quite frankly, really terrible text-only 
display that you would get now on Congress.gov or GovInfo, that 
would go to a full HTML5, fully compliant, fully structured 
data format. So it is much easier for these tools to translate 
that into other languages as opposed to the way it currently 
displays. So that is our goal.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Mr. Clyde.
    Mr. Clyde. Thank you.
    In your testimony, you mentioned that only 10 percent of 
your budget is appropriated and that there is about a 3-percent 
increase--so about $4 million of appropriated money.
    By the way, I think a tremendous amount of which you guys 
do--I think you are a top-tier agency.
    Mr. Halpern. Thank you.
    Mr. Clyde. And I am happy that you run it as well as you 
do, all right?
    So could you tell me--this additional $4 million. I mean, 
you mention it incorporates increased cost in labor and 
materials. Can you be a little more specific about what that $4 
million increase entails?
    Mr. Halpern. Sure. So let me start with labor costs because 
that is the--frankly, the largest component of that.
    So, right now, we have got--depending on how you count--
someplace between 12 and 13 union bargaining units. We have 
contracts in place with those bargaining units.
    Our agreement with them is that they will receive the same 
increase that a standard GS employee would receive. So, if 
Federal employees received a 3 percent increase, they have got 
that 3 percent increase. Last year, I want to say it was a 
little more than 5 percent. So we have got to factor that into 
our cost.
    And the other thing to preface this all with is, by law, I 
am required to recover my costs. So the way we interpret that 
is, if it costs us x to produce Congress' documents, that is 
where we have got to recover that. We can't go to another 
agency and recover the cost to produce Congress' thing from 
what they are paying us.
    There are shared overhead costs. But, for instance, we are 
not going to surcharge the State Department for our production 
of passports to fund Congress' needs.
    So you take that. You add in the cost of paper. And, 
frankly, we need people. We need to add on folks to meet the 
requirements that you all place on us.
    So, to give you an idea, our workforce trends older than 
the Federal average, and one key area is in the prepress work. 
When you drop a bill into the hopper, there is a human being 
who looks at that paper to make sure that it matches the 
electronic file that we have. And those folks are getting 
older, and they are getting ready to retire, and we need to 
hire the next generation of folks to come learn from them and 
follow behind.
    So those are all the resources that we need to bring to 
bear. We think keeping those costs to around 3 percent, given 
where we are, we are able to offset, frankly, much higher costs 
by investing in technology and trying to become more efficient. 
Our ability to keep doing that at a zero increase disappeared a 
few years ago. But our goal is to keep that number as low as we 
possibly can.
    Mr. Clyde. OK. Well, on that note of hiring people, a 
question that I would like to ask both of you and that I did 
not ask the good general down there: What percentage of your 
workforce is working completely--has returned to the office and 
is working completely in person, and what percentage is remote?
    And, if you can answer that, and then you can follow on 
with that.
    Mr. Halpern. Sure. So about two-thirds of our teammates 
have come to the office throughout. They are craftspeople and 
manufacturing employees. You can't take a printing press home.
    Mr. Clyde. Right.
    Mr. Halpern. The third of our team that is knowledge 
workers, telework has worked really, really well for us. And 
those folks are either largely telework or some sort of hybrid 
arrangement.
    I will give you one example. We used to have 12 sales 
offices all across the country, and that was to serve those 
agencies wherever they were. Nobody came to visit them. So, 
when we shifted to telework, we found that those folks could 
keep doing their job just as they were before, and we didn't 
need that overhead. So we closed all 12 of those offices and 
saved about a million dollars a year in rent and other overhead 
costs.
    So, yes, we have embraced telework, but we have also found 
some savings from being able to do that.
    Mr. Clyde. OK. So two-thirds, one-third?
    Mr. Halpern. Two-thirds, one-third.
    Mr. Clyde. All right.
    Mr. Dodaro. Yes. We have had a robust telework program for 
over 20 years in GAO. It really started during 2001 when there 
were anthrax attacks at the Capitol. And all the House of 
Representatives--all 435 Members, their staff, and the 
committee staff--came to the GAO building to continue their 
work because they had to deal with the emergencies associated 
with it.
    Mr. Clyde. I bet that was fun.
    Mr. Dodaro. It was interesting. I was sitting in my office 
on a Friday. I got a call, and I said, Well, when do you want 
to come?'' They said Monday. I said, ``Well, give me until 
Tuesday at least.'' And so we did it.
    But they were there for 2.5 weeks dealing with the aviation 
industry and all the problems that came from 9/11. And we said, 
well--so we let people work from home. We increased our 
technical capacity.
    And we are a knowledge-based organization. Most of the 
government's records are not digitized. We have 11 field 
offices across the country. Most of the Federal money is spent 
outside of Washington, and most Federal employees are used 
there. So it is very important for our people to go--I am more 
interested in where they go to do the audit work, whether it is 
a VA Medical Center, a military installation, the State agency 
that is running the Medicaid program, for example. So our 
people need to be out.
    We have had in the last year, like, 3,200 trips where we 
have sent people to every State, all four territories, and 36 
different countries around the world, you know, where U.S. 
interests are there.
    So this program--even before the pandemic, our people could 
work 66 hours out of 80 hours every 2 weeks telework. And so we 
are adding a remote component. We have done evaluations all 
along--very strict evaluations--to make sure it doesn't affect 
the quality of our work and, you know, the integrity of our 
operations to the Congress.
    So our people have flexibility. It helps us attract really 
high-caliber talent, you know, so that we have the best people 
to serve the Congress and produce these reports that we do.
    And it has helped us retain people. Our attrition rate is 
less than 6 percent, and we are able to get people from the 
private sector that we couldn't get without flexible work 
arrangements because we can't compete on salaries. I mean, that 
is just flat out. These scientists I have been hiring, these 
are people who want flexibility. We have been able to attract, 
you know, high-caliber people.
    So, you know, I believe, over the years, it has not had any 
effect on our quality and our productivity of our work. You 
know, I have been in GAO 50 years. So I have seen all different 
kind of work arrangements. And I am very proud of the quality 
of the work that we have now, and it is because we have high-
caliber people, and having flexible work arrangements is 
pivotal to bringing those people in and keeping them.
    Mr. Clyde. Thank you. That is good to hear.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. The gentleman from Illinois.
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Chair.
    In the darkness, a little bit of light here of 
congressionally mandated reports. As you know, we create 
hundreds and hundreds--a Carl--Sagan-like number of requests 
for congressionally mandated reports. For the most part, 
before, they ended up on the bookshelf, dusty. A lot of them 
had critical information, but a lot of them involved access 
into what the government was doing and why it mattered.
    So I was involved with that, but it had great bipartisan 
support, the Transparency Caucus. So now we are a year into 
this. There are 250 reports on the website--the year website.
    Mr. Halpern. Actually, I can give you an updated number.
    Mr. Quigley. OK. As of this morning?
    Mr. Halpern. As of Monday, we had 299 reports online from 
61 different agencies.
    Mr. Quigley. So I guess the short question is, just tell us 
a little bit about that process. Are there any agencies that we 
need to talk to who aren't as helpful?
    Mr. Halpern. I can get you a list of folks who may be--I 
think the polite way to put it--might be a little laggard in--
--
    Mr. Quigley. I am from Chicago. We can visit them.
    Mr. Amodei. Our phrase, not yours: Do you need a tune-up?
    Mr. Halpern. However you would like to deal with the issue.
    Mr. Quigley. Does the public know about this?
    Mr. Halpern. We do a lot of outreach to executive branch 
agencies trying to educate them about their requirements under 
the law, and we have done our level best to make this process 
as easy as we possibly can.
    Right now, the vast majority of those documents are coming 
to us as PDFs. We would like to, in the future, help build 
systems for these agencies so that they can deliver these 
documents to us in other more accessible formats as well.
    But we have been very pleased with the success so far. We 
were able to essentially stand the program up in a year, and we 
used a combination of custom and commercial off-the-shelf 
technology to make that happen. We are very proud with the 
results.
    Mr. Quigley. And, again, I want to make sure we do what we 
can to make sure the public is aware of this so they can go 
fishing here to see what information might help them.
    Mr. Halpern. We highlight this on GovInfo.gov, and we are 
happy to shout from the mountaintops about the availability of 
this new resource.
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you. I appreciate all your work on that.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Mrs. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And, Director Halpern, thank you for being with us this 
morning.
    Tomorrow, the House Administration Subcommittee on 
Modernization will be marking up H.R. 7592 to remove the print 
requirement for the Annotated Constitution and pocket-part 
supplements.
    If you all have not seen a published Annotated 
Constitution, it is about 5 inches in height and is done on a 
decade basis, but that tends to actually be out of date fairly 
quickly. And we recognized in the Modernization Subcommittee 
that, by allowing that to be done online, it is much more up to 
date. It is much more convenient.
    Director, can you talk a little bit about how much savings 
that we will achieve by moving that to strictly online?
    Mr. Halpern. Sure. I believe the cost to produce the last 
edition was about half a million dollars. That was a 
substantial savings over the time before when it was up over a 
million dollars.
    I think one thing to keep in mind is there are some 
customers out there for the actual book, and those are our 
Federal Depository Libraries. So there may be some 
disappointment there that it is not available, but----
    Mr. Amodei. Excuse me. Some of us--and thank you for being 
gentle with how you describe age of employees. Some of us 
really like books. Please continue.
    Mr. Halpern. I like books. I like stationery. So this seems 
to be the right fit for me.
    So there is probably going to be a little bit of 
disappointment in that community. That said, the FDLP program 
is moving to a largely digital program, anyway. Libraries don't 
have space to store these volumes. And we have been working 
really, really closely with that cohort to try and soften the 
blow, not just on CONAN--on the Constitution Annotated--but on 
other documents as well and creating places for physical copies 
on a regional basis rather than necessarily every library.
    And there are ways. If folks really decide in the future 
that they want a printed copy, digital ink-jet technology gives 
us a lot more flexibility than we had back in the offset days 
to produce small print runs. So it will become cheaper still. 
So, if we wanted to, say, run soft cover copies--a limited 
run--that is easy enough for us to do.
    Mrs. Bice. I appreciate that. I think the focus for us is 
trying to find ways to utilize technology in a beneficial way. 
And certainly that CONAN book, albeit is quite lovely and 
large, it is also almost immediately outdated once it is 
published. So, by using technology to keep that information up 
to date, I think it is incredibly important for anyone that is 
using it for actual legal purposes.
    So thank you for entertaining that. I look forward to 
marking that up tomorrow.
    And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Ms. Wexton, the floor is yours for questions 
for the GPO Director.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Halpern, thank you for being here. It is good to see 
you again. When you came before us last year, you invited us to 
come to the GPO facility, a short walk from here on North 
Capitol Street. It was fascinating to see the quantity and 
quality of publications that are printed here and distributed 
nationwide. The little notepads that you make with leftover 
scrap paper and decorated with ancient techniques were very 
well received.
    Last year, we spoke about a number of initiatives to 
modernize Congress.gov and the ways we print and review 
congressional documents. Coming from the Virginia State 
Legislature where we use LIS, the opaque nature of bill text is 
a pet peeve of mine, and I appreciated your insights.
    One of the things you mentioned in that conversation and in 
your opening testimony today is the work GPO is doing to 
further develop the XPub system and GovInfo. I see that your 
budget request includes nearly $6 million for XPub development 
and over $5.4 million for GovInfo.
    Can you please elaborate on how these investments will 
further the work you have done in the last year and what, if 
any, additional functionality will be achieved?
    Mr. Halpern. Absolutely. And thank you so much for the 
opportunity to answer those questions. And thank you for coming 
to visit. It was great having you.
    Let me take XPub first. As I mentioned, that right now is 
in user acceptance testing with both the House and the Senate. 
So our hope is either over the summer or in the fall, leg 
counsel--both House and Senate--will give that product their OK 
and sort of flip the switch and start using that.
    The immediate change that folks will see is that the text--
the plain text display of a bill resolution or amendment will 
be far more readable online than they are currently, and that 
is a huge step forward.
    What XPub holds for the future is the ability to reimagine 
what congressional documents look like. One project I am 
working on, with the blessing of the Joint Committee on 
Printing and both House Administration and Senate Rules, is 
updating the format for committee reports.
    To date, we have done some focus groups with institutional 
officers and committees so far. We have taken that information 
back. And I am working with our graphic designers now to 
incorporate a lot of that feedback to come up with a new format 
for committee reports.
    On GovInfo, we are always trying to expand those 
collections, and we are trying to figure out new ways to 
incorporate new technology to increase the value that GovInfo 
delivers for the American public.
    And I know that we talked with Mrs. Bice and other folks 
about the opportunities for AI and how that can change things. 
One of the things we are struggling with on GovInfo is, while 
we could create a sort of large language model search engine to 
search all of government publications from 1789 forward, we are 
a little concerned because GPO's brand is we are delivering you 
the authentic document. And, if we have something that 
interposes between the user and that authentic document, is 
that really delivering the authentic item that we have been 
advertising?
    Those are some of the kinds of issues where we are 
struggling with, but we are very open to figuring out new ways 
to deliver this information in ways that benefit your 
individual constituents and the public at large here in the 
U.S. and really worldwide.
    Ms. Wexton. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    Mr. Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you, Mr. Halpern.
    I was thinking back to last year. We were talking about 
workforce, and we had these questions about remote working, and 
one of the challenges you had expressed is in some of the 
skills--particular skills necessary within your office, some of 
these are just things that people don't learn until they get 
there, and there is a lot of hands-on.
    You talked about reinstating your apprenticeship program. I 
am just interested to hear how that has progressed and where it 
needs to go from here.
    Mr. Halpern. So that first year--well, let me back up.
    We have got some critical needs in, frankly, all of our 
trades but particularly in the proofreading/copy editing area, 
and that is actually the entry point for congressional 
documents.
    So our first apprentice class was, I believe, eight folks, 
and they are in the second year of their program right now, and 
we are hoping to get them out on the floor and actually doing 
work a little bit sooner than we had in the past.
    We also, this past year, did a new apprenticeship class of 
almost 24 folks. I believe it is another eight proofreaders and 
then a mix of press people, platemakers, and other trades that 
we need for GPO. So we have really invigorated that program, 
and we are very happy with the results.
    We also took on another program really directed at our 
efforts to produce the U.S. passport. So there, instead of 
doing a full-on apprentice program, we did an on-the-job 
training program. We looked for folks who have some aptitude in 
the manufacturing environment. We used objective assessments to 
try and ferret that out.
    And then we have a 3-year on-the-job training program where 
these folks that we bring in as production technicians. They 
learn all the machines that they need to learn to produce U.S. 
passports and secure identification cards. And, at the end of 
those 3 years, they are a full journeyperson bookbinder at the 
end. That has been a tremendously successful program. We run 
that both here in DC and at our facility down in Mississippi 
where we do our secure ID work.
    We have hired about 80 folks in the production tech 
program.
    So these kind of programs where we are teaching a trade--
where we are teaching folks how to make the products that our 
customers are asking for--have actually been really, really 
successful.
    We have also had great experience recruiting into our 
recent grad program. Those are folks from--everybody from 
accountants to IT specialists to automation experts. And they 
are in a cohort that is learning--as they are going, learning 
what we do at GPO and really bringing a lot to the table.
    Last year, we hired almost 200 new people, and that is 
hugely important as our workforce ages and a lot of them are 
taking their well-deserved retirements. So we are doing a lot 
of work to make sure that we are ready so that, as folks 
retire, we have got that next generation coming up.
    Mr. Franklin. Yes. I seem to recall you had mentioned about 
maybe half of your workforce leaving in the next 3 or 4 years. 
So do you feel like you are on step to----
    Mr. Halpern. We do. The statistic is half of them will be 
eligible to retire in the next 4 years. It doesn't mean they 
all will. But we are working really hard to make sure we are 
backfilling.
    We have got some other areas. For instance, that proof 
room--now, in that, we have a mean age in the proof room of 59, 
and over half of them are eligible to retire right now. So we 
have got a shortage of folks doing that work. That is why 
sometimes it takes us a little longer to process your 
introduced bill than we would like.
    We have got a plan to supplement that using reemployed 
retirees, new apprentices, and trying to hire folks as well. We 
think, that in a couple years, we will be back up to full staff 
in that area, but it is going to take us some time.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Dr. Swagel for CBO, the floor is yours.

 Statement of Phillip L. Swagel, Director, Congressional Budget Office

    Mr. Swagel. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Amodei, Ranking 
Member Espaillat, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you 
for the opportunity to present the Congressional Budget 
Office's budget request. Thank you for providing nearly the 
full amount we requested for this fiscal year and, more 
broadly, for your continued support of our agency.
    CBO is requesting an appropriation of $73.5 million for 
2025, which is an increase of $3.5 million or 5 percent from 
the amount provided in 2024. The request would address 
increased costs, sustain our investments in IT infrastructure, 
and enable CBO to add staff in key areas.
    Our mission is to provide nonpartisan analysis to the 
Congress that is timely, rigorous, and transparent. When 
legislation is heading to a vote, we provide cost estimates and 
real-time analysis of amendments, often hundreds or even 
thousands of them for bills such as the NDAA.
    We provide analysis and technical assistance for large 
complex legislation, such as reauthorization of the farm bill. 
We are still working on that. We produce budget and economic 
projections and analysis of a broad range of policy issues 
confronting the Congress.
    The additional resources would enable us to do better--even 
better in terms of our responsiveness and our transparency. Our 
fiscal year 2024 funding will allow CBO to grow from 267 in 
late March to 276 people by the end of the year, and then our 
request for 2025 would help us grow by an additional nine more. 
So that is to 285.
    CBO would add analysts in areas of particular congressional 
focus: defense and homeland security. In particular, I want to 
add people for some of our work on the budget impacts of weapon 
systems. We would add people to do implications of fiscal 
policy--so effects of taxes and spending on the economy--and 
our long-term projections, and that is analysis of Medicare, of 
Social Security, and preventive health policy.
    Our requested increase is entirely for personnel expenses. 
It is to cover the salaries and benefits for current employees 
and, to a much lesser extent, to fund these new staff. Our 
total non-personnel expenses would decline by about 3 percent 
because some of our spending for IT in 2024--such as purchases 
of equipment, cybersecurity, cloud services--are for things 
that we deferred last year and that will not recur in the 
future--will not recur in 2025. It will recur at some point in 
the future.
    Our requested budget would support our goal and our mission 
to provide information when it is most useful to the Congress. 
And, for the Appropriations Committee, we provide real-time 
provision-by-provision estimates of the 12 annual appropriation 
bills and any supplemental appropriation bills or continuing 
resolutions, and we respond to thousands of requests for 
technical assistance and more as you craft your legislation.
    In addition to providing cost estimates before a floor vote 
for nearly all bills, we will publish dozens of statutory 
reports and requested reports on topics--on a wide range of 
topics: the budgetary impacts of coverage for obesity or anti-
obesity medications, hepatitis C treatment, housing, Navy 
shipbuilding, much more. We will offer help by phone, by video, 
by email, and in person to your offices as you consider and 
draft legislation and in response to questions.
    So, in summary, to achieve our goal of being as responsive 
as possible, CBO requests an increase of $3.5 million. With 
your support, we look forward to continuing to provide timely 
and high-quality analysis to the Congress. Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Swagel follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Amodei. Mr. Ranking Member.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Swagel. Your agency does 
provide great work and bipartisan work, and I commend you for 
your efforts.
    In fiscal year 2024, the Appropriations Act that this 
subcommittee was able to provide, CBO did one of the largest 
percentage increases of any agency across government, and this 
increase was in recognition to the important role that you 
play, obviously, in strengthening our Congress power of the 
purse through analysis and services that you provide.
    As we begin fiscal year 2025 and its appropriations 
process, I want to ask you about CBO's prudent budget planning 
for next year and regarding your budget summary that noted that 
CBO postponed filling about 12 vacancies during fiscal year 
2024 CR.
    And, if necessary, will CBO be prepared to continue 
operating at the fiscal year 2024 level in October if there is 
a continuing resolution for some part of next year? Could you 
tell us the impact on the volume of your work that having 
continuing resolutions imposes on you?
    Mr. Swagel.Yes, sir. And we are looking ahead in exactly 
the way that you are talking about. We are expanding now. As 
soon as, you know, the second appropriations bill was enacted, 
we posted a number of job openings in key areas. Our work on 
Medicare in particular and other health issues is something 
that we had attrition, and now we are looking to restaff and 
rebuild.
    We are going to be cautious and recognize that there could 
well be a CR from October on until, you know, sometime into the 
next year, and so we are not going to overhire in a way that 
would put us at risk if there is a CR. So we will expand with 
our additional funding.
    Mr. Espaillat. So how does the CR impact you? Does it make 
you hire more people or less people?
    Mr. Swagel. We would be cautious and not fill all of our 
positions. You know, we will get the critical ones first--
healthcare and national security first--but it would impact us.
    And the CR this year--you know, I lost people working on 
Medicare, and the volume of our work on Medicare is just--it is 
intense and--immense and intense, I guess, and--yes. So it 
would impact us continuing at a CR.
    Mr. Espaillat. OK. And so you also do all types of reports 
and, obviously, you analyze our bills and the impacts that they 
have. So the work that you do is not confined to this budgetary 
process, correct?
    So how can you increase your response time in other areas 
by hiring people even though we are doing CRs or other things 
that may not require as many people as possible?
    Mr. Swagel. Yes. And we will do that. So the foundation of 
much of our work is our economic forecast. You know, what is 
happening in the macroeconomy? And having a projection for, 
say, the unemployment rate in the future, that feeds into our 
analysis of, you know, say, SNAP benefits or school lunches, 
things like that, inflation and all that.
    So we also lost people on our macroeconomic team that we 
are looking to rebuild. So that is an area that is outside the 
cost estimates but that supports everything that we do.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Mrs. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you, Director Swagel. I appreciate the 
conversation that we had prior walking through some of the 
numbers that you provided us as far as the increases in the 
budget request.
    Can you talk a little bit about the type--what types of 
analyses that you provide for appropriations bills? Being an 
appropriator, that is something that I certainly take notice 
of.
    Mr. Swagel. Yes. So, with the appropriators, we are in 
sometimes just real-time back and forth. You know, we are 
providing analysis provision by provision and then looking at 
the whole to make sure that each subcommittee is within its 
allocation. We start with the top line and then work with you 
from the bottom up.
    With the two appropriations bills that were enacted this 
year, the Consolidated Appropriations Act and the Further 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, we were--I had to write that 
down.
    Mrs. Bice. I was going to say we are creative with names, 
aren't we?
    Mr. Swagel. Right. We were just in sometimes real-time 
communication with the committee in both--again, at the top and 
working up. And so that is how we were able to post the cost 
estimates for both of those bills before--more than a day 
before the floor vote.
    You know, when the final bill came out, of course, we 
checked the language and made sure it matched our previous 
estimates, but we were ready because of that close cooperative 
working relationship.
    Mrs. Bice. Fantastic. Are there any restrictions on CBO 
that prevent it from including supplementary information 
regarding projected debt servicing cost in the cost estimates 
for legislation that impacts the deficit?
    Mr. Swagel. So we are set up to do that. In fact, on our 
website, we provide a tool--a spreadsheet that uses our latest 
economic projection and let's someone say, what are the 
interest costs of anything? So we make that available.
    We don't put that into our cost estimates, but that is 
something we would work with the budget committees, you know, 
in both Chambers, and it is something that is useful to them 
and to Members. We certainly would, you know, work with them 
and follow their direction.
    Mrs. Bice. And, finally, when we spoke previously, you 
indicated that there was an increase in IT costs and that you 
were trying to make some upgrades across the agency. Can you 
also talk a little bit about software? Because that is such a 
big piece of what you all utilize to be able to provide 
estimates, maybe walk through a little bit of what that 
software increase looks like and why that is important for you 
all to continue to invest in that.
    Mr. Swagel. OK. Thank you. We have been shifting to the 
cloud just like the other two agencies, and sometimes we are 
moving from hardware--some things that were hardware to 
software. You know, so I have a PC on my desk. Most of the work 
gets done in the cloud.
    Mrs. Bice. Let me clarify. I meant from a forecasting 
perspective. The software that you are using for forecasting 
that you are having to continually sort of modify and update 
and the cost associated with that.
    Mr. Swagel. OK. I apologize.
    Mrs. Bice. That is OK.
    Mr. Swagel. So we have been doing a variety of things. I 
will give you one example that you and I have talked about 
before. We have one key model that does our analysis on Social 
Security, which was built in FORTRAN 77, which I actually 
learned when I was in high school, but I don't think anyone is 
learning that today. So we are shifting that to Python, which 
is essentially the language some people would learn now.
    We are actually using--this is the one use we have so far 
of an AI tool, is that you can put blocks of code into AI 
tools. You know, here is the FORTRAN. It will translate into 
Python. You know, we then have to check it, but that is one. We 
have other macroeconomic tools. That is a key area that we are 
upgrading.
    And then the last one I will mention is, on the healthcare 
side, we work with massive datasets and various healthcare 
datasets. We have a secure network. It is, like, a subset of 
our network that is secure, and we have been trying to upgrade 
basically the ability to make that model work faster, and it is 
both on the hardware side and the software side.
    Mrs. Bice. Great.
    Mr. Chairman, if I may, I referenced it earlier. Here is an 
actual physical copy of the CONAN from the Publishing Office. I 
thought people may want to see it.
    So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Mr. Amodei. Well, first of all, Mrs. Bice, I want to say, 
you have got a pretty good eye. You said it was about 5 inches 
thick. I am guessing maybe 4.5, but that is close enough for 
government work.
    So, since we are going to digress for just a second before 
we go to Ms. Wexton, are those for sale?
    Mr. Halpern. They are through our online bookstore. I 
couldn't tell you the price off the top of my head.
    Do you know?
    $239, and that can be yours.
    Mr. Amodei. Will you put my name on it, too, if I pay 
extra?
    Mr. Halpern. If you ask nicely, I can arrange that.
    Mr. Amodei. OK. Well, for anybody who--it is cheaper than a 
doorstop made out of silver these days, so what the heck? That 
is probably a pretty good price.
    With that, Ms. Wexton, the floor is yours.
    Ms. Wexton. I don't have any questions.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you, ma'am.
    Mr. Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ranking Member Espaillat asked the questions I had about, 
you know, staffing and personnel as far as, you know, how our 
wacky budgeting processes has evolved, and Mrs. Bice talked 
about my technology questions.
    So, really, I guess I will try and just ask it. Is there 
anything here else that you would like to share with us? Things 
that we should be drilling into that we haven't been asking 
about or any parting shots? That is a loaded question. So you 
can go any direction you want.
    Mr. Franklin. There are a lot of different ways.
    Mr. Swagel. There are lots of ways I can go.
    We are here to support you. And that is my goal, is to look 
ahead. Wherever you are going, I want to get there first.
    And so some of the work we are doing on preventive 
healthcare is that. That, you know, we know Members are 
interested. I mentioned the anti-obesity medication. I have had 
many Members ask about that. We are really hard at work on 
that. The hep C has a little bit of that same flavor. Spend 
money up front and, you know, if it works well, prevent illness 
and cost down the road.
    The math is tough on that. I mean, it is a little bit like 
saving money at Costco by spending a lot and sort of buying a 
lot. So the math doesn't always work. But that is what I am 
trying to do. I am sorry. That is my mother and my late 
stepfather. That is how they bought.
    So that is what I am trying to do, is get ahead and figure 
that out, and that is some of the hiring that we are doing in 
basically the areas. I mean, healthcare and national security 
are the two areas where the interest in our work just continues 
to grow, and I want to be ready for it.
    Mr. Franklin. Well, thank you for that. And it has got to 
be, for you, a pretty fascinating job for one who likes 
numbers. But the diversity of the issues you are working on--
you know, flight hours for F-18 pilots and healthcare, you 
know, challenges on drugs coming down the line. I appreciate 
all that you do.
    And all of you gentlemen, thank you very much for very 
well-run organizations. It is a privilege to work with you.
    I yield back. Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    Mr. Ranking Member, do you have anything else for these 
three gentlemen?
    Mr. Espaillat. No, Mr. Chairman. I think I am done.
    Mr. Amodei. OK. So a little bit of housekeeping for the 
three of you.
    Oh, Ms. Wexton, you are recognized.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you. Dr. Swagel, it is wonderful to have you here 
with us today. I always enjoy seeing you and your passion for 
your work. As you mentioned in your testimony, operating under 
a continuing resolution has presented a number of challenges 
for CBO, causing the agency to shrink from 279 to 267 
employees. Your budget request for the coming year will help 
account for these losses and restore the agency to 285 
employees, which will help you meet your Congressional Budget 
Act responsibilities and be more responsive to Congress.
    Was CBO able to get down to the required number of eligible 
through attrition, or did they have to let people go?
    Mr. Swagel. So we were able to lose people through 
attrition and stay within our budget, and the challenge was 
that some of the people we left created, you know, holes in 
important areas. I mentioned Medicare before. That was really a 
tough one just because of the queue of work. And so, you know, 
we are still catching up.
    But, if you look at our website now, we have several job 
openings posted that would support that work.
    Ms. Wexton. In previous years, we have discussed the 
importance of childcare to attracting and retaining the best 
and the brightest to your workforce. I was glad to see that CBO 
is requesting the authority and funding to provide a childcare 
benefit in this year's request.
    Can you please elaborate on why you need this benefit as a 
way to get qualified professionals to work for the CBO and the 
impact this will have on your ability to recruit and retain the 
employees you need to be responsive to Congress?
    Mr. Swagel. Thank you very much for asking that. It is a 
key issue for CBO and for our staff, our current staff and our 
future staff.
    Just the age of our staff is slightly different than, you 
know, kind of the overall House staff. You know, we tend to 
hire people either right out of college. We have maybe 30 of 
those. We are hiring them now. But, really, it is out of 
graduate school, you know, after a master's. And people of that 
vintage and that age, they are getting married, and then they 
are having children a couple years later.
    We are pretty far down on the priority list for the House 
childcare center, and it means, for infants in particular, we 
just have no hope. So the subsidy that we are looking to 
provide our employees would allow us to help our employees 
with--especially with infant care but then more broadly. And it 
is really a critical one.
    But what we are hoping to do is provide a subsidy of $5,000 
per employee for 50 employees. And, you know, we think that 
would allow us to essentially help, you know, the people with 
kids in that age range.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Go ahead.
    Mrs. Bice. She yields back.
    Mr. Amodei. OK. Thank you.
    Any other follow-up questions from members of the 
committee?
    OK. Some housekeeping stuff. First of all, I think in order 
to check the box on the committee record--Mr. Clyde mentioned 
something. If you could each generate--and this is not a what-
I-did-with-my-summer-vacation request--just a memo for Ms. 
Reinshuttle. And I am going to impose a 2-page limit. And if 
you want to be shorter than that, that is fine--to just discuss 
the quality and value with respect to each of your 
telecommuting folks. I think you have strong stories to tell.
    But so that if somebody says, ``Hey, what are you doing 
about that,'' it is like, ``Well, we discussed that with the 
agencies that are within our jurisdiction, and they generated 
short memos, and here they are.''
    So, because of that, obviously, none of you gentlemen have 
any problems with substance. Let's make them hard on substance 
and light on buzzwords and talking points. You can go to the 
news talk shows for that stuff. So we would appreciate that.
    Also, we would like in fairly real-time manner--I don't 
think it is something that we will require a lot from the 
Publishing Office--who is tardy in their reports to you? And 
let me tell you the context that I am asking for that 
information. That is so that the members of this committee on 
their other committees that they serve on--other subcommittees 
in Appropriations--if that needs to be a discussion with those 
agencies, like, ``Hey, what is the problem with reporting, 
blah, blah, blah?''
    We will endeavor to do it without fingerprints, but I am 
sure you can take care of yourself when you are walking to and 
from work or if you are going to Costco with Mr. Swagel's 
relatives or whenever you have a townhall meeting on that sort 
of thing.
    With respect to, members, please feel free--I know I don't 
need to tell anybody, but if you have other questions that come 
up, please feel free to engage with the committees directly. 
But, if you would let Ms. Reinshuttle know so that, when we are 
getting ready to do the work session--that we know if there are 
outstanding issues, and we can, you know, try to do what we can 
to resolve that or whatever so that we know what is going on.
    The final thing that I will say is, we are endeavoring to 
be crisp with the work of this committee, not hasty, not 
whatever. But we do want--although no good deed goes 
unpunished, we were ready a long time ago last round.
    And, of course, we went through in the last round--what was 
that euphemism you used, Dr. Swagel, about something 
appropriations bill?
    Mr. Swagel. The further consolidated.
    Mr. Amodei. Further. That is quite a euphemism.
    We want to endeavor to complete the work of the committee 
for a couple of reasons in a crisp manner, and that is so that 
members in their other committee assignments--it frees up time 
when that comes to do the necessary stuff to that.
    And then, also, in that ever-continuing quest to try to do 
12 separate bills and in a timely manner--just to be real 
direct--trying to put the committee in a position to go, ``Hey, 
folks that schedule the floor, we are ready.'' We may not agree 
on everything or whatever and people--but, anyhow, it is like 
the committee work is done.
    So there will be plenty of notice. Nobody is going to 
spring a work session on anybody. I appreciate the fact that 
there were several competing things today for members and 
respect your value judgments on whether you can make it or 
can't make it--although please let Mr. LaTurner know that 
flying by and dropping off a you-are-not-in-Kansas-anymore note 
was very effective. We appreciate that.
    But, anyhow, that is kind of the thought as we get started 
on 2025 while the taste or memory or whatever your perspective 
of the 2024 process is still fresh in our mind.
    So thank you all. Thank you, folks, for coming. We look 
forward to working with you to get the product finished up. We 
are adjourned.
    [Answers to submitted questions follow:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                          Wednesday, April 10, 2024

                      UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE

                                WITNESS

J. THOMAS MANGER, CHIEF, UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE
    Mr. Amodei. We will call this meeting of the Appropriations 
Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch to order.
    The reason for today's meeting is to hear the budget 
presentation of Chief Thomas Manger on the Capitol Police 
budget.
    Chief, the floor is yours.

       Statement of J. Thomas Manger, Chief, U.S. Capitol Police

    Chief Manger. Thank you.
    Chairman Amodei, Ranking Member Espaillat, and members of 
the subcommittee, thank you for your continued support of the 
women and men of the United States Capitol Police.
    The support from Congress has allowed the department to 
invest in critical aspects of its operation and address mission 
requirements of an increasing threat environment. I can 
confidently tell you that the Capitol is safer today than it 
was prior to January 6.
    To support this mission, the department has prioritized 
staffing and the expansion of the training, policy, and 
administrative functions, all of which ensure the USCPis 
positioned to meet the demands of today and into the future.
    The department continues to move forward and improve its 
operations. Earlier this year, the department formally 
implemented the reorganization plan approved by the committees. 
The new organization structure is designed to enhance program 
oversight and operational efficiencies in response to the 
recommendations by the Office of the Inspector General.
    Specifically, the fiscal year 2025 budget reflects the 
department's three key budget drivers: protecting the Capitol 
complex, countering the increasing threat environment to ensure 
Member safety, and bolstering recruitment and retention.
    Protecting the Capitol complex from threats while at the 
same time protecting Members, staff, and the public is a 
complex operation that requires planning, coordination, and 
investment in physical and technical security.
    The department's 2025 budget also includes a request for 
no-year funding for the Congressional Continuity of Operations, 
or C-COOP. The major driver behind this request is the 
department's need for an independent, in-house response and 
deployment capability to allow it to respond to changing 
environments. This funding will allow the department to 
replicate the functions of the USCP Command Center at any C-
COOP site to the fullest extent possible.
    Our country is in the midst of a historical rise in 
threats. Over the past year, we have seen a dangerous rise in 
acts of violence against Members of Congress, their families, 
and staff. This changing landscape requires the department to 
take a proactive approach to threat investigations and Member 
protection by enhancing its intelligence-gathering and -sharing 
capabilities.
    The number and increasing complexity of threats against 
Members requires acquisition of cutting-edge technology that 
can help the department navigate the increasingly sophisticated 
climate that the cyber universe provides to criminal actors. 
The fiscal year 2025 budget request is reflective of the 
department's constant need to stay one step ahead of those who 
seek to do harm.
    A significant focus for the department centers on Members' 
security in their home States and districts. With funding 
provided by the Congress for the purpose of enhanced Member 
protection, the department created the Protective Intelligence 
Operations Center, or PIOC.
    The PIOC serves as the department's fusion center by 
centralizing Member protection functions, to include 
investigations intake, air operations monitoring, the tracking 
of congressional details, intelligence analysis, and the 
department's newly created residential security program. This 
new protection model allows the department to increase its 
ability to protect Members whether they are in or away from the 
Capitol complex.
    Our fiscal year 2025 budget also focuses heavily on 
increases to both sworn and civilian staffing. We are 
requesting $642 million to fund salaries and benefits for 2,247 
sworn employees and 583 civilian employees. This represents 75 
percent of the department's total annual budget request.
    One of the most critical aspects in protecting the campus, 
Members, staff, and visitors is the ability to utilize mutual 
aid from our law enforcement partners in the national capital 
region and throughout the country. This aid acts as a force 
multiplier for large-scale events at the Capitol or to assist 
protection of Members and their families when outside the 
national capital region. I would like to thank the committee 
and Congress for providing this vital funding.
    Increasing the department's ranks continues to be a key 
priority. Given the increasing number of threats, it is not 
surprising that the bulk of our staffing efforts are focused on 
the continued expansion of the department's Protective Services 
Bureau, or PSB, which includes the Dignitary Protection 
Division.
    With the support of Congress, the department's staffing 
levels have increased, but we still have more to do, especially 
as we work to right-size the organization and curb overtime.
    There is more work to do, and we must do it within the 
context of a strategic, holistic, and deliberate strategy. 
Long-term strategies take time to develop and implement in a 
coordinated fashion. Working in close collaboration with the 
Congress, I am confident that our upward trajectory will 
continue.
    Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, 
and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Chief Manger follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Amodei. Thanks, Chief.
    I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Espaillat, for his 
opening statement.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you, Chief, for presenting before us today.
    As you know, Members, our colleagues, have been subject 
right here in DC to carjackings and other criminal activity. 
And at our district-office level and back home, our colleagues 
and staff and our colleagues' family members are subject to 
danger and threats. There has been an escalating number of 
protests both at our district offices and our homes. The New 
York Times just recently had an article about the level of 
activity in the department.
    And so we are concerned that the safety of our family 
members and ourselves, staff, and our constituencies are at 
stake, both here locally, in our district offices, and in our 
homes. This has escalated, right? And I am glad that you all 
feel that--confidently feel that the campus is safer now, but 
the level of threat has escalated. And I don't think no one can 
deny here that it is nasty out there, right?
    So what measures have you taken to ensure that our family 
members are safe at home, that right here in DC our Members are 
safer, and that our district offices are secure?
    Chief Manger. So, I think, let me talk about here in the DC 
area first.
    We just recently met with the chief of the Metropolitan 
Police Department to talk about the possibility of the Capitol 
Police expanding its extended jurisdiction zone.
    Right now, we have full authority beyond the Capitol 
complex, and when we identify places where--buildings where you 
have, you know, a dozen or 20 or 30 Members living in that 
building, we feel like we should be patrolling that building 
often, that if we hear anything occurring in or around that 
building, that we should be able to respond.
    So, here in the city, we understand that when somebody 
walks off the campus, we can't just say, ``Well, they are on 
their own.'' We want to take full responsibility to try and 
continue to provide safety and security in terms of responding 
to calls for service. If we hear a 911 call come out, we are 
going to respond.
    Mr. Espaillat. Do you have a process at the airport? 
Because I remember maybe 3 or 4 weeks ago Mr. Quigley ran right 
by me, and I guess he realized he was at the wrong gate or the 
wrong terminal, and he ran right past me again. And I think he 
missed his flight.
    Right?
    Mr. Quigley. Yeah.
    Mr. Espaillat. But, you know, Mr. Quigley was by himself 
there. And, you know, I tried to get his attention, because 
maybe I could have assisted him, but, you know, he was just, 
you know, focused on not missing his flight. But he was by 
himself.
    Chief Manger. Yes.
    Mr. Espaillat. And the airport, as we know, on January 6--
on January 7, the day after January 6, some of our colleagues 
were accosted and threatened at the airport.
    Do you have a permanent at the airport? Or do you have a 
booth or a center of operation there?
    I think it requires--the airport now has expanded a little 
bit, and I think that it is an area where we are all subject to 
threats.
    Chief Manger. Yes.
    Mr. Espaillat. And I believe we need greater presence of 
you there.
    Chief Manger. I agree.
    And so, you know, we are doing more when folks are here in 
the national capital region. We also are doing more and want to 
do more when Members are on travel. And so we have people at 
Dulles, National, and BWI.
    You can work through the House Sergeant at Arms to get one 
of our officers to meet you at the airport if you need an 
escort.
    And then the third leg of that stool is to provide 
additional protection when people are at home, both in their 
home districts and their home residence. And so we have 
programs that are expanding--and we are asking for additional 
money to expand them further--for residential security as well 
as increased air operation security and just better patrols and 
better response to folks when they are here in the District.
    Mr. Espaillat. Let me suggest that I believe that, whatever 
outfit you have at the airport, it should be visible, because 
deterrence is a big factor, right? And if people don't see you 
there, if they don't see a booth there, if they don't see a 
physical presence there, they just may think that you are not 
there at all, and the level of threat may go up.
    Chief Manger. Well, but if they don't see the Member there, 
because the Member is getting escorted by one of our officers, 
that helps too.
    Mr. Espaillat. Yeah, but not every Member is going to be 
escorted. And I remember back when--do you remember, Mr. 
Amodei, when they had the 8-tracks on the car, you know, that 
you would take----
    Mr. Amodei. No, I am too young for that.
    Mr. Espaillat. You know----
    Mr. Amodei. Yes, I do.
    Mr. Espaillat. I remember that one of the modus operandi of 
the criminal element was to go to funeral services, because 
people will be distracted, right? They lost a loved one, and on 
many occasions they would leave their car door open, and they 
would just come in and take the 8-track because we were 
distracted.
    I think that we are distracted at the airport, because we 
want to get to that flight. And, as a result, not everybody is 
going to be escorted by the police. And we don't know who the 
general public may be, but they know who we are, whether we 
like it or not, right?
    And so I think there needs to be a greater presence in the 
airport, that I say, ``Wow, you know, Capitol Police is here. I 
am not going to try anything crazy.''
    Chief Manger. I agree.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    Chief Manger. And we try and accommodate--everybody that 
requests an escort, we try and accommodate them.
    Mr. Espaillat. I am done, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. I yield 
back.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    The gentlelady from Oklahoma, Mrs. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Chief, for being with us this 
morning. And thanks to you and all of your officers for what 
you do every day to keep Members of Congress safe.
    I want to start by--you mentioned patrolling not only the 
Capitol complex but areas adjacent to it, particularly those 
that have a large number of Members living in them.
    Do you think that your communication with agencies located 
within the DC metropolitan area, whether it is Metro PD, 
National Guard, or others, do you believe that that has 
improved since January 6?
    Chief Manger. Absolutely.
    And just as an example, MPD stood up a real-time crime 
center just weeks ago, and we have a person assigned to that 
real-time crime center. So, if anything happens in or around 
the Capitol complex, we are right there. And they have access 
to cameras and a host of other resources so that we can ensure 
the best response to anything that we would get involved with.
    Mrs. Bice. I worry, because we have seen an increase in 
crime in the metropolitan area, that--and we have seen 
carjackings. We have seen one of our colleagues attacked in an 
elevator in her building. We have seen staff assaulted, mugged. 
You know, I am glad to know that you are there. I think that we 
are concerned it is not enough sometimes because of all of the 
things that we are seeing. But I want you to know that I 
appreciate that, and I am glad to hear that there is a lot more 
collaboration.
    In the documentation that you provided, it lists that there 
are going to be 542 civilian employees of United States Capitol 
Police. Can you describe what those roles would be?
    Chief Manger. So, many of them are operational support 
roles. Many of them are--basically create our infrastructure.
    You know, we have been bringing on record numbers of new 
officers, and this doesn't just happen without the folks 
working in our human resources and doing background checks and 
all of those things.
    But we are also looking at opportunities to supplement our 
operations folks by hiring folks that are in civilian positions 
that can assist our operations folks.
    I mean, you know, there was a time when we had police 
officers at posts, where now we have civilian contract 
security, because they are only dealing with people that have 
already been screened, and do you really need a police officer 
there? Couldn't you better use a police officer somewhere else?
    So it is a range of positions, but civilians are a very 
valuable part of our organization.
    Mrs. Bice. Can you talk a little bit about retention? I 
know in previous hearings we have talked about the fact that it 
was becoming difficult to retain officers, particularly those 
that may be, you know, inching towards retirement. Can you talk 
a little bit about what you have been able to do to impact the 
retention rate of your officers?
    Chief Manger. Two big things that had an immediate impact. 
One was the fact that I got a waiver for the 57 year old age 
limit and I bumped it up to 60. Frankly, if I could, I would 
bump it up to even higher than that, but I am limited by 
statute.
    But we also have--and this was vitally important when right 
after January 6 we saw the number of people leaving the 
department, and so you all funded us for retention bonuses that 
we got officers to sign that said if they got this retention 
bonus they would stay for an additional year.
    I know there was some discussion about, well, you know, we 
have had retention bonuses for the last couple years; I mean, 
you know, how long are we going to do this? And my response 
was, this is not the year to change the retention bonus. I 
mean, we need for people to stay for the conventions, for the 
election, for next January 6, for the inauguration, and beyond. 
So we will do another retention bonus with the fiscal year 2024 
money since it just got approved.
    But it is not just the retention bonus and the hiring that 
we are doing--we have 12 academy classes per year. That is 288 
new recruit officers coming in. We are ahead of attrition now. 
Even if this year we lose--and it is probably close to 200 that 
we will lose through retirement or other reasons people leave. 
But if we are hiring 288, we are still ahead.
    And we have been ahead--for the last 3 years, we have 
gotten ahead of attrition, and we are going to continue to do 
that.
    Mrs. Bice. I think that is the best news I have heard.
    So, Chief, thank you for what you are doing for the Capitol 
complex and certainly for Members and staff here.
    And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    Before we go to the gentleman from Illinois, the record 
should be clear that the ranking member's discussion about his 
athletic ability at National Airport was not germane to the 
Capitol Police and that there are some of us that still think 
he has got his game.
    And, with that, the chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Illinois.
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you very much for that, Mr. Chairman.
    Chief, I was in the Chamber on January 6. And before--we 
were the last ones to exit. I heard a colleague say after a 
gunshot, ``So when does the `blankety-blank' cavalry get 
here?'' It never came.
    So, regardless of where a threat like that would come in 
the future, foreign or domestic, what is the plan for a threat 
that would require additional resources to come in quickly?
    Chief Manger. So we have more resources within the Capitol 
Police, but we have already started--we started this months 
ago--planning for the election, next January 6, the 
inauguration. We already have committed hundreds of police 
officers from allied organizations, and by the time we get to 
those dates, we could have thousands of trained law enforcement 
officers--trained, equipped law enforcement officers.
    So the cavalry will be here on site for all the big events 
that we have coming--
    Mr. Quigley. If it is not a big event, how do you get--
    Chief Manger. We still--now, we won't have thousands, but 
we typically will have two or three outside agencies that 
provide trained Civil Disturbance Unit officers.
    If we know we are going to have a demonstration of 10,000, 
20,000 people--you know, we have had 100,000 people for some of 
the marches. And we have our own folks, again, many more of our 
own folks that are trained and equipped, but we also have the 
allied agencies that have been very helpful.
    And the only reason--well, it is not the only reason, but--
the reason that they are here and they keep coming back is 
because of the funding that we get every year to reimburse them 
for their services. And that funding is critical, as I pointed 
out in my earlier testimony.
    Mr. Quigley. Do you see a time or a set of circumstances in 
which you would need the National Guard? And is there a 
different understanding and agreement with them now?
    Chief Manger. We have a new procedure, and you probably are 
aware that one of the legislative changes that were made 
immediately after the 6 was that I now have the authority to 
call and request the National Guard. I don't need to get 
anybody's approval; I can do that myself.
    I have talks with the National Guard on an ongoing basis. I 
will tell you that the National Guard is terrific, but what I 
really need is trained, equipped law enforcement officers who 
are trained in crowd control, civil disturbance. And those--
again, if we need it, we will have thousands of those on our 
campus.
    Mr. Quigley. And part of the reason I ask these, I want 
Members and the public to be able to hear your answers.
    Before I went into the Chamber on that morning, I looked 
out on the east side, and there was a large group there of 
people who would be involved in this attack. And I saw three 
Capitol Police officers at that point, and they were in 
baseball caps.
    So if you could detail just how better equipped--so we 
don't put our officers in danger like that again.
    Chief Manger. So every single one of our officers, all of 
our officers, all 2,000-plus of our officers, have new, state-
of-the-art Civil Disturbance Unit equipment. And, by the way, 
it is actually available to them, whereas on the 6 it wasn't 
available to everybody the way it should have been. So all--
    Mr. Quigley. And what does that--and I am sorry--what does 
that mean? It was stored away someplace?
    Chief Manger. Yes. And a lot of the equipment was so old it 
was expired. So that problem was one of the first things that 
was remedied. And so everybody has new equipment; everybody has 
been trained with that equipment.
    And, again, there is no--if every single one of our 
officers who is CDU-trained and has the training and equipment 
we would mobilize, we still might need more. And whether it is 
getting, you know, another thousand cops from MPD or whether it 
is getting another thousand cops from the neighboring agencies 
that we work with all the time, we will have adequate staffing 
here to handle whatever needs to be handled.
    Mr. Quigley. And those additional coming in will have 
access to the same equipment?
    Chief Manger. They bring their own equipment, yes.
    Mr. Quigley. But we know they have it?
    Chief Manger. And we train with them. I mean, they--
    Mr. Quigley. OK.
    Chief Manger. So we, throughout the year, we have--they are 
here often enough that we take advantage of that, that we 
actually train with them as well.
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you so much.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Mr. Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    Chief, kind of, I was processing what you were just talking 
about there. And, first off, I just want to preface with, I 
appreciate, sincerely appreciate, everything you and the 
department do. The scope and scale of the threat that you all 
are facing, that we are facing as Members, continues to grow, 
and I certainly recognize that.
    We are in budget season, so this is a budget drill, and I 
am just trying to understand the numbers that you presented to 
us. And I saw in the remarks that this is derived through a 
zero-budget basis. So, basically, you are starting from scratch 
and justifying every dollar that is in there. So I appreciate 
the science behind that.
    I do want to talk a little about overtime. For the current 
year, I think, fiscal year 2024, we were looking at about, 
what, $74.9 million in overtime, was what was in the budget, I 
think, for fiscal year 2024.
    This coming year, for 2025, you are asking for $87.37 
million, about 10 percent of the total budget. That is a very 
specific number. I am just interested in how you get to that.
    And as we were just talking about, if you augment the force 
with officers from other areas, is that factoring into 
overtime? Or is this overtime specifically your officers that 
are on--
    Chief Manger. No, this is--the overtime is for our 
officers.
    And you can look at the assignments that you know are going 
to have the highest overtime rates. An example of that is our 
Dignitary Protection Division. We are woefully understaffed 
there, have been, in my view, for many, many years.
    When we get the protection detail staffed to the level they 
should be, we will eliminate the officers who are working 
double shifts, working 16 hours a day, for weeks at a time. But 
you do that by saying, well, you don't have 5 people on the 
detail, you have 10 people, so that you can actually--people 
can work regular shifts, get days off, which now is not working 
as well as it should, which results in this massive overtime.
    We are still understaffed in terms--this department has 
always been staffed for, well, how many posts do you need? OK. 
Well, we can fill all the posts. But then when we have 
demonstrations, multiple demonstrations, at different 
buildings, then you have to have people respond to them. And we 
had one yesterday where we ended up making, I don't know, I 
think it was over 50 arrests.
    And, you know, we have to pull people off posts, 
oftentimes, to be able to handle those kinds of situations. 
When you pull people off post, then you have to draft somebody 
or hold somebody over on overtime, because you can't just leave 
a post empty.
    So, as long as we keep doing that, that is our modus 
operandi, we are not going to be able to bring the overtime to 
a level where it is more manageable.
    It is great for--look, there comes a time when overtime is 
a better way to deal with things than hiring more people. But 
we are at a point where we need to right-size our staffing so 
that overtime is more manageable. And that is our challenge.
    Mr. Franklin. So, now, do I read correctly that you are 
looking to increase the FTEs by about 5 percent?
    Chief Manger. Well, I don't----
    Mr. Franklin. And I guess my question is--you know, that is 
a tremendous amount of overtime and a massive jump from--I 
didn't know if maybe some of that projection for the coming 
year is because of the inauguration and concerns around the 
transition, potentially, during administrations or if that is 
just a more accurate representation of what you have been 
responding to currently.
    Chief Manger. So, thankfully, we don't have conventions 
every year, but I will tell you this: Because we send hundreds 
of officers--we will send hundreds of officers to Chicago; we 
will send hundreds of officers to Milwaukee. You know, if we 
take 200 or 300 officers off the campus, that is going to 
result in overtime that goes through the roof. That is going to 
be a challenge this year.
    So we are not staffed to a point where--training is another 
thing. I mean, you know, I am sure I will get questions about, 
you know, well, you have to train these officers, you know, 
this person got trained, this person needs training, we haven't 
gone yet. Every time we send 30 officers to take a training 
class for a week, I have to find 30 people who are either off 
or, you know, we are going to hold them over--and, again, this 
is all on overtime--so that we can meet the minimum staffing 
levels that we need to operate.
    So all this goes to the point that we need to right-size 
our staffing. And I don't know if your 5 percent--I know that 
we are looking to hire 288 new recruits, as we do every year. I 
know that we have--if you look at the overtime just in our 
Dignitary Protection, if you look at the--I think the number 
was somewhere around $247,000 in overtime in our Dignitary 
Protection. That equates to over 100 special agents.
    And so, if you want to get the overtime to a more 
manageable level, you are talking about adding, you know, more 
than a 5-percent increase in the staffing just to impact that 
overtime.
    Mr. Franklin. OK. Well, I appreciate that.
    I know I am out of time. I would like to hear more at a 
point about the C-COOP request, and I just struggle to get my 
head around that.
    I do appreciate Mr. Quigley's point, too, and your 
amplification that--you know, I hear frequently back home, you 
know, why wasn't the Guard there in more force? People do need 
to understand that Guard troops are not trained to do this 
mission, and your folks are, and there is a tremendous 
difference there. And I think that is under-appreciated.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    We are next going to go to the gentlewoman from Virginia, 
who, for those of you watching online, is doing a masterful job 
of using technology to help her participation in this hearing. 
And so, if it doesn't sound like Ms. Wexton, it really is, via 
her technology assistance.
    And so the floor is yours, Ms. Wexton.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    As most of you now know, last year I was diagnosed with 
progressive supranuclear palsy, or PSP. I describe it as 
``Parkinson's on steroids,'' and I don't recommend it. PSP 
makes it very difficult for me to speak, so I use an assistive 
app so that I can participate and you can understand me.
    I want to thank the chair and ranking member for allowing 
me to do both today.
    Chief Manger, thank you for being here. It is always a 
pleasure to see you.
    As you are aware, one of the things I am most proud of 
during my time in Congress is the progress we have made to get 
Capitol Police greater mental health resources, especially 
through the Liebengood Center for Wellness, which is named 
after my constituent Howie Liebengood. The resources at the 
center are extremely important for the hundreds of officers who 
are already utilizing them.
    I have some questions for you regarding the Liebengood 
Center and its impact. Can you tell us about how you are 
currently tracking officer utilization and satisfaction with 
the center?
    Chief Manger. So we are tracking the use, and it is getting 
increasingly used as we staff up and provide more and more 
services. We are hiring counselors, and it is--I am really 
pleased with the way things are going.
    As you know, Dr. Liebengood, Howie's wife, Howie's widow, 
remains involved and certainly very invested, professionally 
and personally, and it benefits of the wellness center, and we 
continue to expand the services.
    So I am very pleased with what is going on over there.
    And I am sorry, I think I am missing part of the question.
    Ms. Wexton. What, if any, plans and goals do you have for 
the center over the next year?
    Chief Manger. So we want to continue to get it fully 
staffed. And we want to make sure that we continue to remove 
any stigma that anybody--that the department might have that 
would make someone hesitant to use the services there.
    We do, in fact, do surveys so that we can get feedback from 
folks that are using it. People can give confidential feedback 
about the services they get and maybe why or why not in terms 
of using the services.
    So we will continue to do that and, again, continue to 
fully staff the center. And our director, Rachel Kaul, is just 
doing a terrific job.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you. She is.
    As always, it was a pleasure.
    And I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    Chief, just briefly, for Members and staff who may not be 
familiar, could you just, without telling any secrets, tell us 
who your team is here today with you?
    Chief Manger. I don't know these people. No, I am kidding.
    Mr. Amodei. That is what I thought. So I am just trying to 
help you out.
    Chief Manger. No, I am blessed to have an amazing staff, 
and I dearly love these folks.
    Cherry Clipper, our chief financial officer; Magdalena 
Boynton, our chief administrative officer; Tad DiBiase, my 
general counsel; Dawn Stalter, who is the deputy CAO; Assistant 
Chief Jason Bell; my new assistant chief, who we stole from 
MPD, Ashan Benedict; my assistant chief, Sean Gallagher; and 
the FOP president, Gus Papathanasiou.
    Mr. Amodei. Great. Thank you.
    A couple of followups.
    A lot of Members have asked questions, and rightfully so, 
about how are you going to react, what is the deal, what are 
you doing at the airport--you know, all those sort of 
operational things.
    One of the things--we had the Comptroller General in 
earlier today talking about his budget and things like that. 
And one of the things that came up was, they had prepared a 
report, you know, on January 6 saying, hey, here is what--and 
one of the things in that was talking about intelligence. In 
other words, you know, what did we know? When did we know it? 
Did we talk to anybody? Did anybody else talk to us? So this 
isn't all focused on your organization.
    But could you describe, without telling any secrets, just 
how that intelligence-gathering and also, you know, 
crosshatching with all the other intelligence agencies--how you 
have changed from what happened in the spin-up to that to, this 
is how we synthesize intelligence? Because, obviously, how you 
do that helps you figure out when to call who or not and what 
to call for.
    So could you give us a little update on how that mission 
has evolved as a result of January 6?
    Chief Manger. So it is night and day from what it is today 
compared to what it was pre-January 6. That was one of the 
first operations that we knew we needed to invest in because of 
how critically important it is.
    So the way we gather intelligence--I mean, we have folks 
out in the entire region. We are connected to agencies--all 
Federal agencies, but we are also connected to other police 
departments. Chief Benedict and I just were up at NYPD a couple 
weeks ago, where we talked to their chief of intelligence to 
make sure that we had the right connections there. NYPD, there 
is no other police agency in the world that has--local police 
agency--that has their intelligence capabilities. They are, in 
fact, worldwide.
    So we have plugged people in. We have U.S. Capitol Police 
employees that are sitting in joint operations centers, that 
are sitting in other agencies, so that we immediately get that 
information.
    But we are also doing two things that weren't being done 
very well before, in my view. We are analyzing that information 
to see what is credible and what operational strategies we need 
to put into place. But we are also sharing that information, 
which we didn't do very well, pre-January 6. We are sharing 
that with our own folks on a daily basis. Real-time, they are 
getting our intel. They all got--you remember, we talked 
before--they all got phones, and we push intel information out 
to them every day. And we also are sharing information with our 
partners nationwide.
    And the numbers of people, the number of analysts, the 
number of folks that we have plugged into the other agencies, 
is a real indication of how big our operation is becoming.
    Mr. Amodei. OK.
    And, then, as a follow-up to that: So can you describe, 
within your organization, who takes all that data on a daily 
basis or whatever and gets together and sits down and goes, OK, 
do we think we have a problem here or do we not think we have a 
problem?
    And if we are not sure but we want to make sure we are not 
surprised, who synthesizes that within your organization? Not 
who by name, obviously. But I assume there is some sort of 
evaluation group that says: ``Hey, I think we have a problem 
next Thursday. Let's ramp up in case we do. Blah, blah, blah''.
    Describe that function for me, if you would, please.
    Chief Manger. So our analysts do the bulk of that work, but 
they don't pretend to know exactly what we should do 
operationally. So they make sure we have all the information--
that our operational folks have all the information they need 
to make the operational decisions.
    We have an intelligence analysis report that comes out 
every single day, and all of us get it. And I think it is 
primarily Chief Gallagher and our operational folks that are 
looking at that and say, OK, we know what is going to happen 
tomorrow, we know what is going to happen next week, and we 
start planning for those operations.
    And calls get made to our allied agencies for mutual aid. 
The notices get put out to our officers that, you know, we are 
going to restrict leave for this weekend because of this event.
    So we start immediately, as soon as we get the information, 
to plan to make sure we have everything we need for when that 
event occurs.
    Mr. Amodei. Thank you.
    And then, finally, could you talk a little bit for our 
record in terms of the cost--not the specifics or giving away 
any secrets--the cost of those protection details and compare 
them with other protection detail missions that are not in the 
Capitol Police?
    I think in the discussions that this committee has had 
before, it is not like the old days where you have a dozen 
people that are, you know, hey, the Speaker is going somewhere, 
or the Minority Leader is going somewhere, and there you go, 
and go get them.
    If you could put a little bit of information on the record 
as to how that mission has evolved and not shrunk.
    Chief Manger. First of all, we have two people who are in 
the line of succession for the Presidency who are Members of 
Congress.
    Mr. Amodei. For the record, none of them are on this 
committee, so don't anybody--
    Mr. Quigley. Amen.
    Chief Manger. But when you look at the level of protection 
that these folks get and then go compare it to the Vice 
President. You have got the Speaker of the House. You have got 
the president pro tem in the Senate. Well, then you have got 
the Secretary of State. If you look at the--just let's look at 
the Secretary of State's detail, which is three times as big as 
any detail we have. And they are further down the line of 
succession.
    So, clearly, we are not--in my view and, I think, in the 
view of the department, we know we have to expand the 
protection for the individuals that are in the line of 
succession, which means it is not only 24/7 when they are here, 
it is wherever they are, it is wherever they travel to.
    But it is 24/7 at their home, it is 24/7 here. We can't 
just go back to the days when we say, well, we will just follow 
them around and we will make sure they are well protected 
wherever they are. Because their homes, their family are at 
risk, and we can't just all of a sudden not be watching 24/7 
every place they live.
    So that is just common sense. And we have to get to that 
point and keep at that point. And so you are going to see in 
this year's budget--in fiscal year 2025, fiscal year 2026, and 
fiscal year 2027, you are going to see us building the kind of 
protection details that we need for the level of threats that 
we are dealing with today.
    Mr. Amodei. OK.
    And then the final one for me is: I know you have your--and 
I say this term with affection--your bean-counter here. Could 
you provide the committee, in the context of the budget 
request, say, hey, here is magic stuff because it is a 
Presidential election year, which means here are convention 
costs we didn't have times two, here are--whatever those costs 
are, to say, yeah, you have got an increase in funding, but 
this is attributable to doing this, this, and that, which is 
the every-4-years stuff, just so when that number is being 
digested, we can have a point of reference to go, this piece of 
that pie is because it is a Presidential election year, with 
all that goes with it?
    Chief Manger. We can provide that to you, yes. And I don't 
have it off the top of my head, but I just know that it is one 
of those things where it is a massive undertaking for us and it 
will impact our ability to keep the overtime in check this 
year.
    Mr. Amodei. Right.
    And then, finally, the gentleman from Georgia, who is 
enthusiastically in attendance at this point in time, the floor 
is yours.
    Mr. Clyde. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry I had to step 
out. Another committee hearing. That is the way it goes here, I 
guess.
    Well, first off, Chief Manger, thank you. And I want to 
give my utmost appreciation to all the officers of the Capitol 
Police, who work day-in and day-out to ensure the safety of the 
legislative process, the Capitol Hill buildings, Members of 
Congress, staff, and visitors to Capitol Hill.
    So, again, thank you, sir.
    Chief Manger. Thank you.
    Mr. Clyde. In recent years, the radical, pro-criminal DC 
City Council has systemically gutted the Metropolitan Police 
budget, amended the DC criminal code to allow violent criminals 
to be sentenced with no jail time, and attempted to lower 
maximum sentences for violent crime like carjackings, 
robberies, rapes, and even homicides.
    The DC Council's pro-crime policies were so bad that, last 
year, Congress had to step in and enact H.J. Res. 26, my 
resolution of disapproval, that overturned the council's pro-
violent-criminal legislation that threatened the well-being of 
the Washington city residents and visitors alike. Even 
President Biden felt the pressure and signed the legislation 
into law.
    Despite this win, the DC City Council is still reaping the 
rewards of its systematic catering to criminals in our Nation's 
capital. During a time when violent crime has declined 
nationwide, our country's capital city saw violent crime shoot 
up 39 percent in 2023. And, last year, there were nearly 1,000 
reported incidents of carjacking, more than six times the 
number of incidents that were reported in 2019.
    Since last year, the start of the 118th Congress, we have 
had a Member physically assaulted in an elevator in her 
Washington, DC, apartment building; one carjacked at gunpoint 
outside his apartment building less than a mile from where we 
sit today. Numerous congressional staffers and reporters have 
been victimized across Washington, including in the neighboring 
Capitol Hill and Navy Yard communities.
    So, Chief Manger, how does the United States Capitol Police 
track and investigate violent criminal activity perpetrated 
against Members of Congress and their staff when the crime 
occurs off the Capitol campus?
    Chief Manger. So we do keep track of that. We provide any 
assistance we can to MPD. They are typically the lead agency.
    But one of the things that I talked about earlier--I think 
it was during the time when you were not here--is the fact that 
we are working in our extended jurisdiction zone, which goes 
almost to Navy Yard--I would like to expand it to cover Navy 
Yard here we are patrolling, we are responding to 911 calls 
when we are out there, and we are assisting MPD whenever we 
can.
    We are paying close attention to the areas where we have a 
lot of Members live. And while we have plenty of things to do 
here on campus, when we hear an assault call come out at Union 
Station or, you know--we know that there is every chance it 
could be a staffer, someone that was visiting here, or even a 
Member.
    And so we are trying to take a greater role in terms of 
patrol and response in and around the Capitol complex, you 
know, beyond our extended jurisdiction.
    And the one other thing I will say is that we also want to 
look at congressional events. Like, when we have the 
Congressional Baseball Game, the softball game that we have 
jurisdiction, we have responsibility, so that we don't have to 
wait and call MPD, that we can take immediate action on those 
things.
    So we are working with the District to try and get that 
worked out so that we can have a greater role in terms of 
protecting our folks in and around this area.
    Mr. Clyde. OK.
    Other than Navy Yard, is there any other area where you 
would prefer extended jurisdiction?
    Chief Manger. I could get you that. I mean, I know 
Assistant Chief Benedict can----
    Mr. Clyde. I would love to see that.
    Chief Manger. Yeah, we can get you the--we have a map that 
shows a little heat area where most of the Members live. So we 
are looking to see if we can assist in those areas.
    Mr. Clyde. OK.
    Have you noticed a noticeable increase in criminal activity 
perpetrated against Members of Congress in the last year or 
two?
    Chief Manger. Certainly, the threat environment--and, yeah, 
I mean, anecdotally, there is certainly--and, look, I have been 
here for 3 years, so I can't compare it over long periods of 
time, but I can tell you that, certainly, anecdotally, over the 
last couple of years, it has been of concern.
    Mr. Clyde. An increase?
    Chief Manger. Yes.
    Mr. Clyde. A concern.
    Chief Manger. Yes, a concern. I don't want to say----
    Mr. Clyde. All right. Fair enough.
    OK. So I understand that on numerous occasions, as you have 
said, that Capitol Police officers have been dispatched to 
assist Metro Police officers in curtailing criminal activity 
occurring in neighborhoods surrounding our Capitol complex, 
including an incident in February where U.S. Capitol Police 
officers responded to a shooting of a housing authority officer 
about a mile from the Capitol. And, just last month, officers 
assisted MPD in a manhunt for a shooting suspect at an 
apartment complex just a couple of thousand feet from the 
Longworth Office Building.
    So does this increase in criminal incidents outside the 
Capitol complex strain the resources of your department?
    Chief Manger. Our resources are strained with or without 
that. But I would say that this is a good investment for us to 
take on, to assist MPD with these kinds of things.
    Just a few weeks ago, there was a guy throwing rocks at a 
front door of a house. It was the neighbor of a Member of the 
Senate. And we were the first ones there. We took the guy into 
custody. And that is the way it should be. If we are close by 
when we hear a call come out, we should be responding, we 
should be assisting. And oftentimes we can resolve cases like 
that very quickly.
    Mr. Clyde. Well, that is good to hear, because I think MPD 
right now needs all the help they can get because of their lack 
of budget and because of their lack of priority by the city 
council.
    So, I guess, with that, I am going to--I am out of time. I 
am going to yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. OK.
    Any other members have any follow-up questions for Chief 
Manger?
    Mr. Ranking Member.
    Mr. Espaillat. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I move to submit my 
opening remarks for the record.
    Mr. Amodei. Without objection, so ordered. And we will do 
that for the previous ones too.
    Mr. Espaillat. Correct. OK.
    Now, Chief, I just want to clarify my previous line of 
questioning and, like, stress my recommendation that you have a 
command post at the airport and Union Station. I think that the 
investment of--the deployment of officers will be limited. You 
could consider that during fly-in days and fly-out days, not 
the entire week. And I think it will go a long way in 
deterrence.
    Also, I just want to say that I am of the belief that, 
unfortunately, a potential next attack will not be an angry, 
racist mob but it could be a different mode of attack.
    In fact, in April 2023, the DC Health Link was hacked, a 
cyber attack that gave them access to confidential medical 
records of maybe some of our colleagues and staff.
    And in September 2023, the JCI, Johnson Controls--no 
relation to the Speaker--was also hacked. And JCI oversees 
security systems in our district office. And we don't know to 
what degree that was compromised.
    So I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, about a different type of 
attack that is not 10,000 people who want to kill us but a 
cyber attack or another form of attack using, perhaps, 
sophisticated weapons.
    And I want to know what the role of your department is in 
helping prevent this.
    Chief Manger. So, certainly, we work with both the Senate 
and House Sergeant at Arms, as well as our Security Services 
Bureau, where we are putting additional resources into trying 
to prevent that.
    A lot of it is education, you know, to get people to 
prevent themselves from, you know, being a victim. But, also, I 
think you are seeing on, a national level, Federal 
investigations that are having a little bit more success in 
identifying these actors and placing them under arrest.
    So it is just a matter of having the resources to do it. 
And I think there are some specific things in our budget that 
will go directly to that concern about cybersecurity.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Amodei. Any other questions from members?
    So, Chief, we encourage members, if they have questions, 
this isn't their one and only shot. So they will contact you 
and your staff or whatever if there are issues that they have 
as they are going over the budget request.
    We also ask them to let Ms. Reinshuttle know so we can 
track that as we get ready to go into markup, if there are 
unresolved issues or whatever, not because somebody is right 
and somebody is wrong; we just want to know what to leave for 
time in terms of member discussion in markup, stuff like that.
    We are not at the point where we are tentatively talking 
about when markups are going to be, but I will tell you that it 
is our intention to be crisp in terms of pursuing the 
committee's mission for getting Legislative Branch stuff at a 
point where we can bring it back in to the members, do the 
markup, and then report to big Approps and leadership, hey, we 
are ready for the committee, or whatever like that.
    That is all along the idea of, we fully support trying to 
get us to the point where we do 12 appropriations bills and we 
are not way the heck gone past September 30th of this year. I 
will not editorialize beyond when I expect that to be, because 
that is a fool's errand, in my experience.
    But so you know what we are thinking, stuff like that. Same 
thing as the last cycle you folks were through. Collaborative 
effort. If you have concerns, by all means, reach out to us, 
and we will be in contact.
    Thank you for your presentation and your folks here. And, 
with that, we are adjourned.

    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

                                            Tuesday, April 16, 2024

               JOHN C. STENNIS CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE

                OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL WORKPLACE RIGHTS

            CONGRESSIONAL OFFICE FOR INTERNATINAL LEADERSHIP

                               WITNESSES

BRIAN PUGH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JOHN C. STENNIS CENTER FOR PUBLIC 
    SERVICE
MARTIN J. CRANE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL WORKPLACE 
    RIGHTS
JANE SARGUS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL OFFICE FOR INTERNATINAL 
    LEADERSHIP
    Mr. Valadao. The subcommittee will come to order.
    The subject of today's hearing is ``The Fiscal Year 2025 
Request for the Stennis Center for Public Service, the Office 
of Congressional Workplace Rights, and the Congressional Office 
for International Leadership.''
    I would like to thank Ranking Member Espaillat, committee 
members, and our executive directors for being here this 
morning.
    The Stennis Center for Public Service was established to 
promote and strengthen the highest ideals for public service. 
The congressional programs we fund enable staffers across the 
Chamber and party lines to learn from each other and build 
relationships that would otherwise not be possible.
    The Stennis Center fiscal year 2025 budget request is 
$430,000, not a number we are used to seeing very often--the 
same as fiscal year 2024.
    The Office of Congressional Workplace Rights was 
established by Congress to administer the Congressional 
Accountability Act, which is done through outreach, advising 
services, and training programs tailored to the needs of the 
legislative branch.
    OCWR oversees the operation of an Administrative Dispute 
Resolution Program, as well as inspecting over 18 million 
square feet of facilities and ground, to ensure that they are 
hazard-free and accessible.
    OCWR provides recommendations to Congress regarding the 
applicability of the legislative branch, the workplace and 
accessibility laws, and administers the biennial Congressional 
Workplace Climate Survey of the legislative branch employees.
    The budget request for OCWR for fiscal year 2025 is $8.591 
million, a 5 percent increase from fiscal year 2024.
    And, finally, the Congressional Office for International 
Leadership was founded by Congress to support international 
outreach efforts by conducting exchanges that establish lasting 
professional relationships between emerging leaders from 
strategic countries in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and, more 
recently, the Indo-Pacific and their U.S. counterparts. The 
COIL budget request for fiscal year 2025 is $7.2 million, an 
increase of 20 percent.
    I look forward to learning more about your programs today.
    And I now yield to the ranking member, Mr. Espaillat, for 
his opening remarks.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Chairman Valadao, and 
congratulations and welcome to the Leg Branch Subcommittee. I 
look forward to working with you.
    Ms. Sargus, Dr. Pugh, and Mr. Crane, thank you all for 
testifying today on behalf your agencies.
    Your agencies play a vital role in advancing workplace 
rights and providing future leaders with the tools required to 
develop and support democracy.
    I believe this is the first time that this subcommittee has 
held a hearing for the Stennis Center, if I am not mistaken. 
Right?
    Welcome, Dr. Pugh.
    I look forward to hearing about the good things that the 
center is doing for our congressional staffers and emerging 
leaders. The center has had the same request for at least 14 
years. I am interested in learning how the center manages to 
produce such a great program consistently with a flat request, 
Mr. Valadao, flat like a flat soda and a cold pizza in a 
college dorm on a Sunday morning.
    Mr. Valadao. Is cold pizza OK in New York?
    Mr. Espaillat. Yes, it is good.
    So I am also excited to hear about the needs of the 
Congressional Office for International Leadership. Your fiscal 
year 2025 request is $7.2 million, an increase of $1.2 million 
over fiscal year 2024 enacted totals.
    As the first Dominican American to serve in Congress, I am 
encouraged by the international outreach of your organization 
to share American politics, accountable governance, and citizen 
diplomacy. We love to see how we can expand that to the Western 
Hemisphere, Africa, and other places in the world as we see 
other countries or adversaries stretching out. You know, we 
should do the best we can to provide this vital training and 
benefit to people in other parts of the world.
    Your request is timely, as we must continue to connect with 
generations through our democratic system, which is the 
foundation of our Nation and a melting pot and diverse Nation 
that we are.
    Thank you so much, Mr. Crane. Congratulations on your 
promotion to Executive Director of the Office of Congressional 
Workplace Rights. I look forward also to your testimony 
regarding the great work that your organization does and your 
fiscal year 2025 request for $8.6 million, which is an 
increase, as Mr. Valadao said, of 5.4 percent above the fiscal 
year 2024.
    I am very supportive of the work you do, especially at a 
time when, in Congress, we continue to file bills that 
undermine labor rights, climate, OSHA, and roll back wage 
protections.
    Thank you all for being here. I look forward to your 
testimony.
    Thank you, Mr. Valadao. I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. Espaillat.
    Dr. Pugh, your full testimony has been submitted for the 
record, and you are now recognized for to provide a summary of 
your written testimony.

Statement of Brian Pugh, Executive Director, John C. Stennis Center for 
                             Public Service

    Mr. Pugh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and 
other members of the committee.
    And I will start out by just saying it is a pleasure to be 
here. And I have our general counsel, Eric Jones, here, as 
well. And I will keep this brief, but I will start by answering 
the question that the ranking member had, too.
    We have been able to keep our budget flat because we have 
limited----
    Mr. Espaillat. Like a flat soda.
    Mr. Pugh. That is right. Like a flat soda.
    But we have limited the amount of congressional staff that 
we have accepted to the program. So, I mean, it is--there are 
consequences with that. But there is a growing demand for our 
programming, and we just cut off the amount of people we 
accept.
    So that will be something that Congress may decide to--I 
mean, we continue that, or we can do something about that in 
the future if that is the--if that is what you guys would like.
    So, just a brief history of the Stennis Center, we were 
created in 1988 by Congress to promote public service 
throughout America and to also get young people interested in 
careers in public service, as well as providing congressional 
staffer with training and development.
    So the 430 supports our congressional programs, and we have 
other funding sources for other programming. But the 430 is 
specific to just our congressional programs that support our 
Stennis Congressional Staff Fellows Program, our Emerging 
Leaders Program, and also our congressional internship program. 
So that is how we--that's kind of the breakdown of the 
congressional program.
    So, a little bit about it, we are governed by a board of 
directors. It is a seven-member board. In the House, The 
Speaker of the House gets two appointments to our board, 6-year 
terms. And then the minority leader gets one appointment. And 
the majority leader in the House--I mean--I am sorry--in the 
Senate gets two appointments and the minority one. So it's 
three from the House, three from the Senate. And it is meant to 
be bipartisan. And, by law, I am a voting board member.
    So they continue to monitor the direction of the programs 
going into our budget, as well.
    So, again, the 430, I mention that it supports those 
programs, and it has been stagnant. For the 118th Congress, for 
our Stennis Fellows Program, we had a large increase in 
congressional staffers that apply for the program. And one of 
the negative parts is when we select between 30 and 34 people 
to the program, we have to tell a lot of people no. And, in 
order to be eligible for the Stennis Fellows Program, you have 
to have at least 10 years of experience. That is what we 
usually tell the committee that selects the program, which are 
senior Stennis fellows, which are basically congressional 
staffers that went through the program.
    So that is, again, how we have pretty much been stagnant 
with the program is we have to say no to a lot of people, and 
that is unfortunate.
    So, with the Stennis Fellows Program, we select between 30 
and 34 senior-level staffers, and they go through training and 
development for just over a year and a half. And we bring them 
to--we have experts come in to talk about subjects that they 
are interested in. Some of them may have become chiefs of staff 
at an early age or something. And they may not have had 
management experience, or they may not have worked with Gen Z 
long. So that may be some of the topics that they want us to 
assist with. So that is, again, some of the things that we 
provide.
    We take them out of DC We have had a longtime relationship 
with Princeton where we take them up to--we will actually be 
going back up next month, I believe, to go where we utilize the 
faculty there in order to, again, provide some to type of 
development for the staffers.
    And, again, it is a really good program. And, if you look 
at, in the testimony, some of the people who have went through 
the program and are now referred to as senior Stennis fellows, 
it is a pretty amazing group of people.
    So that is our flagship program, our Stennis Fellows 
Program. And we have an intern program, which is basically one-
on-one mentoring where we pair senior Stennis fellows with 
junior-level staffers. And we try to place them based on, 
again, if you are in the House you or you are in the Senate and 
interest, as well.
    So that program, it is not quite 30, like the Stennis 
Fellows Program--is around 25. But it is based on the amount of 
senior Stennis fellows that we get to commit to mentoring the 
junior-level staffers. And our Emerging Leaders Program is 
congressional Hill interns. A lot of them may be in your 
offices, but they apply to the program. And we have senior 
Stennis fellows come and basically talk to them about Congress 
as an institution, just a lot of different issues. And it is 
another very popular program.
    And that is actually one of the programs of the three 
programs that we support with the congressional leg branch 
appropriation that actually has grown. We used to just have one 
cohort in the summer. We now have three cohorts. And, again, we 
selected around 30 students and--I mean, I am sorry--30 
interns. And the demand has just grown significantly for that, 
too, though.
    And how we were basically able to account for adding the 
two different classes is we used to provide them with 
refreshments and snacks and stuff. We utilize the CVC. So that 
is free. And then the staffers, the senior staffers, we don't 
charge. I mean, we don't have to pay. They don't charge us a 
fee or anything. But we have kind of cut back on refreshments 
and things like that. And, again, we have not grown. We 
increased the amount of cohorts. But, again, we keep to around 
30.
    So that is what the 430 pays for. We are very proud of the 
programs. And, just based on the people who have went through 
the program, we continue to get positive feedback, as well.
    So that is a quick rundown, and I will be happy to answer 
any questions that you have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pugh follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Dr. Pugh. Mr. Crane.

      Statement of Martin J. Crane, Executive Director, Office of 
                     Congressional Workplace Rights

    Mr. Crane. Good morning. And thank you, Chairman Valadao, 
Ranking Member Espaillat, and distinguished members of the 
committee.
    We appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and to 
discuss the fiscal year 2025 budget justification for the 
Office of Congressional Workplace Rights.
    Although I just recently became executive director of the 
OCWR and this is the first time I have had the honor to appear 
before this committee, I have been working with my colleagues 
at OCWR since 2017. And I thank you on their behalf for your 
ongoing and steadfast support.
    When Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act 
nearly 30 years ago with nearly virtually unanimous bipartisan 
support, it made a promise to the American people that it would 
apply to itself the same Federal workplace and accessibility 
laws that it applies to employers in the executive branch and 
in the private sector.
    Congress established our office, the OCWR, as the 
independent nonpartisan office charged with ensuring that that 
promise is kept.
    With only 34 FTEs, we are one of the smallest offices with 
a line item in the budget. However, the scope of the workplace 
laws that we enforce on the Hill and in offices throughout the 
country is one of the broadest in the Federal Government.
    Like the EEOC in the executive branch, in the private 
sector, we administer the laws in the legislative branch that 
prohibit discrimination and harassment, as well as laws that 
require reasonable accommodations for pregnant workers and 
people with disabilities.
    Like the Department of Labor, we administer laws that 
govern minimum wages, overtime, equal pay, job-protected family 
and medical leave, laws that prohibit discrimination against 
our Nation's veterans and provide them with enhanced 
opportunities for employment, as well as laws requiring 
services and facilities that are accessible to people with 
disabilities.
    Like the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, we 
administer laws in the legislative branch that require safe 
workplaces.
    And, like the Federal Labor Relations Authority, we 
administer the laws in the legislative branch that govern 
labor-management relations.
    To accomplish this wide-ranging mission, we develop and 
provide outreach, education and training to the congressional 
community. We provide privileged, confidential advising 
services for covered employees. We operate an administrative 
dispute resolution program, which includes administrative 
hearings and voluntary mediation.
    Our Office of General Counsel enforces laws governing 
safety, accessibility, and labor relations, and also inspects, 
as the chair mentioned, more than 18 million square feet of 
facilities and grounds to ensure that they are and remain safe 
and accessible.
    Our board of directors advises Congress on keeping CAA 
protections equivalent to the private sector and the executive 
branch, and we also administer a biennial Congressional 
Workplace Climate Survey to more than 30,000 legislative branch 
employees which assesses the congressional workplace and the 
effectiveness of reforms.
    Our request of just less than $8.6 million focuses on 
efficiency and considers only strictly mission-critical line 
items. It doesn't propose any new programs, but it would allow 
the OCWR to provide the same quality services that it has 
consistently provided to Congress.
    In the current fiscal year, we have been able to hire 
experienced professionals as FTEs to perform in-house services 
previously provided by contractors and service providers. 
Although this has resulted in an increase in projected 
personnel costs, it has also resulted in a significant decrease 
in costs for contractual services.
    Approximately 75 percent of our budget requests, or $6.5 
million, is for costs associated with 36 authorized FTEs. 
Because we depend on the ability to recruit and retain these 
employees, this amount represents a 25-percent increase above 
the fiscal year 2024 enacted level, which will maintain 
compensation levels comparable to those in the executive 
branch.
    But, as I mentioned, non-personnel costs have significant 
decreased in fiscal year 2024. And we expect this trend to 
continue. Therefore, our request of approximately $2.1 million 
for non-personnel costs represents a 36-percent decrease from 
the fiscal year 2024 enacted amount.
    Accordingly, all but approximately $450,000 in projected 
increases in personnel costs are offset by projected decreases 
in non-personnel costs.
    Our budget request will allow the OCWR to succeed while 
serving as a responsible and efficient steward of taxpayer 
money. I therefore ask that you support it and our continued 
work to advance workplace rights, safety and health, and 
accessibility on the Hill and in congressional offices 
throughout the country.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Crane follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. Crane.
    I now recognize Ms. Sargus for a summary of your written 
testimony.

Statement of Jane Sargus, Executive Director, Congressional Office for 
                        International Leadership

    Ms. Sargus. Good morning, Chairman Valadao and Ranking 
Member Espaillat.
    Thank you to all the members of the subcommittee for the 
opportunity to testify today on behalf of the Congressional 
Office for International Leadership, COIL.
    COIL's mission is to assist Congress in its foreign 
oversight responsibilities through the administration of the 
Open World program, an exchange dedicated to engaging rising 
parliamentary rule of law and civic leaders to build mutual 
understanding across borders.
    Our program centers on unfiltered dialogue and brings 
together professionals and communities with common challenges 
to discuss their perspectives and best practices.
    Introducing decisionmakers from critical regions of the 
world to Members of Congress and American experts leads to 
important inroads in bilateral relations, in government, and in 
civic life in these countries.
    To support this, COIL held nearly 200 congressional 
meetings in calendar year 2023, both on the Hill and in 
district offices across the country. Since our founding in 
1999, we have responded to congressional interests by expanding 
to 23 countries throughout Eurasia and the Indo-Pacific, 
bringing hundreds of delegates annually to meet their 
counterparts in the United States.
    In 2023, COIL initiated an experimental model of regional 
program in the Balkans, bringing together Kosovars, North 
Macedonians, and Serbians, providing a forum for conversations 
that COIL is uniquely positioned to facilitate. This model will 
be expanded to Central Asia later this year.
    COIL also inaugurated parliamentary programs with several 
Indo-Pacific countries on congressional requests due to 
concerns with the ongoing rise of Chinese malign influence. 
These parliamentary programs enable regional decisionmakers to 
speak directly and frankly about trade, national security, and 
bilateral relations.
    Of note, the National Assembly of Vietnam specifically 
voiced its appreciation for COIL as an important opportunity 
for further engagement between legislatures.
    As COIL seeks to serve every corner of America, the Open 
World program operates in every State, in over 3,000 local host 
communities. Open World delegations have traveled to each of 
your districts, and your constituent communities have reported 
back meaningful results.
    With high demand, we can only accommodate about a quarter 
of the hosting demand for our program due to budgetary 
limitations. This brings us to our request for a budget 
increase. We have been at or below a $6 million appropriation 
for the last 11 years while at the same time being as creative 
as possible in searching for funding and cost-share 
opportunities with grantees, hosts, U.S. embassies, and other 
stakeholders further defraying the overall cost for 
participants.
    Nevertheless, the per-person cost rose more than 60 percent 
between 2020 and 2023 and is insurmountable despite the 
extensive cost-limiting measures that we implemented.
    After cautious consideration, we have concluded that a 
budget increase is essential to optimally fulfill our duties 
and mission of supporting Congress. With this increase of $1.2 
million, we expect to add one FTE, a specialist in the Indo-
Pacific region, and to expand our Indo-Pacific program, as 
Members have also expressed that, with the rise of malign 
influence from China, having conversations on trade, security, 
and diplomacy between legislatures takes on additional 
significance and impact.
    Having said that, these programs are far more costly than 
Eurasian programs, with airfare alone being multiple times the 
cost of other delegations.
    Therefore, the $1.2 million budget increase would allow a 
more robust Indo-Pacific program and restore full funding to 
our national and regional programs in the Balkans, Central 
Asia, and Central Europe.
    With a fully funded fiscal 2025 budget, COIL will remain a 
resource, an asset, and an investment for all Members of 
Congress and their constituents. Each day, COIL's quiet but 
impactful work brings together Americans and their 
international peers to take tangible steps forward in their 
professions and in our country's relationships.
    Thanks to each of you today for hearing my testimony. I 
appreciate it, and I look forward to your questions.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Sargus follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Well, thank you to our witnesses for 
testifying before this committee today.
    And, as the new subcommittee chairman, I look forward to 
learning about all the different programs and your agencies in 
greater detail.
    I will call on members based on seniority of those present 
when the hearing was called to order, alternating between 
majority and minority. Then I will call on members in order of 
their arrival. Each will have 5 minutes.
    I now recognize myself.
    I will start with COIL. How does COIL and your exchange 
program support Member interests and responsibilities exactly? 
And can you give me an example of how it affects an individual 
district?
    Ms. Sargus. Well, an individual district could have any 
number of local hosting organizations which are the heart of 
the success of the exchange program. They provide members of 
their community to give places to stay for the delegations.
    We do not believe in the hotel approach to international 
exchange. All of our delegates stay with American families. So 
they see the United States from the inside of a house, often at 
a kitchen table. And you learn a lot about your communities and 
the countries that are visiting you over a cup of tea.
    So the communities love to share and show off their place, 
their best practices, their citizenry, their libraries. They 
share a lot about what makes their community accessible, 
pleasant, and desirable. But also they are willing to share 
what is not working. So they bring the conversation around to 
``let's see if we can come up with a new solution.''
    Every community benefits from an Open World delegation 
because they are part of the reason the delegation is able to 
experience the best part of American society.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    Mr. Crane, my understanding is that there is not enough 
congressional staff that know about your programs. So what 
outreach are you doing into the congressional community?
    Mr. Crane. Our outreach is really a daily function of the 
Office of Congressional Workplace Rights. We continually engage 
in it. One of the primary means by which we do so is the 
biennial congressional climate survey, which permits 30,000 
legislative branch employees to answer questions. So that 
allows us to provide our Oversight Committees with information 
as to--so they can consider determining whether the reforms 
that are set forth in the Reform Act have been effective.
    We have training on all of the laws that are incorporated 
and applicable to the legislative branch through the 
Congressional Accountability Act.
    Our general counsel has a brown bag series on items of 
interest for legislative branch legal counsel, both who 
represent employees and employing offices on the Hill.
    We have outreach programs for the district offices. Our 
office--our safety professionals regularly provide the district 
offices with technical assistance. They have administered 
online safety and health survey recently. We have quarterly 
newsletters. We have labor-management forums.
    And so, as I said, every day is--a part of our job is 
outreach to the congressional community that we serve.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    Mr. Pugh, there is a lot of leadership programs out there. 
Why is it important for us to fund yours and not focus on one 
in the private sector?
    Mr. Pugh. Thank you.
    The summary of the testimony is that we have multiple 
funding sources. The 430 is specifically for the congressional 
programs.
    One of the things that we have found is, with some of the 
other programs that are in the private sector, a lot of the 
times they are providing donations.
    Our programming, it is funded by Congress. And we don't 
want the private sector to make a donation and want additional 
access to Members of Congress, your staff basically.
    And a lot of the times, again, I mentioned that our 
enabling legislation allows us to solicit funding from private 
sector. But, I mean, I was a former appropriator. And I have 
been in leadership programs where it was funded by government 
relations or lobbyists or whatever, too, though. And a part of 
that was they wanted access to us, and that is what we don't 
want for the congressional staff.
    So that is why we think it is important for Congress to 
continue to provide funding for this particular program within 
Congress.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    I am now going to recognize our ranking member, Mr. 
Espaillat, for his 5 minutes.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Valadao.
    Ms. Sargus, as I mentioned during my opening statement, 
China now is making a full-court press in the Americas. And, of 
course, they have been in Africa for some time now. And your 
particular initiative is concentrated in the Indo-Pacific.
    What would it take in terms of funding to expand it to our 
backyard really where we need to have an impact and counter 
that malign influence, not just in the Americas but also I 
would say in the continent, in the developing continent of 
Africa where it is vital for us to be on the cutting edge?
    Ms. Sargus. Thank you for the question.
    I would answer that by saying that, much like the Indo-
Pacific, programs with Africa have a cost challenge because of 
the distance. Someone coming from Serbia is not the same as 
someone coming from Papua New Guinea. And I imagine the same 
would be true for some--one of the countries of Africa.
    So, from a budgetary standpoint, it would take an increase 
that would cover a per-person cost. So, from that region of the 
world, the per-person cost is higher than it might be----
    Mr. Espaillat. Have you made an analysis of what it would 
take to expand to let's say getting folks from Venezuela or, 
you know, the continent, right, right in our backyard, right 
next door where, you know, there is a strong presence and a 
real push by China?
    Ms. Sargus. Yes, that is true. We actually had a pilot 
program for Peru some years back because Peru was one of the 
countries covered under the House Democracy Partnership, and 
our board has allowed us to participate in programming for any 
country in the HDP portfolio.
    So, to do--to add countries, the board, our board, which is 
made up of Members of Congress and private citizens, would have 
to approve the new country.
    Mr. Espaillat. OK.
    Ms. Sargus. And most of the time what it takes for the 
board to approve that addition would be a bipartisan letter or 
indication of a bipartisan letter of support. And that is how 
the Indo-Pacific program was launched, with a bipartisan letter 
that we presented to the board who voted to agree to do the 
Indo-Pacific region.
    We discovered only after we started there what the budget 
challenges were. I don't call them obstacles. I call them 
challenges because there are solutions to funding these kinds 
of programs, and I imagine we could do it anywhere.
    And one of the reasons we did this program in Peru, we 
wanted to see how generic, how adaptable our program was in 
different regions of the world. And we found that it worked 
very well.
    We would be open to Venezuela. We would be open to Cuba. We 
would be open to a number of places with that bipartisan 
indication that it would be useful to do that. It would take 
bipartisan on-the-record request that the board would then 
respond to. And then we give a notification to the 
subcommittee, 90-day notification, that a new country has been 
added.
    Mr. Espaillat. And I recognize that the largest number of 
participants in the program, in your program, are from the 
Ukraine.
    Ms. Sargus. Currently. That is our largest cohort.
    Mr. Espaillat. And this happened after----
    Ms. Sargus. After 2022, that is true. We suspended the 
Russia program in 2022, for obvious reasons. We don't have a 
path forward to restarting it, for obvious reasons.
    But, in the words of the late, great Dr. James Billington, 
who founded the agency in 1999, keeping a door open, keeping a 
way forward, having an opportunity for dialogue is very 
important. We have 20,000 alumni in Russia. We don't have 
contact with them necessarily, but sometimes somebody reaches 
out to us. We are not interested in endangering anyone, but we 
also don't want to endanger our own program.
    Our agency is still allowed to operate there, should we 
choose to do so. We have not been declared a foreign agent. 
Because we are associated with Congress and not a Presidential 
administration, we have a certain access.
    Mr. Espaillat. One last question. How do you protect 
yourself from being infiltrated by foreign agents? Are there 
any mechanisms that would----
    Ms. Sargus. Not a formal mechanism. A lot of it has--such a 
tiny agency. There are seven of us. So we talk about these 
sorts of things constantly. We inform each other of funny 
things happening. We try to keep informed. We also ask 
questions when we can.
    The first time I ever testified, I appeared on Russian 
media everywhere.
    Mr. Espaillat. OK.
    Ms. Sargus. And that was not a comfortable feeling, I will 
tell you, honestly.
    Mr. Espaillat. This meeting may be in Russia----
    Ms. Sargus. It may be. It may be very well. You know, they 
pronounced my name right. I was quite happy about that but--
but, yes, it is--it is dicey.
    But the people I met from Russia are just like Americans. 
They may or may not love their government, but they love their 
country, and I respect that.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Mr. LaTurner, 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you and congratulations, Mr. Chairman. 
So happy to have you.
    My first question is for Director Crane. Are there any 
other--other than the annual mandatory training for staff and 
Members, do you offer any other services and training 
throughout the year?
    Mr. Crane. Well, we offer a full range of training, which 
is all listed on our website, and we can give it at any time 
throughout the year.
    Mr. LaTurner. Is it upon request or----
    Mr. Crane. It is upon request. These are most of them are 
voluntary training and education programs. They can be given in 
person. They can be given virtually, which enhances our ability 
to comply with the congressional mandate that we provide equity 
of access to employees in district offices throughout the 
country.
    Mr. LaTurner. How often are those utilized, the upon-
request training?
    Mr. Crane. On a fairly regular basis. It would really 
depend on the particular training. The most popular is 
obviously the training that concerns all the rights and 
protections under the CAA, followed by voluntary training 
modules on subjects such as labor relations, developments in 
discrimination law, and various other topics.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you. I appreciate it.
    Director Sargus, so you mentioned 20,000 in Russia alone 
have gone through this. What would be examples of the fruits of 
that interaction that we have had, not just there but 
everywhere?
    Ms. Sargus. One example is the partner--sister city 
relationships that started. Now sister cities are all at risk 
now because there are no relationships with Russia. But, during 
the course of our program in Russia, there were lots of sister 
city relations that were created.
    And I can tell you that Rotary International is probably 
hands down singularly--responsibility for the success of this 
program in Russia with Russian citizens. There became many, 
many Rotary Clubs in Russia that didn't exist before our 
program. And that would be one.
    The other one is a very simple example of a delegate who 
came to the United States from Russia in 2005, went to Texas, 
stayed with a host family. They had horses. He rode horses on 
the farm. They had a barbecue as part of a community event. He 
had Texas barbecue. He had a wonderful time.
    And his name appeared in a report in 2005 from the 
facilitator who joined the group as someone to keep an eye on, 
and his name was Alexei Navalny. And it was very important to 
us to watch how he did and what he did over the years. We 
considered it a loss almost at a personal level at his death. 
But we are also very proud of the fact that his vision of the 
world, part of it was born in Texas.
    Thank you.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you very much.
    Dr. Pugh, I am curious. Two questions for you. I think you 
said it has been around since the late eighties. Is that right?
    Mr. Pugh. 1988.
    Mr. LaTurner. 1988, yes.
    How close does the current program look like to the 
original one in 1988, the original intent?
    Mr. Pugh. So it is quite different. The Stennis, use the 
Stennis Fellows Program, our flagship program. It was started 
with the 103rd Congress. So that wasn't actually started in 
1988, but it has changed drastically.
    When we have--the 103rd Congress, we didn't get nearly as 
many senior-level officials or staffers applying for the 
program, and now it is a lot more senior. I think the average 
government experience for the 118th Congress that is part of 
the program is like 15.8 years. So it is a lot more senior-
level staff.
    And, really, just depending on what the congressional class 
wants, that is--that really decides what the curriculum is. So 
it evolves. Right now, again--
    Mr. LaTurner. You talked multiple times about different 
funding sources. How many different funding sources? How big, 
how big of a portfolio are you managing?
    Mr. Pugh. So it is just under $2 million. So we have civil-
military programs.
    Mr. LaTurner. Just under $2 million?
    Mr. Pugh. Just under $2 million.
    Mr. LaTurner. OK.
    Mr. Pugh. Correct. We have a civil-military program, and we 
get a transfer from the DOD for that portion. And we also work 
with our--our congressional fellows actually touch every--all 
of our programs.
    And we also have an endowment. When we were created in 
1988, it was about $7.5 million. But the interest over that 
period of time, too, is just under $18 million in endowment. So 
the principal off the endowment actually supports our student 
program. So that is kind of what we use for that.
    Mr. LaTurner. Understood.
    Thank you all for being here today.
    I yield back, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. LaTurner.
    Mr. Franklin, you have got 5 minutes.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And congratulations. It has a very nice ring to it.
    Mr. Crane, a couple of questions regarding your budget. I 
am just still trying to understand how these are put together. 
The $500,000 carryover that you are requesting to go beyond the 
end of the fiscal year into the next, is that something that is 
a recurring component of your budget? Do you currently have a 
half million that is going go into the fiscal year 2025 or 
2024?
    Mr. Crane. The 500,000 that we are requesting as multiyear 
money, we use that money to pay for non-personnel costs, such 
as contractors and service providers. In the past, we have 
asked that more--for more money to obligate up through the 
following fiscal year.
    But we have reduced that quite a bit simply because we 
anticipate and we project for fiscal year 2025 that we are 
going to have lower, non-personnel costs. So since we only use 
that to cover non-personnel costs, and we expect those to be 
lower--we have reduced--we have reduced the amount.
    But what we do use that for is what we consider the known 
unknowns. Every one of our hearings, our hearing officers are 
contractors. Our mediators are contractors. So we don't--we 
simply don't know how many cases we are going to get in a given 
year.
    But, if there is an unanticipated increase, then we would--
we would rely on that $500,000 in 2-year money to cover those 
costs.
    Mr. Franklin. That kind of sounds like you are anticipating 
lower expenses, but you don't want to give up that money. So 
you are asking to keep it in the budget and carry it forward. I 
don't really understand why things are different. And, if you 
are projecting less, why don't you request less?
    Mr. Crane. Request less in 2-year money or request less 
altogether?
    Mr. Franklin. If I understood, you said you are expecting 
your needs to be lower in the year.
    Mr. Crane. We are expecting our non-personnel costs to be 
lower, but we are expecting our personnel costs to be higher. 
So all but $500,000 of what--of our request are--the--that is 
all personnel costs increasing. The $500,000 more or less 
represents that portion of increased personnel costs that 
aren't offset by non-personnel costs, anticipated non-personnel 
costs.
    Mr. Franklin. OK. That is still clear as mud to me.
    But, in the last Congress, it was approved to allow offices 
to unionize. Just wondering how that program has progressed. 
How many--how many are unionized now? How are many are in the 
process? And how has that impacted your workload of your team?
    Mr. Crane. As far as numbers, in fiscal year 2023, we had 
eight representation election petitions filed, and we conducted 
11 representation elections and issued certifications in those 
cases.
    We haven't had a petition filed in fiscal year 2024. We did 
receive a disclaimer petition in 2024, but recently we haven't 
had a lot of activity on the unionization front.
    We have an FTE to process those union petitions when they 
come in. That person does a number of other tasks for us. So I 
would estimate that about 20 percent of his time is spent on 
processing union petitions.
    And our non-personnel costs concern processing union 
petitions are de minimis. We use a contractor that allows us to 
conduct virtual secret ballot elections for employees both on 
the Hill and in the district offices. But the contracting 
costs, that is a contractor that is also used by the Federal 
Labor Relations Authority in the executive branch. But our 
contracting costs are de minimis.
    Mr. Franklin. All right. Very good.
    Dr. Pugh, quick question. I noticed a lot of your budget is 
funded from the trust fund originally that was established, and 
you feed a lot off of the interest on that.
    What is the corpus of that trust fund? What are we talking 
about?
    Mr. Pugh. Initially it was $7.5 million. And, again, it has 
grown. But, in our enabling legislation, it is really 
restrictive. So we can only invest in Treasury bonds. So it 
hasn't grown nearly as much, but we don't touch the 57.5 
million. And interest right now is, with low interest rates, I 
mean, if I had--
    Mr. Franklin. It is going up. You are probably the only 
person around who----
    Mr. Pugh. Exactly.
    Mr. Franklin. Hopefully you will be coming back to us 
needing more because the interest rates are lower.
    Mr. Pugh. So, if I had to--I am trying to think of the 
number last year. It was under $200,000. I mean, even with the 
large amount, like I mentioned, it was let's just say 
approximately $18 million, too, though--it doesn't generate a 
quarter of a million dollars in interest. So and that is with 
the conservative Treasury bonds that we are restricted to.
    Mr. Franklin. I understand. OK.
    Mr. Pugh. Again, whenever--in 1988, when it was created, 
interest rates were just under 10 percent. So it was generating 
$600,000. That is not the case now.
    Mr. Franklin. Right. Understand. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you.
    Mrs. Bice, 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, congratulations and welcome to the 
Leg Branch Approps Subcommittee.
    Mr. Valadao. Welcome back. I was here a few years ago.
    Mrs. Bice. Well, not since I am here. So I am happy to have 
you.
    I want to start by speaking to Ms. Sargus. Last Congress, 
the GAO identified that COIL actually doesn't have oversight 
from an inspector general. Is that accurate that you do not 
have an IG that oversees COIL to conduct regular audits and 
performance evaluations, et cetera?
    Ms. Sargus. It is half true.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you.
    Ms. Sargus. We occupy space in the Library of Congress by 
agreement. And, as such, we also ride the contract for the 
annual audit with the Library of Congress. So their IG manages 
that contract, which means, by extension, they provide support 
to us for the annual audit. But it is limited. The IG support 
is limited only to the annual audit.
    Mrs. Bice. So are you suggesting that it would be incumbent 
upon the LOC to request an either independent inspector general 
or for them to conduct a full audit of COIL, moving forward?
    Ms. Sargus. Well, we get a full audit.
    Mrs. Bice. A performance audit?
    Ms. Sargus. Oh, a financial statements audit.
    Mrs. Bice. I am looking for a full audit.
    Ms. Sargus. I see. My understanding is that GAO would be 
able to determine whether that is under--that is under their 
purview.
    Whether--I don't believe I have the ability to ask the 
Library's IG to do such a thing, and I don't believe the 
Library's IG would do it just because I requested it. I believe 
GAO would have to provide some guidance, some sense of whose 
purview this falls under to determine how it would be done.
    Mrs. Bice. Well, so, last year, your office was in 
discussions with the Library of Congress IG and the House 
Administration Committee to explore having an IG serve as an 
independent IG to your office. But those discussions abruptly 
ended, and I believe it was claimed that COIL was not 
accountable to the House Administration Committee, which 
oversees LOC.
    Ms. Sargus. I don't know who claimed that.
    Mrs. Bice. OK.
    Ms. Sargus. But COIL has a very strong relationship with 
the House Administration Committee. We have for many years, 
both from a programmatic sense but also from an agency sense.
    We work very closely with the Library, and we appreciate 
very much the services we get from the Library, but we can't 
demand from the IG service or coverage that is not within their 
purview to give to us.
    Mrs. Bice. So let me make sure that we are tracking on the 
same path here.
    Ms. Sargus. Sure.
    Mrs. Bice. If I, as an appropriator and a member of House 
Administration, want to ensure that COIL has a full audit, not 
just a budgetary audit, are you agreeing that that should 
happen and that we should try find a way to execute on that?
    Ms. Sargus. I think we would be amenable to a full audit if 
that is what was deemed important, necessary, and customary. We 
would be happy to do it.
    Mrs. Bice. I think almost every agency has a full audit on 
a semiregular basis. It could be every 3 years, 4 years, 5 
years. Who knows?
    Ms. Sargus. OK.
    Mrs. Bice. And it seems that that hasn't happened with 
COIL. So I think for me as, again, as an appropriator on leg 
branch but also as member of the House Administration 
Committee, I think it is incredibly important that we have 
visibility and insight and transparency.
    Ms. Sargus. Yes.
    Mrs. Bice. So I appreciate your willingness to allow us to 
try to figure out a way that we can incorporate a full IG into 
your organization to ensure that, you know, that you are 
meeting all the needs.
    The other question I have for you is, looking at that time 
fiscal year appropriation requested, you had, in fiscal year 
2020, the appropriation was 5.9 million, and you had 9.3 full-
time employees. You are asking for an increase from that 2020 
appropriation to 7.2 but a decrease to 8 employees.
    Can you explain that?
    Ms. Sargus. Yes. The program cost has grown exponentially. 
The per-person cost for our program from 2020 to 2023 has 
increased by 60 percent. A lot of that is airfare, but also the 
home hosting costs have increased.
    So a delegation is six people. To rent a van and a driver 
and have those kind of resources available takes more money in 
the local grants.
    So the cost of our program has increased in grants and in 
the contract that we have with an NGO to be our implementer, to 
be our logistical implementer. So those costs have gone up 
exponentially.
    Mrs. Bice. How many cohorts do you host annually?
    Ms. Sargus. About 550, between 500 and 600 a year.
    Mrs. Bice. And you are doing them in groups of six? Did I 
hear that right?
    Ms. Sargus. Yes.
    Mrs. Bice. So a hundred of them, you are doing a hundred 
individual programs annually.
    Ms. Sargus. Yes.
    Mrs. Bice. OK. All right.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield. Thank you.
    Ms. Sargus. Thank you.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mrs. Bice.
    If there are no further questions, I would like to thank 
Dr. Pugh, Mr. Crane, and Ms. Sargus for being here today.
    Members may submit any additional questions for the record.
    And the subcommittee stands adjourned.

                                            Tuesday, April 16, 2024

                          LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

                        ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

                               WITNESSES

CARLA HAYDEN, LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS
JOSEPH DIPIETRO, ACTING ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
    Mr. Valadao. The subcommittee will come to order.
    The subject of today's hearing is the ``Fiscal Year 2025 
Request for the Library of Congress and the Architect of the 
Capitol''.
    I would like to thank Ranking Member Espaillat and 
committee members and the Librarian of Congress, Dr. Carla 
Hayden, and the Acting Architect, Joe DiPietro, for being here 
today.
    The largest Library in the world, the Library of Congress, 
is the main research arm of Congress. The Library of Congress 
fiscal year 2025 budget request, with offsetting amount, totals 
$898 million, a 5-percent increase from fiscal year 2024.
    The funding would support acquisition, preservation, 
programming, and technical development for the Library of 
Congress, as well as administer the Nation's copyright 
lawsuits. The funding would also provide authoritative, 
confidential, objective, nonpartisan, and timely research and 
analysis to Congress and circulate millions of copies of 
braille, audio, and large-print items to the blind and print-
disabled patrons.
    I understand the Library just concluded the biggest 
Gershwin Prize for Popular Song to date, honoring the legendary 
songwriting duo of Elton John and Bernie Taupin.
    And I offer my congratulations to you and the Library's 
team for the program's great success. I happened to be there 
and enjoyed the show.
    The Architect of the Capitol is the steward of 18.4 million 
square feet of facilities, 570 acres of grounds, and thousands 
of works of art that 30,000 occupants of the Capitol campus and 
5 million annual visitors experience daily.
    The Architect of the Capitol fiscal year 2025 request is 
$1.3 billion, an increase of 9 percent. This funding allows for 
the daily operations and maintenance responsibilities, as well 
as critical security and life-safety priorities, Capitol 
renewal projects and deferred maintenance that support 
Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Library of Congress, the 
United States Capitol Police, and numerous other AOC-managed 
facilities.
    I also understand congratulations are in order to the 
Architect of the Capitol for recently being awarded the 
prestigious Associations of Government Certificate of 
Excellence in Accountability Reporting for the preparing in 
excellent fiscal year 2023 Performance and Accountability 
Report. Congratulations to you and the CFO accounting 
operations and Integrated Risk Management Division.
    I would also like to thank the witnesses for being here 
today.
    And I now recognize my ranking member here for his opening 
remarks.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Chairman Valadao.
    Good morning, Dr. Hayden and Mr. DiPietro. I echo the 
chairman's words and welcome you to discuss your agencies' 
budget requests for fiscal year 2025.
    This has been quite the year for the Architect of the 
Capitol. I know that the role of the AOC is a difficult one, 
especially given the agency's current challenges.
    Mr. DiPietro, thank you for leading the team until a new 
AOC is found.
    Also, congratulations to the AOC Office of the Chief 
Financial Officer for receiving the prestigious Association of 
Government Certificate of Excellence in Accountability 
Reporting. I understand this award is for preparing an 
excellent fiscal year 2023 Performance and Accountability 
Report. Great job, and keep up the good work.
    For fiscal year 2025, the AOC has requested $1 billion, an 
increase of $84 million, or 9 percent, over 2024 enacted 
levels. This increase addresses backlogs and deferred 
maintenance projects that are necessary across the Capitol 
complex.
    I would also like to, Mr. Valadao, be on the record 
expressing my concerns regarding the delay in installing the 
honorific plaque to honor U.S. Capitol officers and other 
members of law enforcement. I know at this point the AOC is 
ready and awaiting clear directions to install the plaque. The 
project required by Public Law 117-103 is on hold without 
explanation from leadership. I hope others on this subcommittee 
also share my desire to see this honorific plaque promptly 
installed.
    Dr. Hayden, the Library of Congress is a national treasure 
and your leadership there is unprecedented. You do great work, 
and I appreciate your commitment to making the Library and its 
collection most discoverable and accessible to the public, as 
well as your continued emphasis on technology development and 
security.
    Mr. Valadao, the access to the Library of Congress 
information and data is a national security issue. And Dr. 
Hayden has taken the detailed emphasis and concentration of 
making sure that we are protected.
    And I also would like to extend a special thanks to the 
Library's dedicated staff for their continuous and essential 
support to Congress, especially to our appropriations 
committee.
    For fiscal year 2025, the Library has requested $944 
million, an increase of $46 million, or 5.1 percent, over the 
fiscal year 2024 enacted levels.
    As a ranking member, I am committed to ensuring the Library 
and the AOC have the resources they need to fulfill their 
mission, safeguard their staff and infrastructure, and provide 
needed services to all Americans.
    Thank you all again for being here, and I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Dr. Hayden is joined here today with Shira 
Perlmutter, the Registrar of Copyrights and Director of U.S. 
Copyright Office, and Dr. Robert Newlen, the interim Director 
of the Congressional Research Service.
    Both of their testimonies have been submitted for the 
record.
    Members are welcome to address questions to either, in 
addition to Dr. Hayden.
    Dr. Hayden, your full testimony has been submitted for the 
record, and you are now recognized to provide a summary of your 
written testimony.

            Statement of Carla Hayden, Librarian of Congress

    Ms. Hayden. Thank you, Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member 
Espaillat, and members of the subcommittee.
    I am very pleased to be able to have this opportunity to 
provide testimony in support of the Library's fiscal 2025 
budget.
    In fiscal 2023 and 2024, the Library, with the support of 
Congress, met its mission to, quote, "engage, inspire, and 
inform the Congress and the American people with a universal 
and enduring source of knowledge and creativity."
    We do this in both traditional and innovative ways. And 
today with nearly 178 million items in the physical collections 
and many more in digital form, the Library remains the steward 
of the largest collection of information and research ever 
assembled, not as a memorial but as a living source of 
knowledge and creativity for Congress and the betterment of 
all.
    I would like to express my gratitude for the ongoing 
support of the Library from Congress and this committee in 
particular for funding our IT investments.
    Also, special thanks for your support of the visitor 
experience. We will open the first permanent Treasures Gallery 
in June of this year and expect that the Youth Center, called 
The Source, will open in 2025, in time for the Nation's 
semiquincentennial in 2026.
    I come before you today to discuss the Library of Congress' 
fiscal 2025 appropriations request for $943.7 million, a 5.1-
increase over the Library's 2024 appropriation. This request 
includes 38.9 mandatory million in pay and price level 
increases, and the remaining increases represent critical 
investments necessary to meet the Library's mission.
    In recognizing that economic conditions are different from 
when they were 8 years ago when I became Librarian, we are 
requesting the lowest programmatic increase in my tenure.
    The two new requests for fiscal 2025 further the goals of 
the Library's new strategic plan for fiscal year 2024-28, A 
Library for All, to expand access, enhance services, strengthen 
our capacity, and foster innovation.
    We are asking, first, for an investment to strengthen the 
Library's infrastructure, including staff with advanced skills, 
to support digital collections processing and acquisition as we 
move increasingly toward digital as the preferred format. This 
includes digital content in copyright deposits, which are 
central to building our collections.
    The second request supports collections handling for 
expanded exhibit spaces in the Thomas Jefferson Building that 
will display over 1,000 items worth millions of dollars, a 50-
percent increase over the previous year's exhibit capacity. 
This request ensures that exhibit items are secure and 
supported by an appropriate level of trained and experienced 
staff.
    And, in keeping with our strategic goals, we are also 
resubmitting three vital requests that were not funded in 
fiscal 2024. The first will enable both CRS and the Office of 
the Chief Information Officer to expand CRS' quantitative data 
analysis and policy simulation capacity to analyze, "big data" 
for congressional clients.
    The second re-request will enable the Library to meet the 
growing demands for accessibility services to improve access to 
our digital products, materials, and services for Americans 
with disabilities.
    The third resubmission, expanded contracts and grant 
staffing as we face an attrition rate as high as 28 percent 
with heavier workloads and increasingly complex contracts, 
particularly for IT-related acquisitions.
    So, in summary, the Library's 2025 congressional budget 
justification advances necessary work initiated in previous 
years to move the Library forward, while preserving our world-
class resources and making them, most importantly, accessible 
for those who will come after us.
    I am happy to take your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Hayden follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Dr. Hayden.
    I now recognize Mr. DiPietro for a summary of your written 
testimony.

     Statement of Joseph Dipietro, Acting Architect of the Capitol

    Mr. DiPietro. Good morning, Chairman Valadao, Ranking 
Member Espaillat, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you 
for the opportunity to provide testimony on the Architect of 
the Capitol's fiscal year 2025 budget request.
    I would also like to thank members of your staff, 
particularly Michelle Reinshuttle and Faye Cobb, for their 
expertise, solution-mindedness, and consistent professionalism.
    I welcome this opportunity to share more about the agency's 
work in preserving the historic buildings and grounds that 
inspire our Nation in serving the 30,000 daily occupants and 3 
million annual visitors to the Capitol campus.
    To begin, I would like to acknowledge and express my 
gratitude to the 2,400 dedicated AOC employees who work 
diligently to support the daily operations of Congress, the 
Supreme Court, the Library of Congress, and the many other AOC-
managed locations, all which requires the daily care for the 
18.4 million square feet of historic facilities, 570 acres of 
grounds, and thousands of works of art that make up our 
historic campus.
    In addition to supporting the daily operations of Congress, 
the Architect of the Capitol inspires the public by providing 
tours and exhibits of the U.S. Capitol, the surrounding 
grounds, and the U.S. Botanic Garden. Our staff remains 
committed to preserving and maintaining the historic buildings, 
monuments, art, and gardens on the campus.
    While the commission works through the process of 
appointing a permanent architect, I am honored to serve in this 
interim role, leading the women and men who work tirelessly to 
accomplish our mission. I am continually amazed by their 
professionalism and dedication of service.
    The AOC's $1.03 billion fiscal year 2025 budget request is 
focused on three key priorities: physical security, life 
safety, and critical infrastructure needs of the Capitol 
campus. Additionally, this budget ensures adequate funding is 
available for the staffing levels necessary to oversee our 
planning and project management needs and to deliver quality 
services to Congress.
    Through the agency's strategic initiatives, we continue our 
commitment to offering world-class service and doing the deep 
work that leads to transformational growth. This focus enables 
the agency to build a safer, more inclusive, and more effective 
workplace.
    Across the agency we dedicate time and attention to safety 
training, processes, procedures, and operations. This budget 
request recognizes these essential measures with a concentrated 
effort to avoid hazards, risks, and interruptions.
    Security is a key priority. With the support of this 
subcommittee and oversight committees, the AOC has made 
significant progress to improve the security posture across the 
campus. The AOC also coordinates daily with our partners across 
the campus to improve security for staff and visitors.
    Improving physical security is imperative to the operation 
of the campus, and we will continue to balance and maintain 
critical infrastructure, while remaining prepared to respond to 
any new developments.
    The critical infrastructure needs of the Capitol campus 
also remain a top priority. AOC employees work behind the 
scenes day and night to provide Congress, the Supreme Court, 
and the Library with the facilities and infrastructure to 
conduct their business.
    The AOC is committed to a long-term approach to the 
facilities' management, focused on maintaining and preserving 
the Capitol campus, while also modernizing these facilities.
    The aging infrastructure comes with many challenges. The 
AOC is developing an Enterprise Asset Management system that 
will provide a structured approach for the development, 
coordination, and control of asset-related activities across 
their lifecycle. This will enable centralized asset monitoring, 
forecast resource requirements, and translate risks into asset 
management plans and effectively prioritize condition-based 
facility maintenance.
    Additionally, an established asset management system will 
provide additional detail to improve data-driven fiscal 
decisions and prioritize projects that reduce backlog.
    As you know well, the safety, physical security, and 
critical infrastructure needs of the Capitol campus are a 24-
hour-a-day operation that could simply not be accomplished 
without hard work. As I close my statement today, I would again 
like to thank the AOC staff for their professionalism and 
dedication to mission accomplishment.
    Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member Espaillat, and members of 
the subcommittee, thank you again for your continued support 
and consideration of the Architect of the Capitol's fiscal year 
2025 budget request.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. DiPietro follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Again, thank you to our witnesses for 
testifying before this committee today. And as the new 
committee subcommittee chairman, I look forward to learning 
more about both of your departments.
    I will call on Members based on seniority of those present 
when the hearing was called to order, alternating between 
majority and minority, and then will call on Members in order 
of their arrival. Each will have 5 minutes.
    And so I will start with myself. I now recognize myself.
    Dr. Hayden, how are the current economic conditions 
affecting the Library's budget and your priorities for the 
subcommittee to consider?
    Ms. Hayden. The Library's first priority is to be able to 
cover the inflationary costs, such as mandatory pay and price 
level increases because preserving our staff and the experience 
that they have is our top priority.
    Eighty-five percent of the Library's requested increase 
this year is for inflation in pay and nonpay areas. And the 
increases in the programmatic areas support improving our 
digital strategy, ingesting the new digital collection flows 
that we see coming, as well as the exhibits. That will be 
expanded, as well.
    Mr. Valadao. Mr. DiPietro, last year the AOC reported that 
phase 4 of the Cannon Renewal Project would be completed by end 
of calendar year 2024. Is this still accurate?
    Mr. DiPietro. Yes, sir. We are tracking to complete floors 
1 through 4 by the end of October. The contractor will be 
turning 24 Member suites over to us then, and we will working 
with our partners in the House CAO to install the IT and 
furniture and other equipment needed to support Congress.
    Mr. Valadao. So there will be offices available for next 
Congress' office move?
    Mr. DiPietro. That is correct.
    Mr. Valadao. Dr. Hayden, Congress has supported the 
Library's modernization efforts, and the Library has come a 
long way in modernizing its internal systems and closing GAO 
recommendations to address serious vulnerabilities in your IT 
infrastructure.
    What is the next highest priority in your investment?
    Ms. Hayden. The staff expertise, our greatest resources, 
that is the highest priority. And then the next highest 
priorities involve the modernization efforts to provide that 
greater access.
    And so the digital collection processing request is at the 
top of our initiative request this year. We will update and 
integrate a number of legacy standalone IT systems, and it will 
also help us improve our capacity for preserving and giving 
access to these digital collections.
    So those two in terms of modernization are our highest 
priorities.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    Mr. DiPietro, I understand the AOC does not have a great 
reputation for cost estimating. What is the AOC doing to ensure 
future projects are properly scoped, avoid cost overruns, and 
end on time?
    Mr. DiPietro. I think the way to address the scope, the 
cost, and the schedule of projects is to follow a standard 
engineering construction process.
    So typically what you do is you start a project with a 
study, and then you move from your study into a design phase. 
There is different elements of that design phase. And then you 
put the project out for bid, and you have a contractor 
construct the work for you.
    Sometimes what happens is, at the end of the study phase, 
we tie a cost and a schedule to the project before we have 
fully done the design. I think that is a mistake to be doing 
that, and it is better to wait further into the design process 
to when the requirements are better defined. You have a better 
idea of the full scope of the project and could advise on the 
costs and the schedule.
    So, following that, normally industry practice I think 
would help us to help control the scope, the cost, the schedule 
of future projects.
    Mr. Valadao. What is the agency's biggest hurdle or 
challenge addressing the deferred maintenance? I mean, it is, 
what, $2 billion deferred maintenance we are looking at? And 
what is the plan to overcome that?
    Mr. DiPietro. So, when you are looking at deferred 
maintenance, there is--we talk about two elements of deferred 
maintenance. There is the deferred piece, which means it is 
maintenance that hasn't been done. It has become overdue. And 
then the second piece is capital renewal. That is maintenance 
that is going to be coming up within the next 5 years.
    And so that makes up your backlog, and the best way to 
address that is to perform facility condition assessments of 
your building on a regular basis--we do it every 4 or 5 years--
and to look at that piece of how much backlog you are building 
up and then be able to translate that into our budget request, 
indicating here is how much money we are going to need to 
maintain that facility over the next several years.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    And now I am going to yield to the Ranking Member Espaillat 
for his questions.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Valadao.
    Mr. DiPietro, Earth Day is Monday, April 22. I am a huge 
advocate for our planet. In fact, I have drafted the Earth Act 
bill, which is a very comprehensive bill that highlights the 
importance of environmental conservation and sustainability. To 
this end, we in Congress can be role models, right within our 
own place of business.
    Can you provide the subcommittee with an update on the AOC 
recycling efforts, as well as any other AOC programs that aim 
to reduce our carbon footprint and protect our environment?
    Mr. DiPietro. OK. With respect to Earth Day, AOC is 
actually doing a small program on Earth Day with our Capitol 
Grounds and Arboretum jurisdiction. They are going to have a 
small event to recognize Earth Day and to be able to celebrate 
that.
    Sir, with respect to recycling, we recycle about 36 percent 
of the waste within the Capitol building. And then, with 
respect to construction, we actually recycle 95 percent of the 
construction waste. So, when we are renovating a building, 
there is copper. There is concrete. All that, we try to recycle 
as much of that as we can. About 95 percent of that gets 
recycled.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    And, as I mentioned during my opening remarks, there is an 
honorific plaque for the U.S. Capitol Police that is still on 
hold. Can you give us the status on that?
    Mr. DiPietro. So our Capitol Building jurisdiction stands 
by. They are ready to support putting that plaque up once we 
are directed to be able to do that, sir.
    Mr. Espaillat. You haven't been directed.
    Mr. DiPietro. Correct.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    And, finally, Dr. Hayden, I look forward to working with 
you on this year's series of activities and commend your 
efforts to work on the Visitor Center and other major 
initiatives, including the upgrade of accessibility to Library 
materials and the digitalization of the Library and the 
critical infrastructure.
    Where are we in terms of processing digital collections? 
Where are we now, and where do we stand in comparison to other 
major libraries across the world in that department?
    Ms. Hayden. Due to the investment that Congress has made in 
the Library's IT infrastructure in the past few years, we are 
well-poised to continue developing the necessary 
infrastructure.
    And this year's request will give us that capacity to 
sunset legacy systems that were standalone systems. And now 
with this year's request, will be able to ingest things that 
were born digital, years ago. For decades, the Library has had 
the capacity to preserve documents and photos and film and all 
of these types of things that are waiting, quite a few of them, 
to be processed.
    The new digital volume that is coming in and will continue 
to come in requires that we put that infrastructure in place. 
And so we are well-poised to do it, and that is why this 
request that we have for this year emphasizes getting ready for 
that. We see it expanding like a firehose, as our chief 
information officer has said.
    And so we need to be ready to do it. We have a short window 
of time. With manuscripts and papers and things, you have a 
longer period of time. They are waiting. For digital collecting 
and things that are born digital, you have a short window of 
time capture them. So you have to have the digital 
infrastructure to be able to get those things quickly and then 
get them out and then keep developing the digital 
infrastructure.
    It is an exciting time. We are poised for it, and we are 
looking forward to it.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. Thank you so much.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. Espaillat.
    Mr. LaTurner.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Dr. Hayden, how do you feel the Library's Visitor Center 
Experience initiative will bring value to both the Library and 
visiting taxpayers?
    Ms. Hayden. Oh, my goodness. Before the pandemic, the 
Library's iconic Thomas Jefferson Building, which is the front 
door to the three buildings that are on Capitol Hill with the 
Library of Congress, over 2 million visitors visit each year. 
And what the new Visitor Experience project will allow people 
that are coming to that iconic building to have orientation to 
what the Library of Congress is and, what can it do for them. 
For instance, the Veterans History Project and Copyright. There 
will be a special section on creativity and the history of the 
Library.
    For the first time, and I think I mentioned that in the 
opening, a permanent Treasures Gallery that will be able to 
rotate some of the items that are rarely on display. And we 
will have for the first time a dedicated Youth Center so the 
young and the young at heart will be able to learn about 
research and using the Library's collection.
    So it is going to greatly expand the public's understanding 
of what the Library of Congress does and what it can do for 
them.
    Mr. LaTurner. The ranking member's question sparked my 
interest. You mentioned the libraries around the world. What 
libraries around the world do you look to or do you learn 
things from that are doing things maybe unique from us?
    Ms. Hayden. Well, two major libraries that are comparable 
in terms of a national library, the British Library in London 
and the Bibliotheque nationale de France. The Bibliotheque 
nationale, for instance, just opened a Treasures Gallery. We 
were a little jealous. It is--it is pretty good.
    But we are using the same, for instance, the cabinetry 
cases are going to be the same. They are top-of-the-line 
Goppion. They use Ferrari parts in the things. The British 
Library also has a Treasures Gallery and a very robust retail 
aspect in terms of their shops similar to a museum shop. So 
those are in terms of national libraries.
    Of course, we look to some of the major university 
libraries that are doing innovative things. Quite a few of them 
are really upping their IT game in terms of what their online 
presence is, too.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you.
    Mr. DiPietro, a portion of your budget justification covers 
the need to prioritize physical security infrastructure. Tell 
me about your--what it looks like, the collaboration with the 
Capitol Police and Sergeant at Arms. And can you provide the 
committee with rough estimates for the costs of these projects?
    Mr. DiPietro. So we work very closely with the House and 
Senate Sergeant at Arms and the Capitol Police on all the 
physical security projects. They determine the requirements, 
but we support them on the build-out of that infrastructure to 
make sure that it meets their needs.
    With respect to the cost, I would have to get back to you 
on those.
    Mr. LaTurner. OK. I would look forward to that.
    It was mentioned earlier with the chairman the Cannon 
Renewal Project. What is the total time from start to finish, 
and what is the rough cost from start to finish of that entire 
project? I just don't know the answer to that.
    Mr. DiPietro. I can tell you the cost. The cost is around 
$970 million total. The schedule for the complete time it has 
taken from when we started the study to when we will finish out 
the last element of that courtyard, I have to get back with you 
on that.
    Mr. LaTurner. When did it start? When did the study start?
    Mr. DiPietro. That is 9 or 10 years ago, but I would have 
to get the specific dates for you on that so to be accurate.
    Mr. LaTurner. I look forward to knowing that.
    You talked about the study, design, bid, you know, and then 
I guess build process. You outlined the best practices for that 
and how you can improve the accuracy of estimates.
    Is that being implemented? And, if so, when can we expect 
that change, to see that change?
    Mr. DiPietro. So that is normally implemented on most 
projects. Sometimes projects get pushed a little bit faster. I 
think there is a desire to get things done a little bit quick, 
more quickly. And sometimes we, again, we, not that we skip 
steps in the process, but we lock into what we believe the cost 
will be and what the schedule will be very early in that 
process. And then I think that leads to disappointment later on 
when it appears that the cost has grown, that it has taken 
longer to complete a project.
    Mr. LaTurner. Sure. OK. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. LaTurner.
    Mr. Quigley, you have got 5 minutes.
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Sir, upon the ranking member's question about being ready 
to mount the plaque honoring the police, just for the record, 
who gives you that direction to actually do the mounting?
    Mr. DiPietro. I would have to get specifically which 
committee gives us that, sir. I don't have that information 
here.
    Mr. Quigley. It is not leadership? It is a committee that 
does that?
    Mr. DiPietro. I believe so, but I would have to get back to 
you on that.
    Mr. Quigley. I mean, to your knowledge, was there any 
communication request asking for it, or did they bring the 
direction to you?
    Mr. DiPietro. They coordinate with our Legislative and 
Public Affairs Office on that issue.
    Mr. Quigley. Could you find that out and report back to 
myself and the committee, please?
    Mr. DiPietro. Certainly.
    Mr. Quigley. And we certainly heard a lot about Cannon this 
morning, and I appreciate that.
    But, since my office is in Rayburn, we are curious what the 
plans are for Rayburn in the coming years.
    Mr. DiPietro. So we are looking at doing a renewal of the 
Rayburn Building, as well. And we want to follow that process 
that I outlined before where we start with the study phase. We 
are working to reprogram some funding to support. Looking at a 
swing space study because Rayburn is large.
    And how we phase that work is really going to play into how 
long it takes and how much it costs to be able to do that.
    Mr. Quigley. But the general plan is to do what you did in 
Cannon. That is basically the ground up.
    Mr. DiPietro. Yes. The building is at the age where it 
requires a renewal, correct.
    Mr. Quigley. And, when you talk about a swing, you mean 
that shifting a certain amount of office space someplace else.
    Mr. DiPietro. Exactly, to another location so that the 
Members can continue their work while we are able to renew or 
modernize a portion of that building.
    Mr. Quigley. And what kinds of places would that be for 
Rayburn?
    Mr. DiPietro. So that is one of the things that we are 
going to have the study take a look at, how we would be able to 
accommodate that. Since Rayburn is so much larger than Cannon, 
that is first phase of the project is that study is to look and 
say, how would we go about doing that?
    Mr. Quigley. Thank you.
    Dr. Hayden, it is a pleasure to see you here today. Go 
Roosevelt.
    I want to follow up. In a hearing we had last week, I 
talked to the GPO Director, Mr. Halpern, about the 
implementation of access to congressionally mandated reports, a 
bill I was proud to sponsor. It has bipartisan support.
    Reported that GPO has set up an online portal for 
congressionally mandated reports that now has about 300 of 
those reports for public viewing, transparency, openness in 
government. We create a lot of these reports, and they collect 
dust. The idea is to share them with the American public, what 
we are up to, but they also include a lot of vital information.
    So does the Library of Congress list a reports link to 
reports on the GPO portal yet, and how could the Library and 
GPO collaborate to link the LOC's listing of executive 
communications to the GPO documents?
    Ms. Hayden. And we are very fortunate to have the Acting 
Director of CRS here, Robert Newlen, who has been doing quite a 
bit and who could address this--
    Mr. Newlen. Thank you.
    So many of those CRS reports are currently available--in 
fact, I believe over 10,000 on our CRS.gov website. Right now--
and I am glad you brought this up--we are in the process of 
doing an update of CRS.gov to improve accessibility.
    Someone asked earlier about what we are doing in terms of 
accessibility. We have already completed that phase on our 
website, and we hope to implement it within--later this year, 
probably in the fall.
    Mr. Quigley. OK. Let us know how we can help and move 
forward and let us know how that is proceeding.
    Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. Quigley.
    And, if there are no further questions, I would like to 
thank Dr. Hayden and Mr. DiPietro for being here today.
    Members may submit any additional questions for the record.
    And the subcommittee stands adjourned.

    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

                                          Wednesday, April 17, 2024

                 UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                               WITNESSES

HON. KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, ACTING CLERK, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
HON. WILLIAM P. MCFARLAND, SERGEANT AT ARMS, U.S. HOUSE OF 
    REPRESENTATIVES
HON. CATHERINE L. SZPINDOR, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, U.S. HOUSE OF 
    REPRESENTATIVES
    Mr. Valadao. The subcommittee will come to order.
    The subject of today's hearing is the fiscal year 2025 
request for the House of Representatives.
    I would like to thank Ranking Member Espaillat, committee 
members, Mr. Kevin McCumber, Mr. Bill McFarland, Ms. Catherine 
Szpindor, and all other House officers for being here today.
    I know that all members of this committee share my 
appreciation for the critical work that you do to maintain the 
operations of the House.
    We are experiencing the work your offices do in hearings 
this morning. The Clerk's Office provides a stenographer for a 
transcript, the Sergeant at Arms controls access through the 
Appointments Desk, and the sound equipment and live-streaming 
services come from the CAO.
    You make the House work, and I look forward to hearing your 
testimonies and learning more about your budget priorities for 
fiscal year 2025.
    I now recognize Ranking Member Espaillat for his opening 
remarks.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Good morning, Ms. Szpindor, Mr. McFarland, and Mr. 
McCumber. I am looking forward to hearing from each of you 
regarding the fiscal year 2025 budget request.
    I would also like to take a moment and thank all the 
officers, officials, and their staff for their extraordinary 
work over the past year to uphold the safety and the integrity 
of the legislative process and those who serve within that 
process.
    You all do an exceptional job of serving this body and 
providing a host of services that are necessary for us to 
represent our constituents and address our country's critical 
needs.
    The overall fiscal year 2025 request for the House of 
Representatives is $1.9 billion, which is $81.7 million, or 
4.41 percent, above the fiscal year 2024 enacted level.
    So, thank you all for being here, and I look forward to 
hearing your testimonies.
    Mr. Valadao. The Clerk, Sergeant at Arms, and Chief 
Administrative Officer are joined today by Mr. Matthew Berry, 
the House General Counsel; Mr. Joseph Picolla, the House 
Inspector General; Mr. Ralph Seep, the Law Revision Counsel; 
and Mr. Wade Ballou, the Legislative Counsel.
    All testimonies have been submitted for the record, and 
members are welcome to ask questions to any of the House 
officers here today in addition to our three main witnesses.
    Mr. McCumber, your full testimony has been submitted for 
the record, and you are now recognized to provide a summary of 
your written testimony.

   Statement of Hon. Kevin F. McCumber, Acting Clerk, U.S. House of 
                            Representatives

    Mr. McCumber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member Espaillat, and members of 
the subcommittee, thank you for your ongoing support for the 
Office of the Clerk and our more than 215 staff, whose 2,500-
plus years of service to this institution are a testament to 
their dedication and true commitment to public service.
    I am extremely proud to testify on their behalf about our 
operations and fiscal year 2025 budget request.
    I would like to take a moment to acknowledge and thank my 
colleagues beside me, Catherine and Bill. Their support and 
collaboration in managing the House's daily operations and 
advancing our modernization efforts is absolutely critical for 
our continued success.
    To put the bottom line up front, we are requesting 
$44,984,000 for fiscal year 2025. This is an 8.5 percent 
increase compared to our fiscal year 2024 enacted level.
    There are two reasons for this increase. First, it supports 
our most valued asset, our staff. Second, the most significant 
increase is the line item for modernization projects, some of 
which received initial funding from the House's Modernization 
Initiatives Account. Our request enables us to continue these 
projects uninterrupted and meet required deadlines.
    Excluding these modernization projects, however, our budget 
request is 2.8 percent below our fiscal year 2024 enacted 
level. This reduction is the result of our significant efforts 
to find and increase efficiencies, including reevaluating 
yearly services and contracts and locking in long-term pricing 
on scheduled projects, all without sacrificing mission-
readiness.
    A great example of these cost-saving efforts is our work on 
the Lobbying Disclosure Modernization Project. Working with our 
colleagues in the Secretary of the Senate's Office, we 
determined that our modernized lobbying disclosure system, 
including unique lobbyist ID capabilities, will be built on top 
of the Senate's recently revamped portion of the system. By not 
having to start from scratch, our agreement with the Senate 
means we will only use a fraction of the $1.4 million 
appropriated for this project.
    This request also supports additional modernization 
projects, including improvements to the eHopper and Comparative 
Print Suite and our ongoing redevelopment of the Legislative 
Information Management System.
    The request also reflects our continued work on projects 
that received initial funding from the Modernization Account. 
This includes developing infrastructure for a committee portal, 
which will serve as a next-gen platform to manage committee 
work.
    The first tool in the portal will be the Committee Vote 
Database Module--a recommendation from the former Select 
Committee on the Modernization of Congress--that will allow for 
the management of committee votes as data. Long term, the 
portal will include several modules to streamline committee 
work and reflects our commitment to the strategic development 
of our products.
    By including these projects as a part our budget, we can 
continue them uninterrupted and stay on track to meet required 
deadlines.
    As I mentioned at the outset, staff are our most valued 
asset. While I have discussed some of the future-looking 
projects that we have created, I would be remiss not to mention 
the Clerk staff who spend significant time and effort finding, 
cataloguing, and preserving the House's history.
    To that end, I brought several items of historical 
significance with me today to highlight that work.
    The first is a franked envelope signed by then-
Representative Abraham Lincoln in 1848. This envelope is one of 
fewer than five in existence. We know he wrote and mailed this 
from Statuary Hall. The envelope is postmarked from the House 
Post Office, which is now, fittingly, the Lincoln Room.
    The second is a letter from 1800 describing the brand-new 
Capitol just 5 days after the House moved its proceedings to 
Washington, DC There wasn't yet a House Chamber or even wing of 
the Capitol. The House was meeting in what is now the Senate 
Republican Leader's Office. Written by Representative Lewis 
Morris of Vermont, the letter describes life in a boardinghouse 
owned by George and Martha Washington.
    In addition to these two artifacts, I have also brought 
examples of our archival work--in this case, copies of your 
first certificates of election, which we have for you that we 
will distribute after the hearing.
    Our archivists work with the National Archives to ensure 
the House's records are properly stored so that, like the 
Lincoln envelope and the Morris letter, they remain in good 
condition and can inform the public about the House's history 
for decades to come.
    I want to take a moment to thank the Clerk team, whose work 
day-in and day-out exemplifies our mission to provide the 
procedural support necessary for the orderly conduct of the 
House's official business.
    Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member Espaillat, and 
subcommittee members, the Office of the Clerk is committed to 
ensuring faithful stewardship of taxpayer dollars as we 
continue our service to this great institution.
    Thank you again for your continued support and for the 
opportunity to testify. I welcome your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. McCumber follows: follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. McCumber.
    And I now recognize Mr. McFarland for a summary of your 
written testimony.

Statement of Hon. William P. McFarland, Sergeant at Arms, U.S. House of 
                            Representatives

    Mr. McFarland. Good morning, Chairman Valadao, Ranking 
Member Espaillat, and members of the committee.
    I appreciate the invitation to appear before you today in 
support of the fiscal year 2025 budget request for the Office 
of the Sergeant at Arms, which totals $34,141,000 and 206 full-
time equivalents, a decrease of $4.6 million, or 11.99 percent, 
and an increase of 11 FTEs from the fiscal year 2024 enacted 
level.
    It is an honor and privilege to serve this institution and 
to collaborate with the committee to provide the necessary 
resources to serve the congressional community and to help keep 
Members, staff, visitors, and facilities safe and open to the 
public.
    This budget request expands upon the priorities and 
initiatives that I testified on last year and that the Sergeant 
at Arms has successfully launched and continues to implement 
today. These priorities and initiatives focus on: one, 
investing in the Sergeant at Arms employees; two, modernizing 
the Sergeant at Arms; and, three, continuing and building 
security and safety programs.
    In my testimony last year, I emphasized the importance of 
the Sergeant at Arms workforce and detailed how they are the 
organization's most valuable resource. As part of the Sergeant 
at Arms Strategic Plan established last year, the Sergeant at 
Arms launched a people initiative to focus on and to invest in 
its workforce.
    To date, investments in the Sergeant at Arms workforce 
include: the creation of a staff council--a forum to provide 
the workforce with a voice to express interest or concerns to 
upper management, improve transparency within the organization, 
and increase employee engagement; providing a detailed series 
of leadership workshops and online curricula to all Sergeant at 
Arms employees; and providing customer-service training from 
top-ranked hospitality trainers.
    We have also implemented organization-wide cross-training 
opportunities for interested Sergeant at Arms staff to expand 
their knowledge base and increase the level of service we 
provide to the congressional community.
    In partnership with a global human capital consulting 
company, the Sergeant at Arms continues to promote transparency 
amongst the workforce through two strategic initiatives: number 
one, a revised performance management program; and, two, 
developing transparent career paths.
    In January, the Sergeant at Arms released two performance 
management guides containing best practices to support 
meaningful interactions around employee performance and career 
development. This initiative is intended to support staff 
career growth and development within not only an employee's 
respective division but the organization at large. The idea is 
to develop and keep great talent within the organization and 
encourage longevity within our team.
    Last year, I spoke with the committee about our efforts to 
launch a new platform to support security requests from Member 
offices. I am happy to report that, in 2023, the Sergeant at 
Arms awarded a purchase order to develop a Secure Member 
Portal, which has since launched.
    I am also happy to report that the vast majority of Member 
offices have enrolled in this new application. We have 
identified future capabilities and are actively looking to 
incorporate them.
    This platform, which is accessible via computer or mobile 
device, includes custom process flows, notifications, and 
dashboards and uses a low-code platform to request and track 
the status of the various requests our office coordinates, to 
include travel security, district office security, threat 
reports, residential security, security trainings, law 
enforcement coordinators, law enforcement event support, and 
mail hoods.
    Also included in the budget request is funding for the 
Sergeant at Arms Police Services Division to provide in-person 
security awareness briefings in Members' districts. In 
conjunction with the U.S. Capitol Police, security awareness 
briefings provide a security overview for Members and staff on 
how to respond to typical security issues that an office 
encounters, and it includes best practices for district office 
security, residential security, and for hosting and attending 
events in their districts.
    In 2023, the Sergeant at Arms employees visited 
approximately 250 Member district offices to provide security 
awareness briefings and related outreach.
    Recently, we have seen demonstrations and other security 
incidents targeting Members' homes. In order to provide 
guidance and best practices to Members' families, the Sergeant 
at Arms created and distributed a Spouse and Family Safety and 
Security Guide. The spouse book is a Sergeant at Arms 
publication produced to address safety and security concerns of 
spouses and families of Members, who are often overlooked.
    The guide covers general security practices, protecting 
personal identifiable information, travel security, and 
emergency preparedness. It also provides emergency contact 
information and a fill-in template for family emergency 
contacts.
    Furthermore, my Police Services Division has met 
individually with Member offices and committees regarding 
swatting and how Sergeant at Arms programs and law enforcement 
coordination can assist with mitigating the risk. The Sergeant 
at Arms has successfully assisted Members with having their 
personal addresses identified with local law enforcement to 
ensure communication and de-escalation.
    Additionally, in partnership with Ms. Catherine Szpindor, 
the CAO, and her team, the Sergeant at Arms created a 
cybersecurity program to provide data and privacy protection 
and to assist with removing sensitive PII from the internet, 
making Member addresses more difficult to locate on the 
internet.
    I want to thank this committee, as well as House 
leadership, for your support on the Sergeant at Arms' efforts 
to reinvigorate long-stalled security upgrade projects. As I 
spoke about last year, my team is committed to these vital 
projects around the campus.
    I have worked closely with your committee, the Acting 
Architect's team, and my counterparts in the Capitol Police and 
Senate, and we have made some progress, but we have a lot more 
work to do in this institution. I look forward to continuing to 
work with the new project managers from the Architect of the 
Capitol to see these projects to completion.
    In closing, the upcoming year will not only include 
building upon the initiatives my team has been working on in 
the past 12 months, but it will also demand rigorous planning 
and coordination for high-profile events with significant 
security and protocol requirements, including the nominating 
conventions, elections, election certification, and the 
inauguration.
    Additionally, the House will continue to play host to 
pivotal events such as the joint meeting held just last week. 
As the chief protocol officer, we will continue to expand upon 
our protocol services to ensure the highest degree of 
professionalism is extended to all dignitaries during a 
congressional event and in coordination for their visits with 
the Members of the House of Representatives.
    As chairman of the Capitol Police Board during this 
critical period, my foremost priority is ensuring the safety 
and security of these gatherings.
    My office is fully committed to continue developing top-
tier, nonpartisan security services for our esteemed Members, 
their families, and staff. We recognize the immense 
responsibility entrusted to us and are dedicated to upholding 
the highest standards of professionalism and efficiency.
    Thank you once again for the opportunity to appear before 
the committee. I am deeply appreciative for the committee's 
support and partnership as we strive to maintain the 
challenging harmony between strong security measures and free 
and open access to the Capitol complex.
    I look forward to working with this committee and my fellow 
House officers here today. I welcome any questions you may 
have, and I am happy to provide further insight into our 
strategies and preparations.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. McFarland follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. McFarland.
    And I now recognize Ms. Szpindor for a summary of your 
written testimony.

Statement of Hon. Catherine L. Szpindor, Chief Administrative Officer, 
                     U.S. House of Representatives

    Ms. Szpindor. Thank you.
    Good morning, Chairman Valadao. Ranking Member Espaillat 
and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity 
to discuss the CAO's fiscal year 2025 budget.
    As dictated by the current financial environment, the CAO's 
fiscal year 2025 budget request is principally equal to its 
fiscal year 2023 and fiscal year 2024 levels. The fiscal year 
2025 request totals $213.1 million, which is $1.5 million over 
the fiscal year 2023 enacted budget and flat with the fiscal 
year 2024 enacted budget.
    The $1.5 million increase is to cover the transfer of the 
House's Office of Diversity and Inclusion to the CAO.
    The CAO's initial fiscal year 2025 budget formulation 
included a $14.7 million increase to cover the growing cost of 
existing programs as well as the cost of new projects. To 
maintain costs consistent with the fiscal year 2024 budget, we 
prioritized and reallocated funds to cover high-priority, 
critical services and reduced funding for noncritical services.
    Additionally, we are very grateful to receive funding from 
the House Modernization Initiatives Account to support some of 
our initiatives.
    In fiscal year 2024, we achieved some major operational and 
technological wins. A few of these successes are:
    Developed an approach to securely integrate GenAI 
technology. This has entailed conducting cyber and legal 
reviews of existing policies and establishing a House-wide AI 
advisory group of 150 Member, committee, and leadership 
offices.
    We established the House Intern Resource Office, providing 
interns and intern coordinators with tools and resources to 
help them navigate the House and maximize their experiences.
    Completed a 2-year renovation of the House recording and 
television studios to provide a modern, state-of-the-art studio 
for Members.
    Also, the team supported 29 field hearings in 17 States and 
1 U.S. territory, saving committees an average of $3,500 to 
$5,000 per hearing.
    Deployed an electronic form application called eForms to 
enable House officials to electronically prepare, approve, and 
submit payroll authorizations.
    Rolled out the My Expenses automated reimbursement 
application to 345 Member, committee, and leadership offices, 
with 87 percent of the offices indicating the reimbursement 
process was easier.
    Created a new Deconflict calendar tool to help Committees 
schedule hearings and markups with fewer Member conflicts.
    Enrolled 11 committees in a new automated eDiscovery 
program to assist with oversight and investigations.
    Installed CAO-funded WiFi solutions in over 95 percent of 
the Members' designated district offices.
    Improved the Technology Partner+ Program to provide sole-
support, in-person, and remote technical services to 115 House 
offices at no cost to the offices.
    Expanded popular in-person staff conferences tailored for 
specific DC and district office staff positions.
    Enhanced the central HR Hub repository to provide more 
comprehensive support for Member and committee staff.
    Established and staffed the new HR Talent and Development 
Office to continue many of the same recruitment and outreach 
programs as previously performed by the Office of Diversity and 
Inclusion.
    These new services and their associated costs are not one-
time expenses. They become sustained programs with a recurring 
cost, which will require additional CAO budget dollars to 
prevent reducing current services.
    The CAO remains committed to being an essential resource 
for Members and staff, providing needed critical services to 
House operations.
    Our greatest resource is our talented and dedicated staff, 
who work every day to provide our many services and are 
constantly improving them. We work together as one CAO--Member-
focused, service-driven.
    Thank you, and I will be happy to answer any questions you 
may have.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Szpindor follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Ms. Szpindor.
    Thank you to our witnesses for testifying before this 
committee today. As the new subcommittee chairman, I look 
forward to learning more about each of your agencies in greater 
detail.
    For questions, I will call on Members based on seniority of 
those present when the hearing was called to order, alternating 
between majority and minority, and then will call on Members in 
order of their arrival. Each will have 5 minutes.
    I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Szpindor, recent AI advancements are going to be very 
impactful on legislative-branch operations. Where is the CAO in 
its efforts to integrate new AI technology into House 
operations?
    Ms. Szpindor. Thank you for that question.
    The CAO has a pulse on AI and is working through 
establishing a sound foundation that will mature over time as 
the technology itself matures. We are just at the beginning of, 
I think, a long journey with AI.
    We are developing an AI policy, exploring tools, and 
capturing use cases that align with the House mission. Specific 
CAO AI progress to date includes:
    Conducting cyber and legal reviews of existing AI 
technologies. One platform which was approved back in June of 
2023 by CHA for limited research and evaluation purposes. CAO 
review includes reported AI capabilities within existing House 
approved cloud technologies.
    Evaluating AI tools being integrated into enterprise 
applications used by the House, such as Microsoft, AWS, and 
Oracle Cloud applications. This will require several months of 
testing before any roll-out of these.
    Conducted a NIST-based AI governance assessment that 
includes policies and guardrails that are needed. These are in 
progress.
    We drafted an AI-specific policy that dictates security 
vetting protocols and usage restrictions that is in progress. 
We are reviewing that policy now.
    We established a House-wide AI advisory group that has 
included, as I mentioned earlier, 150 Member, committee and 
leadership offices, as well as institutional offices like the 
CAO and the Clerk.
    Identifying upskilling opportunities that can be standalone 
or embedded in current position-specific training. Training is 
going to be absolutely necessary and is going to be required 
for my staff, particularly my technology staff.
    We are establishing an AI Center of Excellence within the 
CAO to ensure that we are able to do the upskilling that is 
necessary for our staff.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you.
    This question is for Mr. McCumber and then all officers.
    What actions have you taken and what plans do you have to 
both recruit and retain highly skilled staff?
    Mr. McCumber. Thank you for the question. I will start with 
the recruiting side of things. As you know, I certainly agree 
with you that recruiting and retaining staff are vital to our 
continued success in supporting the House's operations.
    We have a nationwide networking strategy that we have 
started to develop with the State legislatures. When they come 
to visit DC, we meet with them. When we attend a conference to 
talk about what we are doing, we pass out cards, we talk about 
all of our great work, and find ways that we can work together 
and see if there is any interest on their side to come work for 
us when we have openings.
    The Official Reporters have a very close network of 
colleagues, both around here in DC, and they compete in 
competitions around the world. They are always using those 
opportunities to recruit the best and the brightest, because we 
have the best and the brightest official reporters here 
supporting you.
    One of the things, too, for the retainment, we have 
really--or, for recruiting--we are mission-driven, and so that 
allows us to--I get overly excited sometimes talking about our 
mission and the work that we do in the Clerk's Office--find 
people that want to come be a part of that.
    We have IT staff, which I know Catherine can speak to about 
recruiting. We can't pay what they can make in the private 
sector, but when they see the work that we are doing and the 
work that we have ahead, they come join us. They want to come 
be a part of what we are doing.
    And for the retaining, we certainly meet with the staff, 
talk about their goals, professional development, cross-
training, internally as well as providing professional growth 
opportunities outside.
    We host events for staff. We had a fall gathering hosted by 
two of our offices last October. We have a Nats game scheduled 
in June. And we have a monthly ``Clerk Chronicle'' where we 
keep everybody apprised of what is going on in the 
organization.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Well, thank you.
    Out of respect for everyone's time, I am going to go ahead 
and yield to the ranking member, Mr. Espaillat, for his 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for extending the 
courtesy.
    First, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Ms. Wexton for 
pushing, really, the envelope on the issue of cybersecurity. 
Cybersecurity continues to be an important priority of mine. 
Obviously, it is so critical.
    Mr. McFarland and Ms. Szpindor, I appreciate that both of 
you have worked to provide Members with cybersecurity support 
at home. How is this program coming along? How are we doing?
    Ms. Szpindor. I will let Bill begin.
    Mr. McFarland. Thanks, Catherine. Appreciate that.
    Mr. Espaillat, I can say that, since we instituted this 
program later in last year, we have taken an approach of 
basically making sure that everybody knows about the program, 
first. So we have actually sent out information to all law 
enforcement coordinators about the program.
    After we have done that--we have had instances where 
Members were swatted, and when they were swatted, we actually 
had calls with not only chiefs of staff but we also had them 
with congressional spouses, and we let them know about the 
program.
    I can say it has been a slow roll, but it is actually 
picking up steam. So we are very appreciative of the committee 
for providing the funding for it, but we expect to see higher 
numbers probably later this year.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    And, Ms. Szpindor, how has the recent integration of the 
former employees of the Office of Diversity and Inclusion into 
the CAO organization impacted the scope of duties and 
responsibilities within the Office of Talent and Development?
    And would it be beneficial for the Office of Diversity and 
Inclusion to remain independent from the Office of Talent and 
Development, given their distinct roles and responsibilities, 
to ensure focused attention on diversity initiatives?
    Ms. Szpindor. Thank you for that question.
    We are extremely excited to have the ODI team join the 
newly created Office of Talent and Development in our 
organization.
    This office will inject the resources needed to transform 
the House HR Hub into a more robust resource, one that includes 
valuable diversity and inclusion resources like diversity-
focused recruitment and outreach events, resume review 
services, and research and analysis on workforce trends.
    The office will have direct access to and responsibility 
for maintaining and promoting all of the resources on the HR 
Hub, which is being improved daily to include new tools and 
resources.
    Over the coming weeks, we will be seeking opportunities to 
provide similar presentations on topics like career development 
and performance management to offices and staff associations.
    Starting next month, we will provide monthly updates to the 
Committee on House Administration on the operations, 
activities, and progress of the new structure.
    We brought them over, as you know, at the end of March, and 
they immediately went to work. They are working on upcoming 
recruiting activities and resume development services that can 
help us bring in individuals into the House.
    So, we are very excited about the opportunity to work with 
these individuals--some extremely capable individuals. They all 
interviewed for the position that they are currently in. We 
hope to make them feel at home in the CAO, because as a larger 
human resources group, this is really a chance for them to be 
part of the professionals within the human-resources area.
    I can keep you updated, as I said, on a monthly basis. We 
going to do everything possible to make this work, not only for 
us, but for them.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. Espaillat.
    Mr. Clyde, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Clyde. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    First, I want to thank all of the witnesses for being here 
today, and I want to thank you for the excellent job that you 
have been doing in supporting the House.
    Mr. McFarland, your role as Sergeant at Arms is critical in 
the everyday operations of the House. You help keep Members 
safe and the staff safe and our constituents safe, and I am 
extremely grateful for the work that you do. And, as a result, 
I have never seen an issue of Member safety in the Capitol 
complex whatsoever in the 3 years I have been here that I can 
remember.
    However, outside the Capitol complex, it is a completely 
different story. Crime in our Nation's capital is out of 
control. Between 2022 and 2023, there was a 35 percent increase 
in homicide, 82-percent increase in motor vehicle theft. There 
are startling increases in crime as a result of the policies 
created and enacted by the out-of-control DC City Council and 
the DC Mayor. And I am sorry to report that, actually.
    So, in your role, have you seen outside the Capitol complex 
an increase in violence against Members of Congress and 
congressional staff from 2022 until now?
    Mr. McFarland. From what I know, yes, I have seen an 
increase.
    And if I could just add on to that something that we have 
done recently. I think it was last week or the week before, I 
met with DC Chief Pamela Smith about maybe coming up and doing 
a safety program, with WMATA as well and our Capitol Police, to 
actually have a safety forum so that we can talk to Members, 
which--we are hoping that it will be done sometime in May so 
that we can get this important message out to--``Hey, we have 
to provide better safety and security.''
    We have also looked at Capitol Police about providing more 
additional resources to where Members reside at night. So we 
want to make sure that the safety and security of the Members, 
not only here on the Hill, but off the Hill, are taken into 
account.
    Mr. Clyde. All right. Well, thank you.
    You mentioned in your testimony about security training and 
that, you know, it encompasses a lot of things--our district 
offices as well.
    You know, oftentimes, when you see violence against a 
person, there are not other folks, there is not police there, 
there is not--you know, you are not there. It is basically them 
by themselves. And that is very concerning.
    I will tell you, there is an adage that says, you know, an 
armed society is a polite society, or the best way to deal with 
a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
    And so would you consider, in your security training, 
offering classes to Members on knowing how or when to use a 
firearm? Is that a possibility that you would consider?
    Mr. McFarland. Congressman, ultimately, it is up to the 
lawmakers to determine the best laws to govern themselves.
    Mr. Clyde. Right.
    Mr. McFarland. As the chief law enforcement officer, I have 
to be mindful of that I am not a lawmaker.
    Mr. Clyde. Right.
    Mr. McFarland. So I would leave it up to the Members, that 
if that was something that they wanted to do, we would try to 
come up with the best best situation for----
    Mr. Clyde. All right. That sounds fair. And I thank you for 
that.
    Ms. Szpindor, you mentioned that the increase of $1.5 
million was to move the office of DEI within the CAO. Is that 
correct?
    Ms. Szpindor. Correct.
    Mr. Clyde. How does it cost a million-and-a-half dollars to 
move an office?
    Ms. Szpindor.It is not the moving of the office; it is the 
personnel cost and cost associated with training, travel and 
things that they might be doing.
    I think that the original budget of the ODI was about 3.5
    Mr. Clyde. 3.5.
    Ms. Szpindor. Yes, 3.5
    Mr. Clyde. Yes, 3.5.
    Ms. Szpindor. So that really just covers our personnel 
cost.
    Mr. Clyde. OK. So it is actually a savings of $2 million?
    Ms. Szpindor. To someone. Not to me.
    Mr. Clyde. Well, to the taxpayer, that sounds great. I like 
that. Well, I appreciate that very much then. Well, thank you 
for saving $2 million.
    All right. And my last question is going to be for you, Mr. 
McCumber.
    Let's see, I think on page 86 and--page 85 and 86, it talks 
about the Clerk of the House mandated projects. It talks about 
the amount that you actually have.
    And on page 91, it talks about the $1.9 million in 
additional funding. And it says that you are reducing business 
continuity and disaster recovery by $905,000; $79,000 down on 
the Electronic Voting System; $107,000 for the Legislative 
Information Management System.
    And then $3.04 million for House modernization initiatives, 
but I don't really see a breakdown of that. Could you provide a 
breakdown of that, please?
    Mr. McCumber. Yes, sir.
    I don't have--I would be happy to provide that to you.
    Mr. Clyde. OK. Great. All right, if you will just provide 
that to us, I would like to see where all that money is going.
     And I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you.
    Ms. Wexton, you are recognized for your 5 minutes.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Chairman Valadao. And 
congratulations on your new chairmanship. You have big shoes to 
fill, with Chairman Amodei's departure, but we are confident 
that you can handle it.
    This is a great subcommittee. We may be small, but we are 
mighty.
    Mr. McFarland, I have no questions for you, but I want to 
take a moment to express how impressed I am--and, I hope, 
everyone on the subcommittee is--that every year since you 
returned to the House of Representatives you have reduced the 
Sergeant at Arms' budget. It is always nice to have a Federal 
Government budget unicorn in our midst.
    But don't worry, because I am sure that there are plenty of 
other legislative-branch agencies that will be happy to help 
spend whatever you no longer need.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Szpindor, thank you for being here. It is nice to see 
you again, and not just because you sign everyone's paychecks.
    As we discussed in previous years, the CAO offers many 
services which are vital to Members of Congress and their 
staff, including to me and my team.
    For instance, the CAO Coach program provides valuable 
support and expertise, including, as I understand it, very 
popular conferences that are tailored to share position-
specific information and resources.
    As you noted in your testimony, operating with flat funding 
levels has been impactful for the CAO. Can you elaborate on the 
long-term impacts of decreased funding levels on these programs 
and your ability to serve the House?
    Ms. Szpindor. Thank you. It is good to see you again.
    Well, I would not be telling the truth if I said it is not 
going to have any impact, OK? The decreases that we have taken 
mean, staying flat, essentially, with the fiscal year 2023 
budget.
    I come from a long history of project management. One of 
the things that we have done is developed a very rigorous 
evaluation, prioritization, and selection process for all 
projects that are brought before us. We spend quite a bit of 
time reviewing and making sure that we are prioritizing 
projects are critical to the House as the top-priority things 
to invest in. Other things we do when we have funds to do them 
and improve as we are able to do improvements.
    With all of the opportunities we have had to deliver new 
projects, though, I would not be telling the truth if I said we 
are not going to need more money in the future, because we are. 
All of our projects come with a recurring cost.
    Usually we have to go in, as you know, in any technology 
project, particularly, and upgrade hardware/software on a 
recurring basis. New licenses, which is the predominant method 
by which software is provided anymore, always increase in cost 
every time there is an opportunity to get an updated product.
    So, next year, the 2026 budget, we will be requesting an 
increase. How much? Right now, I don't know. But our budget 
office Director, Sarah Jackson, who is sitting right behind me 
here, is responsible for the entire House budget formulation 
and submission to the President's budget. She begins at--what 
time today?
    Ms. Jackson. 11 o'clock.
    Ms. Szpindor. 11 o'clock today working on the fiscal year 
2026 budget.
    Ms. Jackson. In an hour.
    Ms. Szpindor. Did that answer your question?
    Ms. Wexton. Yes. Thank you.
    Ms. Szpindor. Thank you.
    Ms. Wexton. Mr. McCumber, as you noted in your testimony, 
your request includes further work on a number of modernization 
initiatives, including the House Comparative Suite, eHopper, 
and LIMS.
    Can you explain how these projects help the House to 
operate more effectively and what the impact would be on these 
services if your funding is left at current levels or reduced?
    Mr. McCumber. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for that question.
    Piggybacking off what Ms. Szpindor said about the budget 
reduction or if projects aren't fully funded, it will certainly 
have an impact on the additional work that we are able do.
    We were able to secure funding, thanks to Mrs. Bice and 
this subcommittee, for several of our projects using the 
Modernization Initiatives Account, one of those being the 
Collaborative Drafting Tool.
    That may not be the shiniest and greatest piece of software 
out there for the greater good, but it will have an impact. 
XMetaL is the software tool. It is twenty-five years old. It is 
very clunky. It doesn't work great. And it is time to upgrade. 
And I would certainly defer to Wade, too, to chime in on that 
as well.
    And so Mrs. Bice and this Subcommittee gave us some 
starting money to be able to do a study on looking at the House 
legislative ecosystem fully, seeing what works best, not only 
for the staff in Wade's office, but also on your staff, the 
ability to collaborate.
    One of the first steps we took in February, with Wade's 
team, is--and with, certainly, the support of CHA--is locking 
down the PDF that is generated by XMetaL to further editing by 
staff so that the file generated on the PDF matches what is 
sent down to GPO and so there is no discrepancy in any of that 
work.
    The funding that we are requesting will be used for the 
next steps in these projects and will certainly continue us on 
the path of modernizing these services so that you have the 
tools when you need them to be able to do your work and we can 
make sure that everything is completed down the line through 
GPO, on to Congress.gov, et cetera.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you.
    I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Ms. Wexton.
    Mr. Franklin, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you all for being here. I appreciate learning more 
and more about all the functions you all cover every time we go 
through this.
    And I tell people and I try to explain what Leg. Branch is, 
it is like the Swiss Army knife of Congress. And you all do a 
lot with relatively little compared to a lot of your peers out 
there, and I appreciate that, and particularly with the efforts 
you are making to try to control budget things, the top lines.
    On that, Ms. Szpindor, it is remarkable to me, looking back 
over the last 5 years, you have held personnel flat, your 
budgets have been relatively, you know----
    Ms. Szpindor. Reasonable.
    Mr. Franklin. Well, very reasonable.
    And, you know, when we talk about, you know, human capital 
is our most important asset, it is also our most expensive 
asset.
    How is your retention and turnover? You haven't really 
changed head count, but is there a lot of turn in there? And is 
there a time coming when--are there salary increases buried in 
here and you are able to maintain flat but you are gaining 
efficiencies elsewhere?
    Ms. Szpindor. We have, of course, made salary increases, 
and we have a very good performance management program and 
evaluation program to determine when somebody warrants a salary 
increase, and we do promotions.
    We do have some turnover. I don't know the exact 
percentage, but it is not high. We have had a number of people 
retire recently, because some of our technicians, particularly 
in cybersecurity and operations have been here 35 years, which 
is a credit to them because they really love the House. For 
them, it is a way of showing that they are helping the American 
people, OK?
    So, it really is touching, how the employees are dedicated 
to doing their very best here.
    Mr. Franklin. I appreciate that.
    I appreciate also the efforts you are doing on AI. And I 
would love to learn more about that, being on the AI committee 
now.
    Mr. McCumber, I also appreciate the efforts through the--
particularly through the modernization recommendations.
    Just as a plug for the electronic voting, I love that. It 
was transformational in Armed Services, and we have it now in 
Science, and I would really love to see that in every 
committee. Back to the thought of, you know, time is the most 
expensive thing we have around here, literally, when you put a 
price tag on it, and I don't know why we don't roll that out to 
every committee, but----
    Mrs. Bice. We have. I will tell you about it later.
    Mr. Franklin. Is it?
    Mr. Franklin. OK. Excellent.
    So, also, as far as the House-wide AI advisory committee, I 
would love to get our office added onto that as well. But I 
appreciate what you are doing there.
    Mr. McFarland, I guess, a question--well, first of all, $2 
million last year for the offsite ops center. What is the 
status of that?
    Mr. McFarland. So we have actually put a hold on the 
operations center. We did not feel that it was a critical need 
that we needed to do right now. I think we have places that 
Members and leadership can go in case of an emergency 
situation.
    So we were thinking about building an offsite center that 
will--something new, but we decided that this is not a good 
time right now to proceed with that.
    Mr. Franklin. OK.
    I had a question, one I forgot there, Mr. McCumber. Just an 
urban legend that I would like you to set straight for me: What 
happens to unspent MRA funds? Where do those go back to?
    Mr. McCumber. Ms. Szpindor?
    Ms. Szpindor. Sarah, do you want to talk to that?
    Ms. Jackson. Yes.
    Unspent MRA appropriations are returned to Treasury.
    Mr. Franklin. They are?
    Ms. Jackson. Yes.
    Mr. Franklin. There is a widespread myth out there that 
that doesn't happen, so we will have to set that straight. I 
appreciate that.
    Mrs. Bice. It doesn't go in your pocket?
    Mr. Franklin. No. Actually, what I hear most often is it 
goes to the Speaker's office and that somehow the Speaker uses 
it.
    OK.
    Ms. Szpindor. No.
    Mr. Franklin. Finally, and we don't have much time, so this 
will be more, Mr. McFarland, for a follow-up.
    But I get a little confused on the functions outside of DC, 
or even DC to some extent, between your office and the Capitol 
Police and where there may be overlap. I would love to unpack 
that sometime with you.
    Just, it seems like--I know everybody is doing zero-based 
budgeting, but it seems like there are some areas where at 
least I as a Member would be confused, do I go to the Sergeant 
at Arms for that or Cap Police? Are there overlaps?
    And, at the end of the day, when it hits the fan, who is 
ultimately responsible? I mean, where do we turn to? Is it your 
office or the Capitol Police? And particularly back in the 
districts.
    Mr. McFarland. Sure.
    Mr. Franklin. Because I know there has been arguments for 
plussing up Capitol Police to have remote offices and all these 
things, and yet we reach out to your office when we are talking 
about direct Member security, so----
    Mr. McFarland. Correct. I don't think we can do it in 8 
seconds, but I would----
    Mr. Franklin. No, we can't, so that's just a marker.
    Mr. McFarland [continuing]. definitely like to set up that 
time with you to discuss that.
    Mr. Franklin. OK. I appreciate that.
    Mr. Franklin. And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mr. Franklin.
    Mrs. Bice, 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the time.
    And, first, let me start by saying thank you to Sergeant at 
Arms McFarland. You have been incredible in this role, and it 
is very evident by the engagement with your staff and the, I 
think, morale that has changed within the Sergeant at Arms 
Office. So kudos to you for that.
    I do want to piggyback off of Mr. Clyde's comments. It has 
been noted in the press that there are a lot of Members that 
live in the Navy Yard. And we continue to see huge crime 
numbers. As a matter of fact, you probably saw last night that 
a CVS on the corner of a very busy intersection a couple of 
blocks from Nats Park was ransacked and raided by a bunch of 
young people.
    This has to stop. And so I ask for MPD and certainly your 
office's help in trying to find a way to address this, because 
it is only getting, I think, more dire. And we cannot have our 
Nation's capital in, sort of, a Gotham scenario, and that is 
what it seems to be headed towards right now.
    So I appreciate your help in that. I know it is not your 
purview, necessarily, but certainly want to bring that point 
up.
    Ms. Szpindor, I want to first say thank you for your 
partnership in working with the Modernization Subcommittee--
which, I think it was mentioned, I happen to be the chairwoman 
of that--as well as Leg. Branch Approps and the AOC for helping 
get the ADA pick-up and drop-off project off the ground.
    That has been something I feel like has been pushed to the 
side for a very long time. And it is not a difficult or 
expensive project, but we have to make sure that we are 
focusing on individuals with disabilities that need access to 
the Capitol, coming for visits or coming to visit with Members, 
giving them an easy way to make that happen. So thank you for 
that cooperation.
    Let me start by asking: Your staff has discussed how the 
House is nearing 100-percent compliance with section 508 to 
ensure that all congressional websites are accessible to the 
public. Can you talk a little bit about how much money that 
will cost and, you know, where we are with that?
    Ms. Szpindor. Yes.
    Actually, we have been working on that now for about 4 or 5 
years, and it has been a long process and much more complicated 
than what we thought it was going to be when we first started.
    We have spent a lot of time working with different entities 
that are very up-to-date on how to implement the 508 
accessibility requirements.
    As of the end of April, we will have completed all of the 
websites that we have responsibility to make 508 accessible. I 
think there are 400-and-some websites that will be compliant. 
There are still a number of vendor websites that they are still 
working on.
    Mrs. Bice. OK.
    Ms. Szpindor. However, that has been a very expensive 
project over the years. We anticipate, to maintain it--and it 
would be a shame, after working so hard to get them accessible, 
if we did not continue ensuring that they were maintained--it 
is going to be anywhere between $500,000 to $1 million a year. 
A lot of that is ensuring that we have the right additional 
contractors in place that can help us to make sure they are 
compliant.
    I am ecstatic that we finally have gotten to more of a 
finish point with this. My staff has worked very hard on that.
    Mrs. Bice. Great.
    Ms. Szpindor. Very hard.
    Mrs. Bice. I just want to maybe wrap up by saying that I 
have appreciated working with the Clerk's Office and with CAO 
on modernization initiatives to try to make Congress function 
better--things like the deconfliction tool for scheduling, 
which evidently some of the committees haven't been using, 
because I had three at the same time yesterday. But that is a 
different story.
    The eDiscovery tool, which allows us to upload documents 
and make them searchable, that is really important for 
committees like the Judiciary Committee.
    The flag tracker, which we are now rolling out the second 
iteration of that so that Member offices can track flag 
requests easier.
    Anonymized casework data; the Electronic Voting System, as 
was mentioned; the eHopper; collaborative legislative drafting 
tools--these are all things that make our offices function and 
work better.
    So I want to say thank you for your cooperation in making 
this happen, and also thank you to the chairman and this 
committee for funding the Modernization Initiatives Account to 
make sure we have resources available to make these things 
work.
    So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back 10 seconds.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Mrs. Bice, for being so efficient.
    Mr. LaTurner, 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    What I would really like is for each of you to give me a 
name or two of the most obnoxious Members of Congress you have 
to deal with.
    I don't--did we--were they sworn in or not? I don't know.
    I am just kidding. I am just kidding.
    Ms. Szpindor, how is CAO exploring opportunities for cost 
savings and improvement in efficiency by integrating technology 
into its operations? Is it the electronic payroll 
authorizations, digital scheduling tools, and things like that?
    Ms. Szpindor. We are looking at those as priority items for 
us to work on. Many of the things that Congresswoman Bice 
mentioned are things that do that.
    Mr. LaTurner. It was a good thing. It wasn't negative.
    Mrs. Bice. You mentioned commenting on Members, so----
    Ms. Szpindor. Through the modernization committee, through 
other means, many times, our own staff will say, we can make 
this more effective. So, we look at those, we prioritize those, 
and if we feel like there is going to be a huge return on 
investment that is what we really focus on with the dollars 
that we have.
    So I will tell you that, eventually, maybe not next year, 
but maybe the next or the next, many of the quality and well-
scrutinized AI tools that we could bring in will be able to 
make dramatic differences in how we acquire statistics and 
status on certain things across our data here at the House. 
That is what I get excited about, the potential for the future 
So I don't know if I answered your question.
    Mr. LaTurner. No, you did. I appreciate that.
    Ms. Szpindor. Thank you.
    Mr. LaTurner. Mr. McFarland, since you launched the SAA 
Service Center, have you been able to quantify the value of 
that to employees and to congressional offices?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, to be honest, I think the Service 
Center was probably the best idea that we came up with. We are 
right in the same hallway with the rest of the services for the 
CAO; we have First Call right down the hall. Everything is 
right in that little town hall, we like to call it.
    That said, the way that that Service Center has operated as 
far as helping us to get that message out of what the services 
are that are provided to Members and to the staff we have a 
mockup of our district office security software that, you know, 
you can purchase, you know, for the district office or 
residential.
    So, you know, passing out Gallery passes, anytime we do a 
Member pick-up, as far as it relates to joint sessions, that 
Service Center has been the best thing that we can come up 
with.
    Mr. LaTurner. That is great.
    Mr. McCumber, how do you ensure that you are consistently 
recruiting qualified staff? Workforce is a big issue. How do 
you make sure you are recruiting qualified staff, you have the 
right training in place, et cetera?
    Mr. McCumber. So a lot of the openings that you see--staff 
on the floor, Clerk staff on the floor are the ones that you 
guys are most familiar with.
    Mr. LaTurner. Yes.
    Mr. McCumber. We typically bring them in in one of our 
other divisions, typically the Legislative Resource Center, 
which is a good foundation for them to learn the organization, 
learn what we do. And if they show the right temperament to 
work on the floor and express the right interest, then we will 
bring them to the floor.
    For the IT, we are competing against everybody in the 
private sector, against--you know, Catherine is recruiting IT 
folks. We look for all the proper qualifications and make sure 
that, again, they are mission-driven and that they have public-
service interest.
    We do not have a shortage of applications for most of our 
openings. And so it is a, I think, testament to the quality of 
work-life balance that we are able to provide folks and, you 
know, afford them with the opportunity to fulfill their mission 
for service, their desire for service.
    Mr. LaTurner. Thank you so much.
    And I want to thank all three of you for what you do. It is 
invaluable to the House and its operations.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back 16 seconds.
    Mr. Valadao. So productive.
    A second round of questioning. I am just going to have one 
question. I don't know if anyone else does. Feel free to stick 
around if they do.
    Mine is quick. Mine is for Mr. McCumber. And this is one 
that I have actually run into quite a few--not personally quite 
a few times, but I have seen it a few times.
    What checks are in place to ensure that the wrong Member 
isn't inadvertently added as a cosponsor?
    Mr. McCumber. We have a very thorough process on our side 
of things to ensure that we are accurately capturing what 
Members submit into the eHopper or the hopper on the floor.
    We process everything as received. We do not question 
whether or not a Member was intended to be added to a bill. We 
process nearly 200,000 of them a Congress. It is not natural 
for us to think, ``Well, this person, why are they signing up 
for that bill?'' That is not something that even enters our 
thought.
    And we only reach out to the submitting office when 
something is unclear. So take ``Adam Smith'' for example, 
right? We have two ``A. Smiths.'' And if you have ``Adam 
Smith'' and it shows ``Republican of Nebraska,'' that would 
flag for us this is something we need to reach out for, because 
Adrian Smith is from Nebraska, right? Then we would contact the 
office.
    We do at least two proofreading checks on our side of 
things. If after the legislative day is over and we have made a 
mistake, it is something that we correct right away on 
Congress.gov, and it is as if it never happened.
    There are a couple of things, I think, that Members and 
staff can do on their side to help be notified if they were 
inadvertently added as a cosponsor by another Member's office. 
Congress.gov has alerts that can be set up and you are 
automatically notified if you are signed up as a cosponsor or 
you have remarks in the record. That is something that is very, 
very easy to do.
    And the way that cosponsors are gathered through the e-Dear 
Colleague process, you see a lot of Google forms, ``Fill out 
this Google form to be added.'' A Google form can be sent off 
the Hill, updated, and submitted as if a Member's office did 
it, right? So there is no security associated with that.
    Microsoft Forms, which is part of the Office 365 suite, is 
free. It is secure. You can check a box that says, yes, I want 
to htrack who is submitting this. You have to be on the House 
network in order to submit it. And so it is a much more secure 
process to gather those cosponsors.
    We do everything from process the forms as they are dropped 
in the hopper to submitted through the eHopper online system. 
We do our very best to capture everything as it is intended, 
but there is a lot on the Member side to verify, because it has 
significant implications for some bills that--you know, maybe 
not a post office bill will get everyone's attention, but there 
are some bills that Members are accidentally added to that they 
had no intention to, and once you are on, you are forever 
linked to that bill, that bill's history.
    It is a process that should be taken seriously, you know, 
and we will do our very best to ensure that that process is 
smooth and accurate.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    I have no more questions.
    So, with that, if there are no further questions, I would 
like to thank Mr. McCumber, Mr. McFarland, and Ms. Szpindor for 
being here.
    And members may submit any additional questions for the 
record.

    The subcommittee now does stand adjourned. Thank you.

    [Information submitted for inclusion in the record 
follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                          Wednesday, April 17, 2024

                              MEMBERS' DAY

    Mr. Valadao. The subcommittee will come to order.
    This is the fiscal year 2025 Legislative Branch 
Subcommittee Member Day hearing.
    I would like to thank Acting Ranking Member Wexton today 
and committee members for being here; Representative Kilmer and 
Representative Crockett for being here as well today.
    In addition to our two witnesses here this morning, 
Representative Mark Takano and Representative Sylvia Garcia 
submitted testimony for the record.
    [The prepared statments follow:]
                              ----------                              

                                          Wednesday, April 17, 2024

                                WITNESS

 Prepared Statement of Hon. Mark Takano, a Representative in Congress 
                      from the State of California

    Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member Espaillat, and Members of 
the Legislative Branch Subcommittee, thank you for the 
opportunity to submit this written testimony. I would like to 
take this moment and implore the Subcommittee to provide robust 
funding for congressional Science & Technology (S&T) resources. 
Expertise in S&T is necessary to assist Members of Congress 
make well-informed and evidence-based public policy decisions 
grounded in research. Specifically, I am requesting $6 million 
to restore the already authorized Office of Technology 
Assessment (OTA), and, in the absence of restoring OTA, asking 
for language to request a follow-up report to the 2019 National 
Academies of Public Administration (NAPA) review of 
congressional S&T resources.
    For more than two decades, OTA provided relevant, unbiased 
technical and scientific assessments for Members of Congress 
and staff. The office was unfortunately defunded in 1995, 
stripping Congress of a valuable resource that understood both 
emerging technologies as well as the intricacies of the 
legislative process and the needs of policy makers. OTA remains 
authorized and is unique in that its mission enables in-depth 
analysis with extensive input from external experts providing 
forward-looking and comprehensive assessment of new 
technologies.
    In its absence, the need for the OTA has only grown. Nearly 
30 years after OTA was defunded, Congress is grappling with 
questions surrounding how to encourage innovation while 
minimizing the potential harms of new technologies. A restored 
OTA could help Congress develop thoughtful, targeted policy 
around emerging technologies, including but not limited to 
artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and autonomous 
vehicles. As complex advances in science and technology 
continue to rapidly evolve, Congress should have access to 
OTA's thorough and nonpartisan analysis to help find the right 
path forward.
    Funding the OTA is a wise investment for the future. In 
fiscal year 2020, the House Appropriations Legislative Branch 
Subcommittee included $6 million in initial funding to 
reestablish the agency and passed out of committee by voice 
vote. Unfortunately, the funding was not included in the final 
appropriations package signed into law. I ask that you revive 
your efforts to restore funding for OTA to begin rebuilding the 
office with $6 million in appropriated funding for fiscal year 
2025. These funds will better prepare Congress to account for 
emerging technologies in the legislative process and allow us 
to make informed policy decisions.
    If the subcommittee chooses not to restore funding, I ask 
that you request a follow-up study to the 2019 NAPA report: 
``Science and Technology Policy Assessment: A Congressional 
Directed Review.'' This report examined the technology 
assessment services provided by the Congressional Research 
Service (CRS) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
and identified remaining gaps in networking support, 
consultative support, short-to-medium term reports, and horizon 
scanning reports. The report recommended ``enhancing existing 
entities and creating an advisory office'' to solve these gaps.
    Since the report's release, only the enhancement of 
existing entities has been enacted, with the House Committee on 
Appropriations increasing funding to both CRS and GAO for S&T 
assistance. Additionally, in 2019, GAO established the Science, 
Technology, Assessment, and Analytics (STAA) mission team which 
generates assessments, primers, and training for staff on 
emerging technologies. Since its establishment, STAA has 
quickly increased its workforce and taken on additional 
responsibilities to help Congress with its S&T needs. I commend 
the work that both CRS and GAO have done to address some of the 
gaps left behind by OTA; however, more must be done to meet 
this moment of rapid technological development and solve the 
remaining gaps identified in the 2019 NAPA report.
    I believe this follow-up report must include a 
reexamination of the gaps identified in the original report to 
account for the changes implemented by CRS and GAO in their S&T 
support. This report should also make recommendations on 
Congressional actions that can be taken to improve the 
coordination between CRS, GAO, and the National Academies to 
increase efficiency and avoid duplicative efforts. Lastly, I 
believe this follow-up report should also examine whether and 
how to authorize the STAA mission team to ensure the longevity 
of Congress's S&T capacity.
    To effectively respond to the latest advancements in S&T, I 
believe it is imperative for the Committee to invest in 
Congressional S&T support through restoring OTA or requesting a 
follow-up report. Restoring funding to OTA will provide 
Congress with the expertise to make well-informed and evidence-
based public policy decisions. Should the Committee not fund 
OTA, a follow-up report will inform Congress on the steps 
necessary to address remaining gaps in S&T resources and 
expertise and ensure the longevity of relevant and unbiased S&T 
expertise.
    Thank you for your time and leadership. I look forward to 
working with you all to ensure that Congress has the resources 
necessary to respond to the latest advancements in science and 
technology.
                              ----------                              

                                          Wednesday, April 17, 2024

                                WITNESS

   Prepared Statement of Hon. Sylivia R. Garcia, a Representative in 
                    Congress from the State of Texas

    Thank you, Mr. Chair, Ranking Member, and committee members 
for the opportunity to provide written testimony to the 
Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee as part of 
today's Member Day.
    This is an important opportunity for Members of the House 
of Representatives to advocate for their constituents, share 
their priorities, and help shape the appropriations process for 
fiscal year 2025.
    Over the last several years, Congress has taken decisive 
action to ensure that Congress and all levels of government 
better reflect our nation's diversity--building pathways of 
opportunity for America's next generation of leaders.
    The subcommittee should build on this critical work by 
ensuring that the Legislative Branch appropriations bill for 
fiscal year 2025 expands Federal employment requirements to 
include recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals (DACA) program.
    As you know, the DACA program was established in 2012 to 
protect eligible immigrants, who came to the United States when 
they were children, from deportation. The program also provides 
recipients with work authorizations, allowing them to be 
legally employed in the United States.
    DACA recipients make immeasurable contributions to our 
communities--paying billions in Federal and State taxes each 
year.
    DACA recipients are American in every way and influence all 
sectors of our society. These young men and women serve in 
uniform, teach our children, start businesses on Main Streets 
across the country, and contribute to the fabric of our 
communities in every conceivable way.
    DACA recipients occupy roles and are pursuing degrees in 
critical industries that influence government policy and 
operations, including tech, finance, health care, education, 
environment, and law.
    Dreamers support America and now America needs to support 
Dreamers.
    Just as DACA recipients are already making a positive 
difference across the country, they are positioned to make 
significant contributions to the Federal workforce. Yet, 
despite having work authorizations, they are inexplicably and 
unfairly barred from serving in the Federal workforce.
    DACA recipients have been serving as Federal interns and 
fellows through third party entities, contributing diverse 
experience and expertise to the work of the Federal Government, 
but have no avenue for permanent Federal employment.
    Historically, appropriations legislation has routinely 
prohibited the Federal Government from hiring non-citizens.
    It is time that Congress finally eliminated this 
unnecessary and unfair barrier that keeps DACA recipients from 
seeking Federal employment. This would give thousands of DACA 
recipients across the nation, including more than 95,000 in my 
home State of Texas, the opportunity to continue contributing 
to the United States, the only country they call home. 
Congress, and the Federal Government more broadly, would 
benefit greatly from the contributions of DACA recipients.
    In addition to this critical priority, the subcommittee 
should provide adequate funding to support diversity, equity, 
and inclusion initiatives in Congress.
    Until recently, the House Office of Diversity and Inclusion 
(ODI), a non-partisan and non-legislative support office, was 
responsible for addressing the state of underrepresentation in 
the congressional workforce.
    Since its inception in the 116th Congress, the ODI assisted 
approximately 2,678 job seekers and conducted over 1,526 
consultations with employing offices. The office referred over 
6,441 resumes to hiring managers and helped approximately 730 
job seekers land congressional careers.
    Further, ODI's research initiatives and surveys shed 
critical light on the state of workforce representation, 
compensation, benefits, and demographic makeup of the U.S. 
House of Representatives workforce, which guided actions taken 
by Congress to make it a more representative, fair, and 
equitable place to work.
    Despite ODI's strong record of service to members 
regardless of political affiliation, some Republicans eager to 
score cheap political points in their crusade against 
diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives worked to 
eliminate ODI in its entirety as part of the Fiscal Year 2024 
Legislative Branch appropriations bill.
    While non-partisan staff and critical functions of ODI were 
ultimately protected and moved to be housed under the Chief 
Administrative Officer, it is clear that the ODI operated at 
its best when it was fully dedicated to advancing equity for 
our Asian American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, Black, 
Hispanic, and LGBTQ+ communities, along with other underserved 
communities, including women, veterans, and individuals with 
disabilities.
    I therefore request that the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations Subcommittee work on a bipartisan basis to 
restore the existence and robust funding of the House Office of 
Diversity and Inclusion in the 119th Congress and beyond. We 
must ensure that Congress better reflects the diversity and 
lived experiences of our constituents.
    I am grateful for the opportunity to share these priorities 
for your consideration, and I encourage all members of the 
subcommittee committee to work with me to get this done.
    Thank you.
                              ----------                              

    Mr. Valadao. I would also like to make a note that this 
hearing also serves as a vehicle for public witnesses to submit 
testimony for the record, and nine testimonies were submitted 
and may be found online.
    [The submitted testimony follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Valadao. Representative Kilmer, I appreciate the work 
and support you have provided to modernize Congress. Your work 
on the Select Committee on Modernization and more recently on 
the House Administration Committee's Modernization Subcommittee 
have driven the implementation of numerous recommendations that 
make the House and the Congress work more efficiently and 
effectively for our own benefit and that of our constituents.
    And, then, for Representative Crockett, thank you for 
taking time to testify today. I look forward to hearing more 
about AbilityOne and how you believe Congress could benefit 
from procuring the flags that fly over the Capitol through this 
program.
    I now recognize Ranking Member Wexton for her opening 
remarks.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Chairman Valadao.
    As members of the committee already know, last year I was 
diagnosed with progressive supranuclear palsy, or PSP. I 
describe it as ``Parkinson's on steroids,'' and I don't 
recommend it. PSP makes it very difficult for me to speak, so I 
use an assistive app so that I can participate and you can 
understand me. I want to thank the chair for allowing me to do 
both today.
    It is very important that the subcommittee hear the 
concerns of our fellow legislators and members of the public 
before we begin to work on marking up our fiscal year 2025 
subcommittee bill.
    Welcome back, Mr. Kilmer. I look forward to hearing your 
testimony and reading the other testimonies submitted by our 
fellow colleagues and members of the public who have shared 
with us their suggestions on the legislative-branch agencies 
within our bill and how to improve the operations of the 
Congress. We will do our best to incorporate them into our 
bill.
    Mr. Kilmer has been a friend of this subcommittee for a 
long time and always comes with hope for a better tomorrow.
    Mr. Kilmer, your contributions to modernizing our 
institution have been tremendous. Thank you and Mrs. Bice for 
your work on the Modernization Subcommittee and carrying the 
torch to ensure Congress has the tools necessary to serve our 
constituents effectively.
    With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Ms. Wexton.
                              ----------                              

                                          Wednesday, April 17, 2024

                                WITNESS

STATEMENT OF HON. DEREK KILMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE 
    STATE OF WASHINGTON
    Mr. Valadao. Representative Kilmer, your full testimony has 
been submitted for the record, and you are now recognized to 
provide a summary of your written testimony.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Chairman Valadao, and thank you, 
Acting Ranking Member Wexton. I appreciate you both. I am sort 
of a Leg. Branch Subcommittee groupie, I suppose. But, 
Chairman, congratulations on your gavel and your new role 
leading this committee.
    I am here to talk about modernizing Congress.
    As you know, in the 116th and 117th Congresses, the Select 
Committee on the Modernization of Congress, also known as the 
``Fix Congress Committee,'' was tasked with developing 
bipartisan recommendations designed to make Congress work 
better for the American people.
    We looked at everything from congressional capacity to 
outdated technology to rising polarization to just figure out 
how to build a better institution that is more responsive to 
the needs of the American people.
    In total, the Select Committee made 202 recommendations. At 
this point, about half have been partially or fully 
implemented. The House Administration Committee's Modernization 
Subcommittee, where I serve as the ranking member alongside 
Chairwoman Stephanie Bice, has been tasked with driving 
implementation of the remaining open recommendations.
    I am here to both thank you for your past and continued 
partnership on modernization issues and outline ways that the 
Leg. Branch Subcommittee can continue to help.
    First, I want to call attention to the significant work of 
this subcommittee in driving the implementation of 
recommendations. In the fiscal year 2023 and 2024 Legislative 
Branch Appropriations bills, we were able to successfully 
advance over two dozen Select Committee recommendations.
    That includes the establishment of the new Intern Resource 
Office that will officially open this summer to provide 
streamlined training to interns and intern coordinators alike. 
This one is especially meaningful to me, as--I won't say how 
long ago--I was a congressional intern myself.
    Past bills from this subcommittee also included language to 
ensure managers on Capitol Hill have access to supervisor 
training; funding and language to provide Members with a 
transition aid to help new Members hit the ground running at 
the start of their term; as well as language to create 
bipartisan staff collaboration spaces on campus where staff can 
now meet together to work on and negotiate policy.
    Additionally, the Modernization Initiatives Account, 
somewhat frighteningly titled the ``MIA,'' was created in 
fiscal year 2021 to support the Select Committee's work, and it 
has and will continue to fund the implementation of Select 
Committee recommendations.
    So far, this funding has supported the introduction of new 
eDiscovery software for use in congressional oversight; a flag 
tracker portal to ease management of constituent flag orders; a 
tool to allow electronic voting in committees to save time and 
to reduce errors; the development of a legislative and support 
agency staff directory so offices don't spend their limited MRA 
funds to get data Congress already owns; and the Deconflict 
tool, where committees can see when their members are slated to 
be somewhere else--or, in my case today, three other places all 
at the same time--to help improve scheduling and attendance at 
committee proceedings; and more.
    Additional projects underway include completion of the 
lobbyist disclosure modernization project by the Clerk to make 
it easier to know who is lobbying Congress and on what; a tool 
to allow collaborative drafting of legislation between several 
Member offices, the Senate, committee staff, and stakeholders; 
a tool to streamline and reduce errors when staff obtain and 
register bill cosponsors; a committee portal to serve as a one-
stop shop for committee information; and a tool to allow Member 
offices to anonymize casework data to identify trends impacting 
constituents across different congressional districts that can 
inform subsequent congressional actions.
    Simply put, the MIA, the Modernization Initiatives Account, 
helps funds Select Committee recommendations designed to solve 
problems and, over time, save this institution money by 
reducing turnover and allowing us to complete higher volumes of 
work better.
    And I just want to urge you to continue funding this 
critical account. Through the Modernization Initiatives Account 
and a related report language request I will make to this 
subcommittee, I am hopeful we can fully implement additional 
open Select Committee recommendations in fiscal year 2025.
    That includes recommendations for the Congressional 
Leadership Academy and Staff Academy to offer voluntary 
training to Members and staff to promote civility, 
collaboration, and leadership skills; for the House to start a 
formal mentorship program for matching more experienced staff 
with less experienced staff; the development of a tool to 
improve offices' management of constituent tour requests; 
getting our offices better industry-leading correspondence 
technology tools so we can respond to constituents in a more 
thorough and timely fashion; for the House to offer a voluntary 
seminar for new Members to build on new Member orientation and 
provide followup opportunities for new Members to ask questions 
and provide input after having served in Congress for several 
months; and, finally, for the House to have a public-facing, 
interactive platform for constituents to offer opinions and 
feedback on pending legislation.
    I can't think of a better way to finish my final term in 
Congress than by bringing these recommendations home and, by 
extension, making this institution work better for all of our 
constituents and for all Americans.
    I greatly appreciate your leadership, your partnership, and 
your consideration of these requests. I am happy to provide 
additional information as you review them. And thank you again 
for the opportunity to testify before your subcommittee today.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kilmer follows:]

   Prepared Statement of Hon. Rep. Derek Kilmer, a Representative in 
                 Congress from the State of Washington

    Thank you, Chairman Valadao, Ranking Member Espaillat, and 
members of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee for the 
opportunity to testify today at Members' Day--and to you Mr. 
Chairman, congratulations on your gavel and new role leading 
the subcommittee.
    As I am sure some of you may have guessed, I am here today 
to talk about modernizing Congress. In the 116th and 117th 
Congresses the Select Committee on the Modernization of 
Congress, also known as the ``Fix Congress Committee'', was 
tasked with developing bipartisan recommendations designed to 
make Congress more effective, efficient, and transparent. We 
looked at everything from Congressional capacity, to outdated 
technology, to rising polarization to figure out how to build a 
better institution that is more responsive to the needs of the 
American people. In total, the Select Committee made 202 
recommendations. At this point, about half have been partially 
or fully implemented. The House Administration Committee's 
Modernization Subcommittee, where I serve as Ranking Member 
alongside Chair Stephanie Bice, has been tasked with driving 
implementation of the remaining open recommendations. I am here 
to both thank you for your past and continued partnership on 
modernization issues, and to outline ways the Legislative 
Branch Subcommittee can continue to help.
    First, I want to call attention to the significant work of 
this subcommittee, in driving the implementation of 
recommendations. In the fiscal year 2023 and fiscal year 2024 
Legislative Branch appropriations bills, we were able to 
successfully advance over two dozen Select Committee 
recommendations. This includes the establishment of the new 
Intern Resource Office that will officially open this summer, 
to provide streamlined training to interns and intern 
coordinators alike--this one is especially meaningful to me, 
as--I won't say how long ago--I was a former House intern 
myself. Past bills from this subcommittee also included 
language to ensure managers on Capitol Hill have access to 
supervisor training, funding and language to provide members 
with a transition aide to help new members hit the ground 
running at the start of their term; as well as language to 
create bipartisan staff collaboration spaces on campus, where 
staff can now meet together to work on and negotiate policy.
    Additionally, the Modernization Initiatives Account (MIA) 
was created in fiscal year 2021 to support the Select 
Committee's work, and it has and will continue to fund 
implementation of Select Committee recommendations. So far, 
this funding has supported the introduction of new e-discovery 
software for use in congressional oversight, a flag tracker 
portal to ease management of constituent flag orders, a tool to 
allow electronic voting in committees to save time and reduce 
errors, the development of a legislative and support agency 
staff directory so offices don't spend their limited MRA funds 
to get data Congress already owns, and the ``Deconflict'' tool-
where committees can see when their Members are slated to be 
somewhere else--or in my case today--three other places at 
once, to help improve scheduling and attendance at committee 
proceedings, and more. Additional projects underway, include 
completion of the lobbyist disclosure modernization project by 
the Clerk, to make it easier to know who is lobbying Congress 
and on what; a tool to allow collaborative drafting of 
legislation between several Member offices, the Senate, 
committee staff, and stakeholders; a tool to streamline and 
reduce errors when staff obtain and register bill cosponsors; a 
committee portal to serve as a one- stop shop for committee 
information; and a tool to allow Member offices to anonymize 
casework data to identify trends impacting constituents across 
different Congressional districts, that can inform subsequent 
Congressional action. Simply put, the Modernization Initiatives 
Account helps fund Select Committee recommendations designed to 
solve problems, and over time, save this institution money by 
reducing turnover and allowing us to complete higher volumes of 
work better. I urge you to continue funding this critical 
account.
    Through the Modernization Initiatives Account and related 
report language requests I will make to this subcommittee, I am 
hopeful we can fully implement additional open Select Committee 
recommendations in FY 2025. This includes recommendations for 
the Congressional Leadership Academy and Congressional Staff 
Academy to offer voluntary training to members and staff to 
promote civility, collaboration, and leadership skills; for the 
House to start a formal mentorship program for matching more 
experienced staff with less experienced staff; the development 
of a tool to improve offices' management of constituent tour 
requests; getting our offices better industry-leading 
correspondence technology tools so we can respond to 
constituents in a more thorough and timely fashion; for the 
House to offer a voluntary seminar for new members to build on 
New Member Orientation and provide follow-up opportunity for 
new members to ask questions and provide input after having 
served in Congress for several months; and for the House to 
have a public-facing interactive platform for constituents to 
offer opinions and feedback on pending legislation.
    I can't think of a better way to finish my final term in 
Congress than by bringing these recommendations home, and by 
extension, making this institution work better for my 
constituents and for all Americans. I greatly appreciate your 
leadership, partnership, and your consideration of these 
requests, and I am happy to provide additional information as 
you review them. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify 
before the subcommittee today.

    Mr. Valadao. While we are waiting on Ms. Crockett to 
appear, I guess I will just ask a question because she's not 
here yet, right?
    As I mentioned in my opening statement, we appreciate the 
work you are doing and have already done to modernize the 
House. As you look forward to your well-deserved retirement, 
your legacy remains.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you.
    Mr. Valadao. I want to congratulate you on that. I have 
enjoyed working with you over the years.
    Mr. Kilmer. Back at you.
    Mr. Valadao. Especially the text chain on the full 
Appropriations Committee. That is always fun.
    As we continue to work, what priorities or recommendations 
do you have for us that you would say are the most important 
for us to really focus on?
    Mr. Kilmer. You know, I laid out a number of them.
    I think, actually, implementation of the Staff and Member 
Academy really matters. Congress is the first place I have ever 
worked that, to the best of my knowledge, other than freshman 
orientation, has no professional development. And I think 
Members want to get better at their jobs. And I know our staff 
do as well. They want to actually work their way up and develop 
new skills. And the work that that Staff Academy and the 
Congressional Leadership Academy will do, I think, really 
matters.
    There are other things that are currently being implemented 
that I think really matter. I mentioned the committee 
deconfliction tool. That will only be as successful as the 
degree to which committees actually use it. So that is 
something, you know, perhaps the Leg. Branch bill could--even 
though we have now funded the tool, if there are ways that we 
can encourage committees to actually participate in it.
    The notion of this is, if you are a committee chair and you 
are looking to schedule a hearing, being able to look at, OK, 
you know, if I schedule it Wednesday at 10 o'clock, how many of 
my committee members have a conflict, versus if I schedule it 
at 11 o'clock or if I schedule it on Thursday, you know, with 
the hope that we can have a little less conflict in the 
schedule.
    Ideally, Congress is a place where policymaking happens in 
committees, not in leadership offices. That only works if 
Members are able to show up at committees and we are actually 
able to have a discussion and dialogue. Right now, committees 
are largely a place, as I am demonstrating today, where you 
airdrop in for 5 minutes, read your speech, and then peace-out 
because you have to go to another committee. That is not best 
practice.
    Mr. Valadao. Well, and that is one of the things that I 
have always found frustrating. And I am just learning about 
this new tool to help schedule a little bit better. Can you 
elaborate a little bit more about it?
    Mr. Kilmer. Yeah. I mean, obviously, the--you know, I guess 
I just gave the context for how it works. Now, the problem is, 
that only works if committees are populating it when they put 
something on the schedule. And so that is one of the things I 
think we are hoping to do.
    You asked about other areas. Chairwoman Bice and I have 
spent a fair amount of time talking about new Member 
orientation.
    You know, both as you look at the culture of an institution 
and how people get better at their jobs--you know, one, when 
you and I came into Congress, you know, a lot of the 
orientation process was an exercise in keeping Democrats and 
Republicans from talking to each other. One of the 
recommendations of the Modernization Committee was, let's try, 
insofar as is possible, to make that an entirely bipartisan 
experience.
    But the other thing we learned through the work on the 
Modernization Committee is, best practice in terms of training 
up new employees is not to just pound them with information on 
the first week--or, not even the first week for us; it is 
before you even show up. You know, having a deep dive into the 
budget and appropriations process several months before you 
actually go through a budget and appropriations process is not 
actually super-helpful.
    But if you could actually offer sort of just-in-time 
training to new Members and say, OK, now we are entering 
appropriations season, here is what you need to know, and 
offering that type of training, I think, would actually be very 
valuable. And it is one of the things that the Modernization 
Committee mentioned.
    There are other things that I think would be worthy of 
funding through the--you know, the way this Leg. Branch 
committee has worked--and I commend you for it--is not to sort 
of micromanage, you know, we are going provide X amount for 
this project and X amount for Y, but rather to fund the 
Modernization Initiatives Account. And then the Modernization 
Committee and now the Modernization Subcommittee has worked, 
along with Leg. Branch Approps and the CAO, basically trying to 
prioritize projects and trying to get as much bang out of those 
limited dollars as possible. And I think it has worked really 
well. I think it is actually a really good approach, and I 
commend this subcommittee for taking that approach.
    Mr. Valadao. Well, I appreciate that.
    Thank you again.
    I am going to open it up and see if Ms. Wexton has any 
questions for you.
    Mr. Kilmer. I will say one other thing on the schedule, if 
that is all right, Chairman?
    Mr. Valadao. Yes.
    Mr. Kilmer. I don't know that it is going to be the purview 
of this committee--although everything is the purview of this 
committee. You know, I think there is going to be a push by the 
Fix Congress Caucus and by others: Focus on the schedule and 
calendar, probably in the fall, when we don't know which party 
is going to be in the majority, in an effort to express to the 
leadership of both parties that there is a better way to do the 
calendar.
    We are not here enough. You know, I don't know the data for 
this year, but the last year of the Modernization Committee we 
were here 65 full days and 66 travel days. Ideally, we would be 
actually in D.C. more full days than travel days.
    There is a way to build out the calendar where you are 
actually able to have more time in DC actually having full days 
where committees meet, more time in the district, and just less 
time with your flight attendant friends on your commute here. 
And I think that would be a smart thing for us to do, and I 
would love to invite your participation in that effort.
    Mr. Valadao. I would enjoy that. As a fellow west coaster 
who spends way too much time in the air, I can sympathize with 
that.
    Ms. Wexton.
    Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The chairman asked my question. But you will be glad to 
hear that Mrs. Bice brought up the same point about the 
schedule deconfliction tool--as she headed out to another 
committee. But changing the culture will take some time.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Mr. Kilmer, I know you have other committees 
to go to. You are more than welcome to stick around, but if you 
have things to do, I get it too.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Chairman.
                              ----------                              

                                          Wednesday, April 17, 2024

                                WITNESS

STATEMENT OF HON. JASMINE CROCKETT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM 
    THE STATE OF TEXAS
    Mr. Valadao. Ms. Crockett, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair and committee. 
And thanks for having this day. It is really important.
    I am here to talk about something you don't see very often, 
in this Congress especially, and that is a bipartisan proposal. 
The letter that my office has provided the committee a copy of 
is led not only by myself but also by Representatives Molinaro, 
Mike Thompson, and Strong.
    We are requesting the Legislative Branch Appropriations 
bill support the employment of Americans with disabilities by 
purchasing at least 25 percent of the flags the CAO procures in 
order to satisfy constituent flag requests from the AbilityOne 
program.
    As a bit of background for those who don't know, when 
Congress passed the JWOD Act, it required the Federal 
Government--and that includes legislative entities--to procure 
products and services, whenever possible, from the AbilityOne 
program.
    Now, why would they institute this requirement? Because, by 
procuring through the AbilityOne program, you certify that the 
product or service you are purchasing is provided by Americans 
with disabilities, including those living with blindness and a 
growing number of returning disabled veterans.
    Thanks to these Federal dollars supporting employment for 
those with disabilities, tens of thousands of Americans are 
able to work at good-paying jobs. Through the AbilityOne 
program, we allow Americans with disabilities to achieve a 
level of financial independence that too often is out of reach.
    Unfortunately, the number of Americans employed through 
AbilityOne has declined in recent years. While this has spurred 
a renewed commitment to the program in the executive branch, 
Congress has not only failed to increase our efforts to engage 
with AbilityOne but, in many cases, is in fact failing to make 
the basic required procurements under JWOD.
    Each year, the Chief Administrative Officer purchases and 
flies over the Capitol over 100,000 flags, to be presented to 
our constituents. Currently, not a single flag is purchased 
through the AbilityOne program. This is despite the law being 
crystal-clear that products on the procurement list should 
always be purchased unless they are demonstratively not fit for 
the purpose.
    Right now, the AbilityOne Commission lists three vendors 
that, together, produce nearly a quarter of a million flags 
annually for other Federal entities. These flags are of such 
high quality that they are used to lay our fallen veterans to 
rest. If these flags are good enough for our veterans, they are 
certainly good enough to be presented to our constituents.
    So, if these flags are fit for purpose, why isn't CAO 
purchasing them now? Because, despite being required to engage 
with AbilityOne under JWOD, legislative-branch entities are not 
subject to any enforcement or reporting mechanisms.
    So, for now, we must ensure compliance one step at a time. 
If this procurement order goes as well as Representatives 
Molinaro, Mike Thompson, Strong, and I expect, we should 
continue to raise the percentage in future years.
    And if you are interested in increasing legislative-branch 
procurement from the AbilityOne program more holistically, 
reach out to Congressman Molinaro and I. We are working with 
the Committee on House Administration on a larger fix that I 
would be happy to talk about.
    But, for now, let's do the obvious thing, the thing that is 
required by law. Let's ensure, when our constituents purchase a 
flag that is flown over the Capitol, it is one made by a 
veteran who returned home after developing a disability in 
service to our country. Let's do the bipartisan thing. Let's 
procure at least 25 percent of our CAO flags from the 
AbilityOne program in fiscal year 2025.
    With that, I thank the committee for its time, and I yield 
back.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Crockett follows:]

   Prepared Statement of Hon. Jasmine Crockett, a Representative in 
                    Congress from the State of Texas

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member for having 
Members here to testify about our priorities. I am here to talk 
about something you don't see very often in this Congress, 
especially in this committee--a bipartisan proposal. The letter 
that my office has provided the committee a copy of is led not 
just by myself, but also by Representatives Molinaro, Mike 
Thompson, and Strong. We are requesting the Legislative Branch 
Appropriations Bill support the employment of Americans with 
disabilities by purchasing at least 25 percent of the flags the 
CAO procures in order to satisfy constituent flag requests from 
the AbilityOne Program.
    As a bit of background for those who don't know, when 
Congress passed the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (JWOD), it required 
the Federal Government, and that includes legislative entities, 
to procure products and services whenever possible from the 
AbilityOne program. Now why would they institute this 
requirement? Because by procuring through the AbilityOne 
program, you certify that the product or service you are 
purchasing is provided by Americans with disabilities, 
including those living with blindness, and a growing number of 
returning disabled veterans. Thanks to these Federal dollars 
supporting employment for those with disabilities, tens of 
thousands of Americans are able to work at good-paying jobs. 
Through the AbilityOne program, we allow Americans with 
disabilities to achieve a level of financial independence that 
too often is out of reach.
    Unfortunately, the number of Americans employed through 
AbilityOne has declined in recent years. While this has spurred 
a renewed commitment to the Program in the Executive Branch, 
Congress has not only failed to increase our efforts to engage 
with AbilityOne, but in many cases, is in fact failing to make 
the basic required procurements under JWOD. Each year, the 
Chief Administrative Officer purchases and flies over the 
Capitol over 100,000 flags to be presented to our constituents. 
Currently, not a single flag is purchased through the 
AbilityOne program.
    This is despite the law being crystal clear that products 
on the Procurement List should always be purchased unless they 
are demonstrably not fit for purpose. Right now, the AbilityOne 
Commission lists three Vendors that together produce nearly a 
quarter of a million flags annually for other Federal entities. 
These flags are of such high quality that they are used to lay 
our fallen veterans to rest.If these flags are good enough for 
our Veterans, they are certainly good enough to be presented to 
our constituents.
    So, if these flags are fit for purpose, why isn't CAO 
purchasing them now? Because despite being required to engage 
with AbilityOne under JWOD, legislative branch entities are not 
subject to any enforcement or reporting mechanisms. So, for 
now, we must ensure compliance one step at a time. If this 
procurement order goes as well as Representatives Molinaro, 
Mike Thompson, Strong, and I expect, we should continue to 
raise the percentage in future years.
    And if you are interested in increasing Legislative Branch 
procurement from the AbilityOne program more holistically, 
reach out to Congressman Molinaro and I. We are working with 
the Committee on House Administration on a larger fix that I 
would be happy to talk to you about.
    But for now, let's do the obvious thing. The thing that is 
required by law. Let's ensure when our constituents purchase a 
flag to fly over the Capitol, it is one made by a Veteran who 
returned home after developing a disability in service to our 
country. Let's do the bipartisan thing. Let's procure at least 
25 percent of CAO flags from the AbilityOne Program in fiscal 
year 2025. With that, I thank the committee for its time, and 
yield back.

    Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Ms. Crockett. Appreciate the time.
    I am just going to yield myself a few minutes to ask a 
quick question.
    And I just want to thank you for your efforts to support 
AbilityOne vendors and Americans with disabilities.
    If the CAO were to begin purchasing flags from these 
vendors, are you aware of any savings or cost adjustments that 
would be passed on to our constituents from purchasing these 
flags through the websites?
    Ms. Crockett. I am unaware as to whether or not--as far as 
the cost, I think that it is comparable to what we are already 
paying, so I don't think it will necessarily be less expensive. 
I don't have any information that would make me believe that it 
would be more expensive though.
    Mr. Valadao. All right. Thank you.
    I don't have a whole lot of questions. I don't know--Ms. 
Wexton, I think she is preparing a question, if you have a 
minute to hold on.
    Ms. Crockett. Yes. Thank you.
    Mr. Valadao. Thanks.
    Ms. Wexton. Do participants in AbilityOne risk losing their 
benefits due to the money they earn producing the flags?
    Ms. Crockett. No, these are people that are already working 
for these companies. In fact, we know that there is, what, 
three--I believe that there are three specific AbilityOne 
companies, and one is in the chair's--anyway.
    There may be one that you are very familiar with. We will 
get back to you on that, Mr. Chair.
    But, long story short, these are people that are already in 
the workforce, and it is just a matter of making sure that 
those companies, these small businesses, are surviving and 
thriving. So they are already earning the earnings that they 
are already getting, but we are just trying to make sure that 
they still are staying employed and that these businesses 
continue to thrive.
    It is not a matter of an individual that has a disability 
is now going to lose access to their benefits because now they, 
themselves, will experience a windfall of some sort. But, 
instead, it is a matter of you have specific companies that 
have employed people with disabilities, and we want to make 
sure that those companies survive, those small businesses 
survive. And that is what this is about.
    Ms. Wexton. OK. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Valadao. Well, if there are no further questions, I 
would like to thank Representatives Kilmer and Crockett for 
being here today.
    And members may submit any additional questions for the 
record. This subcommittee stands adjourned. Thank you.

                              [all]