[House Prints 113-1]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[COMMITTEE ON RULES PRINT 113-1]
113th Congress
1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
===========================================================================
OVERSIGHT PLAN OF THE COMMITTEE ON RULES FOR THE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
------
FEBRUARY 13, 2013. Approved by the Committee on Rules.
------
Mr. SESSIONS, from the Committee on Rules, submitted to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Commit-
tee on House Administration the following
REPORT
Clause 2(d)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives
requires each standing Committee, not later than February 15 of the first
session, to adopt an oversight plan for the 113th Congress. The oversight
plan must be submitted simultaneously to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform and the Committee on House Administration.
The following agenda constitutes the oversight plan of the Committee on
Rules for the 113th Congress. It includes areas in which the Committee and
its subcommittees expect to conduct oversight during this Congress, but does
not preclude oversight or investigation of additional matters or programs as
they arise. The Committee will consult, as appropriate, with other committees
of the House that may share jurisdiction on any of the subjects listed below.
BACKGROUND
The Committee on Rules has existed as part of the House committee
structure since the First Congress, when it was established in 1789 as a
select committee. The essential portion of the present jurisdiction of the
Committee is set forth in clause 1(o) of rule X, which grants the Committee
jurisdiction over:
(1) Rules and joint rules (other than those relating to the Code of
Conduct) and the order of business of the House.
(2) Recesses and final adjournments of Congress.
In addition, clause 3(j) of rule X assigns to the Committee special
oversight responsibility over the congressional budget process.
The Committee on Rules has always been at the forefront of efforts to
reform the processes and procedures of the House to improve the effectiveness
of the institution.
The Committee also continues to play a lead role in providing
recommendations for substantive changes to the rules of the House, which are
adopted on the opening day of each Congress. Such changes have included
streamlining the committee system to be more effective in conducting
oversight and other business, ensuring the continuity of Congress in the
face of man-made and natural disasters, increasing the transparency of
committee and House actions, and modernizing the operations of the House.
Some of the substantive changes to House rules adopted on the opening
day of the 113th Congress include:
Streamlining the voting process for several specific instances
in the House and the Committee of the Whole, including reducing the time
for voting on motions to recommit to not less than five minutes;
Improving the readability of the comparative print required by
clause 3(e) of rule XIII--commonly known as a ``Ramseyer''--by including other
contiguous portions of law if they will be useful in understanding the
change made by the amendment;
Prohibiting the consideration of a concurrent resolution on
the budget, or any proposed amendment to or conference report on, unless it
includes specified information and estimates related to direct spending,
including means-tested direct spending and nonmeans-tested direct spending;
Continuing the requirement for ``spending reduction'' accounts
in appropriations bills to ensure that spending cuts can reduce the costs
of appropriations bills rather than be used exclusively as offsets for
additional spending;
Authorizing the chair of a committee to request that the
Government Accountability Office perform a duplication analysis of any bill
or joint resolution referred to that committee; and
Requiring committee reports on bills or joint resolutions to
include a statement estimating the number of directed rule-makings required
by the measure.
In addition to the items discussed below, the Committee will continuously
monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the rules changes adopted at
the beginning of this Congress.
MAJOR AREAS FOR OVERSIGHT
Budget Process Reform. The annual budget process continues to present
challenges to authorizing committees, appropriations committees, and the
House as a whole. In each of the last sixteen fiscal years, Congress has
failed to enact some or all of the annual appropriations bills prior to the
start of the new fiscal year. In the second session of the 111th Congress,
the House and Senate not only failed to adopt a concurrent resolution on
the budget, but for the first time the House and Senate Budget Committees
failed to even report a resolution. Congress also failed to enact even a
single regular appropriations bill for fiscal year 2011. In the 112th
Congress, the House passed a concurrent resolution on the budget for two
consecutive years, but the Senate did not consider a budget resolution
during either session of the 112th Congress.
To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the legislative budget
process, the Committee will examine alternative budget processes, including
the use of biennial budgeting. A two-year budget cycle could provide
committees and Members much-needed flexibility and time for increased
scrutiny of government programs and funding requests.
The Nation, and by extension the taxpayers, is facing record deficits
and record levels of public debt. Congress must ensure that its processes
are best structured to allow for comprehensive oversight and informed
decision-making.
The Committee will also continue to pursue the establishment of a joint
select committee on budget process reform. The Committee recognizes that
ultimately a bicameral solution is necessary in order to successfully
implement reforms to the congressional budget process.
Dynamic Scoring. The American public and many in Congress continue to
highlight the pressing need to reduce Federal government spending. This
increased focus on government spending has also led to greater interest in
the cost and revenue estimates of proposed legislation. In many cases, these
estimates are also used to trigger budget enforcement mechanisms.
The Committee is committed to ensuring that the most accurate and
comprehensive analysis is available to Members and the public. In the 113th
Congress, the Committee will examine current estimating models, including
the feasibility of further incorporating macroeconomic impacts of legisla-
tion in Congressional estimates in order to determine whether rules changes
are necessary to improve the quality and accuracy of budget estimates.
Effective and Efficient Committee Jurisdiction. The Committee on Rules
has always played an integral role in modernizing the rules of the House,
including its rules on jurisdiction. In the 104th Congress, the House
streamlined what was considered to be a bloated and ineffective committee
system, abolishing three full committees (Committees on Post Office and
Civil Service, the District of Columbia, and Merchant Marine and Fisheries).
In the 107th Congress, the trend toward jurisdictional efficiency continued
with the establishment of a new Committee on Financial Services. In the
108th Congress, the House responded to the changing security environment
and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security by creating the
Select Committee on Homeland Security, which became a standing committee of
the House in the 109th Congress.
The House rules for the 113th Congress include two clarifications to
rule X. The changes include clarifying that the Committee on Homeland
Security's jurisdiction includes the general management of the Department of
Homeland Security. This change is intended to clarify the Committee's
existing jurisdiction over the organization and administration of the
department, and is not intended to alter the pattern of bill referrals to
the Committee on Homeland Security, nor is it intended to alter the existing
oversight jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland Security. Additionally,
the changes conform terminology used in the jurisdiction of the Committee
on Natural Resources to terminology recognized by the Departments of State
and Interior.
The Committee notes that there was a minimum of jurisdictional
conflict in the 112th Congress. In furtherance of this goal, the Committee
on Rules will continue to review proposals to streamline the committee
system and increase effective oversight of the Executive branch and the
Federal budget during the remainder of the 113th Congress.
Impact of New Information Technologies on the House. In recent years,
the House has adapted and upgraded its technological capabilities to improve
efficiency, accessibility, and transparency. Members are communicating more
effectively with their constituents through the use of websites, blogs, and
tele-townhalls, and many Members communicate with their constituents in real
time through social media applications.
Technology is also affecting the way Congress considers legislation.
For example, more data and analysis is readily available to Members in the
execution of their duties. Bills and committee reports are available and
often searchable electronically, and the public can follow Congressional
proceedings in real time through ``cybercasts.''
Providing real-time information allows the broader public access to the
day-to-day proceedings of the House. Technology is helping bridge the gaps
of time and distance to bring representative government closer to the people
and Members closer to their constituents. Technology is helping to create a
more orderly process and to reduce costs and bureaucracy.
The 113th Congress rules continue to embrace the work of the 112th
Congress of recognizing electronic availability as an alternative to
physical printing by the Government Printing Office. Like any major change,
this one will require oversight and adjustment as the House gains experience
with the new rule and its implementation. In the 112th Congress, the House
opened its portal for hosting electronic versions of text at
http://docs.house.gov. At the beginning of this congress, the second phase
of the project -- the committee ``repository'' -- came online to host
electronic versions of committee documents. The House Office of Legislative
Counsel, in conjunction with the Law Revision Counsel, is working on a
series of electronic tools to facilitate ``comparative prints'' of
legislation, amendments, and statutes.
The Committee will continue to monitor the progress of these projects
and determine whether any additional rule or policy changes are necessary.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. As the House focuses its attention on
creating jobs and restoring economic growth, it is critical that the Federal
government not impose burdensome mandates on our nation�s job creators nor
on our state and local governments.
In the 104th Congress, the 1996 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) was
enacted. Among a number of provisions designed to reduce or eliminate
unfunded mandates, the law requires the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
to estimate the cost of unfunded public and private sector mandates. CBO
cost estimates are required to be included in committee reports accompanying
legislation brought to the House floor for consideration.
In 2013, this framework requires CBO to estimate the direct mandate
costs of intergovernmental mandates exceeding $75 million and of private
sector mandates exceeding $150 million proposed in any measure reported from
a committee. It also establishes a point of order against consideration of
legislation that contains intergovernmental mandates with mandate costs
estimated to exceed the threshold amount. In addition, Title II requires
Federal administrative agencies to assess the effects on state and local
governments and the private sector of proposed and final Federal rules and
to prepare a written statement of estimated costs and benefits for any
mandate requiring an expenditure exceeding $100 million in any given year.
In the 113th Congress, the Committee will continue to examine the
application of the procedures and enforcement mechanisms associated with
UMRA, as well as proposals for expanding the application of the law to
capture indirect costs.
Health Care Reform Legislation. In March 2010, President Obama signed
health care reform legislation into law (P.L. 111-148 & P.L. 111-152). The
law created an Independent Payment Advisory Board and contains rules and
procedures for congressional consideration of the Board�s proposals. The law
also contains expedited procedures for consideration of a joint resolution
for the dissolution of the Board.
Section 3(a) of H. Res. 5 (113th Congress) contained a provision that
suspends the procedures for congressional consideration of IPAB proposals.
The Rules Committee will use this opportunity to review necessary changes to
House procedures relating to IPAB.
The Congressional Review Act of 1996. Job creation and economic growth
continues to be the number one priority for the House in the 113th Congress.
Part of this agenda includes a systematic review of existing Executive
branch regulations that could hinder economic growth and job creation.
While the House undertakes a review of existing regulations and their
potential impacts on job creation and the economy, it is essential that
Congress also be prepared to respond to future regulatory proposals.
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) provides Congress with an opportunity
to review--and stop--regulations before their final implementation. Under
the expedited procedures established by P.L. 104-121, if a majority of the
House and Senate vote to approve a joint resolution of disapproval and the
President signs it into law within 60 legislative days of the regulation's
publication in The Federal Register, the proposed regulation cannot go into
effect.
In the 113th Congress, the Rules Committee may examine the CRA, and its
procedures, in order to determine if the CRA can be better utilized to
ensure burdensome regulations do not impede job creation and economic growth.
Treatment of Confidential Business Information. During the normal
course of oversight, committees obtain a wide variety of information,
including confidential business information. This can take the form of
trade secrets, personnel information, attorney-client privileged matter,
or other kinds of data that would not otherwise be publicly available.
Sometimes that information comes to the committee from the owner of the
information, and other times it comes via a Federal regulatory agency that
receives the information during the normal course of regulatory enforcement.
Often, this information is essential to providing committees with the
background necessary to conduct effective oversight of public and private
entities alike. However, if that same information is disclosed publicly, it
has the potential to cause irreparable harm to the entity to which the
information belongs. The firms providing this kind of information often
have protections against disclosure by Federal agencies, but do not enjoy
the same kinds of protections when this information is provided to the House.
The Senate has a rule prohibiting disclosure of confidential business
information in the possession of a Senate committee; the House has no
analog. While House committees often deal with these questions on a case-
by-case basis, some individuals have asked whether more robust protections
are necessary to avoid disclosure of confidential business information when
disclosure is not essential to the advancement of oversight. Any change in
the regime governing this kind of committee information must balance the
needs of the owner of the information with the needs of the House to conduct
effective oversight. Further, the operation of the "speech and debate"
clause of the Constitution must also inform any changes in this area.
In the 113th Congress, the Committee will conduct a review of existing
laws and committee rules and procedures governing the handling of
confidential business information. This review is intended to provide the
background necessary for the Committee to consider whether any changes to
the Rules of the House are necessary.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The Committee on Rules met in open session on February 13, 2013 and
ordered the measure reported by a voice vote, a quorum being present.