[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 41 (Monday, March 6, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3504-S3510]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  Mr. ROTH addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise in support of S. 244, the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995. This legislation was, this year as last year, 
reported out unanimously from the Committee on Governmental Affairs, 
reflecting the bipartisan efforts of Senators Nunn, Glenn, and myself.
  The legislation reaffirms the fundamental purpose of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980--to reduce the paperwork burden imposed on the 
public by the Federal Government. But it does much more. It increases 
the scope of the act by 50 percent in overturning the Supreme Court's 
decision in Dole v. United Steelworkers of America. In that case the 
Supreme Court surprised many of us who had worked on fashioning this 
legislation by limiting OMB's authority to review Government 
collections of information only to those instances where the paperwork 
flowed from a private party to the Government and thus excluded 
instances where the Government requires information to be provided to 
another party.
  By overturning the Dole case, all paperwork falls under the act and 
is thereby subject to review by the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs.
  Under the act, each agency--and the act covers all agencies, even 
independent agencies--must analyze each information collection for its 
need and its practical utility. All such information collections, even 
those of independent agencies, must be approved by OIRA before they 
become effective.
  The legislation also authorizes appropriations for OIRA for 5 more 
years at $8 million each year. OIRA is not only the hub of the wheel in 
enforcing this act but has come to play a significant role in executing 
executive orders on the subject of regulatory review. As we work in 
committee to draft comprehensive regulatory reform legislation, it is 
clear that OIRA will have even a greater role. This authorization of 
greater appropriations is a very important provision.
  The paperwork burden produced by Government's enormous appetite for 
information is an ever increasing problem. The fact that the problem is 
growing does not mean that the efforts under the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1980 have not been worthwhile. The problem would have been even 
worse without such efforts. The mechanism for reducing burdens cannot 
be faulted because Congress passes more laws that generate more 
paperwork.
  Now, the legislation before us recognizes that an information 
collection may be problematic not only because the collection has no 
public utility but also because the collector may already have access 
to the information and need not bother our citizenry with a request for 
the same information. I applaud the efforts of GAO to underscore this 
simple truth by highlighting the 
[[Page S3505]] benefits of information resources management. This 
legislation effectuates the principle that information resources 
management and reduction of paperwork burden are two sides of the same 
coin. While some may view the two aspects as competing for scarce OIRA 
resources, that view is mistaken. The two aspects are inextricably 
linked.
  This legislation enjoys widespread support among the business 
community, both big and small, as well as among State and local 
governments and the people, all who bear the burden of Federal 
Government paperwork collections. They all will be pleased to see that 
this legislation strengthens the paperwork reduction aspects of the act 
and that, in particular, it retains the direction of OIRA that it 
manage the paperwork burden on the public to achieve a 5-percent annual 
reduction.
  Paperwork burdens, like other regulatory burdens, are a hidden tax on 
the American people--a tax without measure, a tax unrestricted by 
budgetary or constitutional limitations, but a tax no less real.
  Government paperwork collections are a burden on the public. The 
legislation indicates an increased sensitivity to that fact by 
requiring each agency to develop a paperwork clearance process to 
review and solicit public comment on proposed information collections 
before submitting them to OMB for review. Public accountability is also 
strengthened through requirements for public disclosure of 
communications with OMB regarding information collections--with 
protections for whistleblowers complaining of unauthorized 
collections--and for OMB to review the status of any information 
collection upon public request. In combination with more general 
requirements, such as encouraging data sharing between the Federal 
Government and State and local and tribal governments, this legislation 
strives to further the goals of the act of minimizing government 
information collection burdens while maximizing the utility of 
government information.
  With regard to the act's over-arching information resources 
management--IRM--policies, the legislation charges agency heads with 
the responsibility to carry out agency IRM activities to improve agency 
productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness. It makes program officials 
responsible and accountable for those information resources supporting 
their programs. The IRM mandate is strengthened by focusing on managing 
information resources in order to improve program performance, 
including the delivery of services to the public and the reduction of 
information collection burdens on the public.
  With the Federal Government spending approximately $25 billion a year 
on information technology, the stakes are too high not to press for the 
most efficient and effective management of information resources. With 
such improvements in information resources management, the reduction of 
information collection burdens on the public and maximizing the utility 
of government information will not otherwise occur.
  This legislation is not the final word on the very important subject 
of information technology. The committee will be fashioning legislation 
later this session to restructure and redesign the Federal Government 
for the 21st century. One essential aspect of a modern Federal 
Government is the effective use of information technology to better 
accomplish public missions at lower costs. We will be back.
  Finally, I want to underscore a point to which Senators Glenn, Nunn, 
and I gave considerable attention. This legislation is a rewrite of the 
1980 act. Its form is necessitated by the number of technical and other 
changes made. This form is in no way intended to start a new 
legislative history with the 1995 act. Rather, this legislation is only 
a pro tanto modification intended to carry on the legislative history 
of the 1980 act. The report, at page 3, makes this very same point. 
This is an important point. It should be noted by anyone interested in 
the legislative history that guides the interpretation of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act.
  In closing, I wish to commend my colleagues, Senator Glenn and 
Senator Nunn, for their cooperation and patience in fashioning 
legislation on a very, very complex subject. This legislation, in my 
opinion, merits the full support of every Member.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, today, the Senate turns to consideration of 
S. 244, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. As the Senator from 
Delaware, my good friend, Senator Roth, has already explained, this 
bill reauthorizes appropriations for the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs [OIRA] and it strengthens the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1980. This represents years of hard work which began in the 
100th Congress.
  S. 244 is substantially identical to S. 560, the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1994, which was approved by the Senate, not once but twice in 
the closing days of the last Congress. It passed the Senate by 
unanimous voice vote on October 6, 1994. the following day, the text of 
S. 560 was attached to a House-passed measure, H.R. 2561, and returned 
to the House. Unfortunately, it was not cleared for action before the 
adjournment of the 103d Congress. The House of Representatives did not 
act on it.
  Like S. 560 in the last Congress, S. 244 enjoys strong bipartisan 
support. Chairman Roth and Senator Glenn are both original cosponsors. 
Both have worked long and hard on this needed legislation to strengthen 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 and to reauthorize appropriations 
for OIRA. The crafting of a consensus bill in the last Congress was 
made possible by the skill and leadership of my friend from Ohio, Mr. 
Glenn, and my friend from Delaware, Mr. Roth.
  Leading cosponsors of S. 244 also include the new chairman of the 
Committee on Small Business, Senator Kit Bond, and the committee's 
ranking Democratic member, Senator Bumpers. Former Chairman Bumpers and 
successive ranking Republican members of the Committee on Small 
Business, including Senators Boschwitz, Kasten, and Pressler, have been 
original cosponsors of the predecessor legislation in the 101st and 
102d Congress. The Committee on Small Business, of which I am a member 
as well as the Governmental Affairs Committee, has played a crucial 
supporting role in sustaining the effort to enact legislation to 
strengthen the 1980 act. Such support is not surprising since relief 
from paperwork and regulatory burdens is vital to the small business 
community. It has become a focus of activity for the Committee on Small 
Business, the Committee on Governmental Affairs, and several other 
committees in the Senate as well as their counterparts in the House of 
Representatives.
  This year we are being joined by colleagues from both sides of the 
aisle, many of whom are present or former members of the Committee on 
Small Business as well as the Committee on Governmental Affairs. When 
introduced, S. 244 had 21 bipartisan cosponsors. My friend from 
Mississippi, Mr. Lott, as inadvertently omitted from the list. He 
should have been on the list when it was originally introduced.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Lott be added to 
list of original cosponsors to the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. NUNN. Further, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
following Senators be added as additional cosponsors--Senator Stevens, 
Senator Akaka, Senator Grassley, Senator Thomas, Senator Cohen, Senator 
Thompson, Senator Rockefeller, and Senator D'Amato.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. NUNN. In this Congress, the House of Representatives is decidedly 
more receptive to this legislation. A modified version of S. 560 was 
included in H.R. 9, the Job Creation and Wage Enhancement Act of 1995, 
which includes many of the regulatory and paperwork relief provisions 
of the Republican Contract With America. Representatives Bill Clinger, 
the new chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight, the new name for the Committee on Government Operations, was 
the principal Republican cosponsor to H.R. 2995, the House companion to 
S. 560 in the last Congress. So he has been working on this a long 
time. In this Congress, he introduced H.R. 830, the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995, with Representatives Norm Sisisky as the principal 
Democratic cosponsor.

[[Page S3506]]

  I might add Representative Sisisky has worked on this legislation for 
several years with me, including trying last year to get this 
legislation through the House in the last couple of weeks of the 
session. On February 22, the House passed H.R. 830 by a rollcall vote 
of 418-0.
  Like the reported version of S. 560 in the last Congress, S. 244 has 
the support of the Clinton administration. During testimony before the 
House Small Business Committee on Friday, January 27, Sally Katzen, 
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
stated the administration's support for S. 244.
  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 enjoys strong support from the 
business community, especially the small business committee. It has the 
support of a broad Paperwork Reduction Act coalition, representing 
virtually every segment of the business community. Participating in the 
coalition are the major national small business associations--the 
National Federation of Independent Business [NFIB], the Small Business 
Legislative Council [SBLC], and National Small Business United [NSBU], 
as well as the many specialized national small business association, 
like the American Subcontractors Association, that comprise the 
membership of SBLC or NSBU. Other participants represent manufacturers, 
aerospace and electronics firms, construction firms, providers of 
professional and technical services, retailers of various products and 
services, and the wholesalers and distributors who support them.
  Leadership for the coalition is being provided by the Council on 
Regulatory and Information Management, known as C-RIM and by the U.S 
Chamber of Commerce. C-RIM is the new name for the Business Council on 
the Reduction of Paperwork, which has dedicated itself to paperwork 
reduction and regulatory reform issues for more than a half century. 
While he was C-RIM's executive director, Bob Coakley worked tirelessly 
on advancing this legislation. Bob came to C-RIM after many years of 
service to the Committee on Governmental Affairs, especially for our 
former colleague, Lawton Chiles, the father of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1980, when he was in the Senate. Of course he is now Governor of 
Florida.
  The coalition also includes a number of professional associations and 
public interest groups that support strengthening the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980. These include the Association of Records 
Managers and Administrators [ARMA] and Citizens for a Sound Economy 
[CSE], to name but two very active coalition members.
  Given the regulatory and paperwork burdens faced by State and local 
governments, legislation to strengthen the Paperwork Reduction Act is 
high on the agenda of the associations representing elected officials. 
As Governor of Florida, Lawton Chiles, has worked hard on this issue 
within the National Governors Association. During its 1994 annual 
meeting, the National Governors Association adopted a resolution in 
support of legislation to strengthen the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1980.
  The principal purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is to 
reaffirm and provide additional tools by which to attain the 
fundamental objective of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980--to 
minimize the Federal paperwork burdens imposed on individuals, 
businesses, especially small businesses, educational and nonprofit 
institutions, and State and local governments.
  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 provides a 5-year reauthorization 
of appropriations for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
[OIRA]. Created by the 1980 act, OIRA serves as the focal point at OMB 
for the Act' implementation. OIRA is also the
 focal point for the regulatory review process, which is exercised 
under an Executive order. As the Congress undertakes its fundamental 
changes to the Government processes for the formulation of regulations, 
OIRA's role and its broad authorities under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
will be become even more obvious.

  I would like to highlight just a few of the provisions of the bill. 
It reemphasizes the fundamental responsibilities of each Federal agency 
to minimize new paperwork burdens by thoroughly reviewing each proposed 
collection of information for need and practical utility, the act's 
fundamental standards--need and practical utility. The bill makes 
explicit the responsibility of each Federal agency to conduct this 
review itself, before submitting the proposed collection of information 
for public comment and clearance by OIRA in the Office of Management 
and Budget.
  The bill before us reflects the provisions of S. 560 that further 
enhance public participation in the review of paperwork burdens, when 
they are first being proposed or when an agency is seeking to obtain 
approval to continue to use an existing paperwork requirement. 
Strengthening public participation is at the core of the 1980 act and 
is strengthened even further in this act.
  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 maintains the 1980 act's 
Governmentwide 5-percent goal for the reduction of paperwork burdens on 
the public. Given past experience, some question the effectiveness of 
such goals in producing net reductions in Governmentwide paperwork 
burdens. The Coalition believe that the bill should reflect individual 
agency goals as well. If seriously implemented, the proponents argue 
that such agency goals can become an effective restraint on the 
cumulative growth of Government-sponsored paperwork burdens. Although 
this provision is not in the bill before the committee today, I am 
hopeful that it will be strengthened in this manner before becoming 
law.
  The bill includes amendments to the 1980 act which further empower 
members of the public to help police Federal agency compliance with the 
act. I would like to describe two of these provisions.
  One provision would enable a member of the public to obtain a written 
determination from the OIRA Administrator regarding whether a federally 
sponsored paperwork requirement is in compliance with the act. If the 
agency paperwork requirement is found to be noncompliant, the 
Administrator is charged with taking appropriate remedial action. This 
provision is based upon a similar process added to the Office of 
Federal Procurement Policy Act in 1988.
  The second provision encourages members of the public to identify 
paperwork requirements that have not been submitted for review and 
approval pursuant to the act's requirements. Although the act's public 
protection provisions explicitly shield the public from the imposition 
of any formal agency penalty for failing to comply with such an 
unapproved, or bootleg, paperwork requirement, individuals often feel 
compelled to comply. This is especially true when the individual has an 
ongoing relationship with the agency and that relationship accords the 
agency substantial discretion that could be used to redefine their 
future dealings. In other words, leverage. Under S. 244, a member of 
the public can blow the whistle on such a bootleg paperwork requirement 
and be accorded the protection of anonymity.
  Next, I would like to emphasize that the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 clarifies the 1980 act to make explicit that it applies to 
Government-sponsored third-party paperwork burdens. These are 
recordkeeping, disclosure, or other paperwork burdens that one private 
party imposes on another private party at the direction of a Federal 
agency. In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that such Government-
sponsored third-party paperwork burdens were not subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act.
  That was contrary to the authors' original intent as has been often 
stated by the Governor of Florida, then-Senator Lawton Chiles.
  The Court's decision in Dole versus United Steelworkers of America 
created a potentially vast loophole. The public could be denied the 
act's protections on the basis of the manner in which a Federal agency 
chose to impose a paperwork burden, indirectly rather than directly. It 
is worthy of note that Lawton Chiles went to the trouble and expense of 
filing an amicus brief to the Supreme Court arguing that no such 
exemption for third-party paperwork burdens was intended. Given the 
plain works of the statute, the Court decided otherwise. The bill makes 
explicit the act's coverage of all Government-sponsored paperwork 
burdens. Once this bill is enacted, we can feel confident that this 
major loophole 
[[Page S3507]] will be closed. But given more than a decade of 
experience under the act, it is prudent to remain vigilant to 
additional efforts to restrict the act's reach and public protections.
  The smart use of information by the Government, and its potential to 
minimize the burdens placed on the public, is a core concept of the 
1980 act. The information resources management [IRM] provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 build upon the foundation laid more 
than a decade ago by our former colleague from Florida. These 
provisions of S. 244 are the major contribution of my friend from Ohio, 
who has emphasized the potential of improved IRM policies to make 
Government more effective in serving the Public.
  Mr. President, I would like to recognize the contributions of several 
staff members. First, David Plocher, counsel for Senator Glenn, who 
along with Tony Coe, an associate counsel in the Office of Senate 
Legislative Counsel, did much of the drafting. Next, I would like to 
recognize Frank Polk, the committee's Republican staff director, who 
assisted Senator Roth over the many years of effort that have gotten us 
to this point,
 and also on my staff Rocky Rief and Matthew Sikes, who have been 
diligent in working on this legislation; and, finally, certainly not 
least and probably more than any other individual person, Bill 
Montalto, who has provided assistance to me as well as Chairman Bumpers 
and the ranking Republican members of the Small Business Committee. In 
this and many other efforts Bill has served well many Members of the 
Senate, the Committee on Small Business, and indeed the entire small 
business community. For 13 years, Bill Montalto has served the Small 
Business Committee. Six years prior to that he was in the service of 
the U.S. Army. He was there a lawyer and counsel and a logistics 
specialist.

  I have had an opportunity to work with this remarkable public servant 
for all of those 13 years as he served the Small Business Committee. We 
have worked on a number of legislative initiatives, such as the mentor-
protege program which is now functioning. On the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act, Bill brought his expertise in the small business 
arena to bear in that legislation which was passed by the Armed 
Services Committee and the Governmental Affairs Committee, and helped 
initiate and further small business development centers that are 
operating all over the country. Bill was invaluable in his creation of 
the concept of developing that legislation. The SBA 504 program, no one 
knows more about that program than Bill, and the SBA Preferred Surety 
Bond Program and numerous others which have helped our small business 
community.
  Bill will be leaving the Small Business Committee on the Senate side, 
and my understanding is that he will be going to a key position on the 
Small Business Committee on the House side. So we will continue, 
hopefully, to benefit from his advice and his expertise and his 
dedication in all of these areas.
  So to Bill Montalto I owe a special debt of gratitude today, and I am 
sure Senator Bumpers, who was chairman of the Small Business Committee, 
now ranking Democrat, and others who have worked with him would echo my 
sentiments expressed here today. I am sure Senator Bond and others who 
have worked on this legislation, also, would certainly know that Bill 
has done a wonderful job here.
  Mr. President, with those comments, I urge my colleagues to pass this 
legislation. I hope we can pass it today or certainly tomorrow. And I 
hope that we will be able to have a meeting of the minds with the House 
and send this bill to the President. It is long overdue. I think it 
will help begin to alleviate some of the crushing burden of paperwork 
for so much of our business community.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I rise in 
support of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, S. 244. As an original 
cosponsor, I see this legislation playing a critical role in the 
broader initiative to minimize Government regulatory and paperwork 
burdens imposed at the Federal level.
  I want to say a very special thanks to Chairman Roth for moving this 
bill through his committee. We have given his committee the great 
blessing of about two-thirds of the urgent legislation to be brought 
before the Senate. We thank him for moving this bill forward.
  In addition, a very special thanks to the Senator from Georgia [Mr. 
Nunn] who has long been a champion of paperwork reduction who has 
worked long and hard. With his leadership we passed this several times 
in the Senate. As he indicated in his opening remarks, it now looks 
like we have a receptive majority in the House. I am hopeful that the 
good work that those two friends, as well as the distinguished Senator 
from Ohio, Senator Glenn, have put in, along with Senator Bumpers, my 
predecessor, will bear fruit.
  Small businesses are especially hard hit by excessive regulatory and 
paperwork burdens imposed by the Federal bureaucracy. Each time I 
return home to my State of Missouri, small business owners come up to 
me and say how the unnecessary burdens of Federal regulations are 
really crushing them. The Federal requirements too often force these 
hard-working men and women and small business owners to divert time, 
energy, and their resources away from productive activities, reducing 
the competitiveness of the business and impeding their growth.
  As chairman of the Small Business Committee, I have had the 
opportunity to hear a lot from people around the country in the last 
few months. They are the ones who seem to be crying ``enough'' during 
last November's election. They have told us they are fed up with 
Government that is inefficient and wasteful. They want that to change. 
They are unhappy with the Government's failure to meet their 
expectations in carrying out its responsibility.
  People want Government to work well. Basic governmental functions to 
insure we have clean water to drink, safe medicines to take, and safe 
food to eat are sought by all Americans. But they look at our 
Government today and see an institution that must be brought under 
control.
  And it is not hard to understand their frustration. The paperwork 
burden imposed on Americans in 1993 totaled 6.6 billion hours. Small 
businesses alone spend 1 billion hours simply filling out Government 
paperwork at an annual cost of $100 billion. Furthermore, Government 
regulation costs individuals and businesses more than $500 billion 
annually or about $5,000 per family. Just imagine the potential benefit 
to our economy if some of this valuable time could have been spent on 
product development or sales.
  First, let me assure my colleagues that the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 will not impose new regulatory burdens on individuals and 
businesses. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, we expect more from the 
agencies, not from the public. Whenever an agency imposes a paperwork 
requirement, it must estimate the total amount of time needed to 
fulfill the requirement. The burden is not merely how long it takes to 
complete the Government form, report or survey. A greater burden is 
likely to be the time necessary to understand the requirement, identify 
the information needed to respond, compile the data, and then submit it 
in the required format. It is likely the Government format is vastly 
different from how the small business owner maintains the data.
  The Council on Regulation and Information Management [C-RIM], a group 
which has sought since 1942 to rationalize and minimize the Federal 
regulatory and paperwork reduction processes, believes that Federal 
agencies underestimate the total time burden imposed by their paperwork 
by nearly one-third. C-RIM believes the actual burden is closer to 10 
billion hours, not the 6.6 billion claimed by Federal agencies. If you 
estimate compliance cost at $50 per hour, the annual cost of federally 
imposed paperwork burdens totals $500 billion.
  As a nation, we cannot afford to continue to heap new paperwork and 
regulatory burdens on individuals and businesses. While recognizing 
that the total Federal paperwork burden has continued to grow, the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 has brought some successes. First, the 
1980 act assures that the public will have an opportunity to comment 
upon proposed Federal paperwork burdens and to suggest 
[[Page S3508]] ways to collect necessary information in a less 
burdensome way. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 strengthens 
participation by the public. Small businesses will have an opportunity 
earlier in the process to shed light on the practical business reality 
on a proposed paperwork requirement. In this bill, we are giving them 
opportunities to point out when nearly identical information is being 
collected by another Federal agency. In addition, small businesses will 
be able to comment on the timing of the submission of the data as well 
as the format.
  Recently, the House of Representatives passed its version of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. It is very appropriate that we in the 
Senate act on this important legislation today. This act is part of a 
broad down payment on the regulatory relief program we must pass if
 we expect Americans to maintain trust and respect in their Government.

  Another bill I hope we will consider soon is S. 350, the Regulatory 
Flexibility Amendments Act of 1995. Earlier this year, I introduced 
this bill to remove the prohibition against judicial review of agency 
compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The purpose of the Reg 
Flex Act is very simple. It rejects the notion that one size fits all 
under Government regulations. Under this act, Federal regulators must 
take into account the needs of small business in drafting new 
regulations.
  The SBA Chief Counsel for Advocacy is charged with monitoring Federal 
agency compliance with the Reg Flex Act. Unfortunately, too often 
regulators in some Federal agencies give mere lipservice to the Reg 
Flex Act requirements, because the Reg Flex Act specifically prohibits 
judicial enforcement of the law's requirements. As a result, too many 
Federal regulators have ignored their responsibilities under the act, 
even when the Chief Counsel for Advocacy notifies the agencies of their 
failure to comply.
  My bill is intended to encourage Federal agencies to comply with 
their reg flex obligations by permitting small businesses to go into 
Federal court to enforce compliance by an agency. The judge also will 
have the freedom to stay implementation of a regulation until the 
agency comes into compliance. On March 8, I will chair a hearing before 
the Senate Committee on Small Business to receive testimony from public 
and private witnesses on how to implement better the Reg Flex Act. It 
is my intention to review other administrative remedies to enforce the 
Reg Flex Act so new regulations are written correctly in the first 
place, so the need to challenge agencies in Federal court might be 
minimized.
  Mr. President, when I first elected to the U.S. Senate, I did not 
realize so much of my time would be devoted to getting the Government 
off the backs of individuals and small businesses. As the co-chair of 
the Senate Regulatory Relief Task Force, we have targeted for reform 
the 10 worst regulatory burdens. This move will help small businesses, 
who are the hardest hit by many of these burdensome regulations. We 
need to reinforce the notion that our Government should be a friend of 
small business. Government should not be an enemy of growth and new 
jobs. Unfortunately, today we find a regulatory environment that 
creates too many roadblocks that impede the growth of small business.
  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is an important step toward 
bringing our Government under control. For our Government to demand 
paperwork requiring 10 billion hours per year to fill out is a sign 
that much work needs to be done to reach this goal. This bill will help 
move us in the right direction, and I urge to support its passage.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, today we begin consideration of S. 244, the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This is a badly needed piece of 
legislation, and enjoys broad bipartisan support. Americans are 
drowning in paperwork and need relief now.
  This legislation is an important part of our package of reforms to 
downsize Government; to get the Government off the backs of the 
American people. Together with regulatory reform and unfunded mandates 
legislation, paperwork reduction is an important step forward toward 
improving the lives of ordinary Americans by injecting some common 
sense into the requirements of the Federal Government on our citizens.
  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 strengthens the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980 by setting a goal of reducing the paperwork 
burdens imposed by the Federal Government by 5 percent; clarifying that 
the act will apply to all Government-sponsored collections of 
information; and strengthening and improving both information 
technology management and information dissemination. These are reforms 
and improvements that are long overdue.
  Mr. President, I have had many people, particularly those with small 
businesses, tell me that they would be willing to forgo some aspects of 
a Federal program that might benefit them if only they could be 
protected from unnecessary paperwork as well. As it is, the burdens 
involved are nothing more than a tax: a tax on our productivity. This 
costs America jobs. It deters those who would otherwise open businesses 
from doing so; and it is often the difference between a successful and 
a failing business.
  The American people spoke clearly in last November's elections: 
``rein in big government.'' They want and deserve a smaller and more 
responsive Government. They also want and deserve a system of 
Government that respects the intentions of the Founding Fathers as 
reflected in the 10th amendment to the Constitution: Those powers not 
delegated to the Federal Government are reserved to the people and to 
the States.
  The 10th amendment is not merely an abstract point of political 
philosophy--it reflects the voice of experience by those who understood 
that Government works best when it governs least and when decisions are 
made at the level closest to the people. Decisions about what to 
require in the way of forms, justifications, documentation and 
recordkeeping made in Washington, DC, often lack this sense of the 
practical limits on Government. Thus, what may seem perfectly 
reasonable to a bureaucrat in Washington, DC--who only deals with his 
or her specific program--is experienced by many Americans as an 
exercise in frustration, and often of harassment. When you multiply 
that one bureaucrat by the literally thousands of programs that seem 
reasonable in a vacuum, it does not take long to see that we have the 
recipe for disaster.
  Mr. President, when everyone is in charge, no one is in charge. Thus, 
we cannot absolve ourselves of the burdens caused by the executive 
branch that is, after all, attempting to carry our what it believes to 
the dictates of Congress. Congress has an important role--indeed, an 
obligation--to exercise the kind of oversight that reins in the 
excesses of Government. S. 244 is an important step forward, and I urge 
my colleagues to support its passage.
  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I am very happy that we are today one 
important step closer to reauthorization of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act. This law is essential to reducing the burdens of Government 
paperwork on the American people. The law is also key to improving the 
management of Federal Government information systems--this is essential 
because the Federal Government is now spending $25 billion a year on 
information technology.
  The bill we bring to the floor today is the product of several years 
of bipartisan effort. In fact, this bill is virtually identical to the 
bill passed by unanimous consent in October 1994. This year, I hope we 
can quickly go all the way and get the bill signed into law.
  Our bill makes important improvements to the 1980 Paperwork Reduction 
Act. It strengthens the paperwork clearance process and information 
resources management--both in OMB and the agencies:
  We reauthorize the act for 5 years;
  We overturn the Dole versus United Steelworkers Supreme Court 
decision, so that information disclosure requirements are covered by 
the OMB paperwork clearance process;
  We require agencies to evaluate paperwork proposals and solicit 
public comment on them before the proposals go to OMB for review;
  We create additional opportunities for the public to participate in 
paperwork clearance and other information management decisions;
  [[Page S3509]] We strengthen agency and OMB information resources 
management [IRM] requirements;
  We establish information dissemination standards and require the 
development of a Government Information Locator Service [GILS] to 
ensure improved public access to Government information, especially 
that maintained in electronic format; and
  We make other improvements in the areas of Government statistics, 
records management, computer security, and the management of 
information technology.
  These are important reforms and improvements to the act. We should 
act on this legislation quickly.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that letters of 
support from the Paperwork Reduction Act Coalition and individual 
member organizations may be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                           The Paperwork Reduction


                                                Act Coalition,

                                                    March 2, 1995.
     Hon. Sam Nunn,
     U.S. Senate, Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Nunn: The organizations comprising the 
     steering committee of the Paperwork Reduction Act Coalition 
     wish to express our strong and enthusiastic support for S. 
     244, the ``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.''
       As you know, we have been steadfastly working for enactment 
     of this legislation since 1989. This commitment stems from 
     our belief that S. 244 will significantly strengthen the 
     ability of the federal government to reduce the regulatory 
     paperwork burden upon the private sector and the American 
     public. Time and again it has been demonstrated that 
     unnecessary regulatory costs hinder economic growth and 
     retard job creation and retention. With as much as nine 
     percent of the gross domestic product involved in meeting the 
     federal government's information needs, it is imperative that 
     a strengthened Paperwork Reduction Act be aggressively used 
     to improve productivity, eliminate waste, and reduce the 
     burdens upon businesses and taxpayers.
       To illustrate the breadth of support for this legislation, 
     we have attached a partial list of the members of the 
     Paperwork Reduction Act Coalition. Their commitment to this 
     issue is every bit as sincere as ours.
       We came so close last Congress with passage of S. 560. Now 
     that the House has passed its companion legislation, we have 
     the opportunity to successfully bring this debate to a close. 
     We look forward to helping you achieve that goal.
           Sincerely,
       Chamber of Commerce of the United States; Citizens for a 
     Sound Economy, Council on Regulatory and Information 
     Management; National Association of Manufacturers; National 
     Federation of Independent Business; National Small Business 
     United; Small Business Legislative Council; Aerospace 
     Industries Association of America; Air Transport Association 
     of America; Alliance of American Insurers; American 
     Consulting Engineers Council; American Institute of Merchant 
     Shipping; American Iron and Steel Institute; American 
     Petroleum Institute.
       American Subcontractors Association; American Telephone and 
     Telegraph; Associated Builders and Contractors; Associated 
     Credit Bureaus; Associated General Contractors of America; 
     Association of Manufacturing Technology; Association of 
     Records Managers and Administrators; Automotive Parts and 
     Accessories Association; Biscuit and Cracker Manufacturers' 
     Association; Bristol Myers; Chamber of Commerce of the United 
     States; Chemical Manufacturers Association; Chemical 
     Specialties Manufacturers Association; Citizens Against 
     Government Waste.
       Citizens for a Sound Economy; Computer and Business 
     Equipment Manufacturers Association; Contract Services 
     Association of America; Copper and Brass Fabricators Council; 
     Council on Regulatory and Information Management; Dairy and 
     Food Industries Supply Association; Direct Selling 
     Association; Eastman Kodak Company; Electronic Industries 
     Association; Financial Executive Institute; Food Marketing 
     Institute; Gadsby & Hannan; Gas Appliance Manufacturers 
     Association; General Electric; Glaxo, Inc.; Greater 
     Washington Board of Trade; Hardwood Plywood and Veneer 
     Association.
       Independent Bankers Association of America; International 
     Business Machines; International Communication Industries 
     Association; International Mass Retail Association; Kitchen 
     Cabinet Manufacturers Association; Mail Advertising Service 
     Association International; McDermott, Will & Emery; Motorola 
     Government Electronics Group; National Association of Home 
     Builders of the United States; National Association of 
     Manufacturers; National Association of Plumbing-Heating-
     Cooling Contractors; National Association of the Remodeling 
     Industry; National Association of Wholesalers-Distributors.
       National Federation of Independent Business; National Food 
     Brokers Association; National Food Processors Association; 
     National Foundation for Consumer Credit; National Glass 
     Association; National Restaurant Association; National 
     Roofing Contractors Association; National Security Industrial 
     Association; National Small Business United; National Society 
     of Professional Engineers; National Society of Public 
     Accountants; National Tooling and Machining Association; 
     Northrop Corporation; Packaging Machinery Manufacturers 
     Institute; Painting and Decorating Contractors of America.
       Printing Industries of America; Professional Services 
     Council; Shipbuilders Council of America; Small Business 
     Legislative Council; Society for Marketing Professional 
     Services; Sun Company, Inc.; Sunstrand Corporation; Texaco; 
     United Technologies; Wholesale Florists and Florists Supplies 
     of America.
                                                                    ____

           Members of the Small Business Legislative Council.

       Air Conditioning Contractors of America.
       Alliance for Affordable Health Care.
       Alliance of Independent Store Owners and Professionals.
       American Animal Hospital Association.
       American Association of Nurserymen.
       American Bus Association.
       American Consulting Engineers Council.
       American Council of Independent Laboratories.
       American Floorcovering Association.
       American Gear Manufacturers Association.
       American Machine Tool Distributors Association.
       American Road & Transportation Builders Association.
       American Society of Travel Agents, Inc.
       American Sod Producers Association.
       American Subcontractors Association.
       American Textile Machinery Association.
       American Trucking Associations, Inc.
       American Warehouse Association.
       American Wholesale Marketers Association.
       AMT--The Association of Manufacturing Technology.
       Apparel Retailers of America.
       Architectural Precast Association.
       Associated Builders & Contractors.
       Associated Equipment Distributors.
       Associated Landscape Contractors of America.
       Association of Small Business Development Centers.
       Automotive Service Association.
       Automotive Recyclers Association.
       Bowling Proprietors Association of America.
       Building Service Contractors Association International.
       Business Advertising Council.
       Christian Booksellers Association.
       Council of Fleet Specialists.
       Council of Growing Companies.
       Direct Selling Association.
       Electronics Representatives Association.
       Florists' Transworld Delivery Association.
       Health Industry Representatives Association.
       Helicopter Association International.
       Independent Bakers Association.
       Independent Bankers Association of America.
       Independent Medical Distributors Association.
       International Association of Refrigerated Warehouses.
       International Communications Industries Association.
       International Formalwear Association.
       International Television Association.
       Machinery Dealers National Association.
       Manufacturers Agents National Association.
       Manufacturers Representatives of America, Inc.
       Mechanical Contractors Association of America, Inc.
       National Association for the Self-Employed.
       National Association of Catalog Showroom Merchandisers.
       National Association of Home Builders.
       National Association of Investment Companies.
       National Association of Plumbing-Heating-Cooling 
     Contractors.
       National Association of Private Enterprise.
       National Association of Realtors.
       National Association of Retail Druggists.
       National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds.
       National Association of Small Business Investment 
     Companies.
       National Association of the Remodeling Industry.
       National Association of Truck Stop Operators.
       National Association of Women Business Owners.
       National Chimney Sweep Guild.
       National Association of Catalog Showroom Merchandisers.
       National Coffee Service Association.
       National Electrical Contractors Association.
       National Electrical Manufacturers Representatives 
     Association.
       National Food Brokers Association.
       National Independent Flag Dealers Association.
       National Knitwear Sportswear Association.
       National Lumber & Building Material Dealers Association.
       National Moving and Storage Association.
       National Ornamental & Miscellaneous Metals Association.
       National Paperbox Association.
       [[Page S3510]] National Shoe Retailers Association.
       National Society of Public Accountants.
       National Tire Dealers & Retreaders Association.
       National Tooling and Machining Association.
       National Tour Association.
       National Venture Capital Association.
       Opticians Association of America.
       Organization for the Protection and Advancement of Small 
     Telephone Companies.
       Passenger Vessel Association.
       Petroleum Marketers Association of America.
       Power Transmission Representatives Association.
       Printing Industries of America, Inc.
       Promotional Products Association International.
       Retail Bakers of America.
       Small Business Council of America, Inc.
       Small Business Exporters Association.
       SMC/Pennsylvania Small Business.
       Society of American Florists.
                                                                    ____

                                            National Federation of


                                         Independent Business,

                                    Washington, DC, March 1, 1995.

     Cut Government Redtape and Excessive Paperwork--Support S. 244

     Hon. Sam Nunn,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator: On behalf of the more than 600,000 small 
     business owners of NFIB, I am writing to express our strong 
     support for S. 244, legislation to strengthen the Paperwork 
     Reduction Act (PRA).
       Small business is struggling to swim against the rising 
     tide of regulatory paperwork required by the federal 
     government. This flood of paperwork is overwhelming to small 
     business owners and threatens their ability to survive and 
     prosper. In fact, a recent NFIB Education Foundation survey 
     found that the burden of federal regulation and paperwork was 
     the fastest rising problem facing small business owners. 
     Strengthening the PRA is essential to the livelihood of small 
     business in America.
       If you want entrepreneurs in your state to spend less time 
     filling out forms and more time creating jobs then vote YES 
     on S. 244. Final passage of S. 244 will be a Key Small 
     Business Vote for the 104th Congress.
           Sincerely.

                                           John J. Motley III,

                                                   Vice President,
     Federal Governmental Relations.
                                                                    ____

         Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America,
                                    Washington, DC, March 2, 1995.
     To Members of the United States Senate:
       The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Federation of 215,000 
     businesses, 3,000 state and local chambers of commerce, 1,200 
     trade and professional associations, and 72 American Chambers 
     of Commerce abroad identified the need for federal paperwork 
     reduction as its number three issue of greatest significance 
     for the 104th Congress. Accordingly, I urge your strong 
     support for S. 244, the ``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.''
       Consider this:
       Paperwork burdens carry a $510 billion price tag annually 
     for the American economy;
       The American public spends 6.8 billion hours annually 
     complying with federal paperwork mandates;
       Businesses pay at least twice as much in paperwork costs 
     than for corporate taxes;
       Businesses (both small and large) carry more than 60 
     percent of the paperwork burden; and
       The financial impact from paperwork burdens equals about 
     nine percent of the Gross Domestic Product annually.
       Clearly, this problem has reached gargantuan proportions 
     and must be reversed. The ``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995'' 
     is essential to this goal. If enacted, S. 244 would provide 
     for a stronger Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
     (OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget to conduct 
     centralized reviews of proposed and existing paperwork 
     burdens. It also would provide for increased opportunities 
     for the public to comment on proposed paperwork mandates and 
     for realistic assessments of estimated reporting and 
     recordkeeping. Significantly, S. 244 would reverse the 1990 
     Supreme Court decision in Dole vs. United Steelworkers, which 
     had the effect of limiting OIRA's ability to oversee a 
     substantial amount of the federally imposed paperwork burden, 
     despite the intentions of the authors of the original 
     Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. Any information required to 
     be disclosed to third parties (i.e., where the data is not 
     provided directly to the government) would be subject to the 
     paperwork review process. Finally, this legislation would 
     prescribe specific goals for substantive reductions in the 
     amount of federally required information.
       Because information is the key to meeting many of the needs 
     of society, we acknowledge the validity of appropriate 
     reporting requirements. The business community--and 
     particularly small businesses--do require, however, an 
     information-collection process that is rational and 
     reasonable, and that reflects the centrality of our role as 
     job creators.
       Again, please vote ``YES'' on S. 244, the ``Paperwork 
     Reduction Act of 1995.''
           Sincerely,

                                              R. Bruce Josten.

                                            Senior Vice President,
                                          Membership Policy Group.

  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, while we are waiting and working out, 
hopefully, the managers' amendment, I would like to speak briefly on 
another subject, with the stipulation that if someone comes in, I will 
be glad to be interrupted.


                          ____________________