[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 65 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H4421-H4423]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE 
                              ACT OF 1995

  Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the 
Speakers' table the bill (H.R. 1345) to eliminate budget deficits and 
management inefficiencies in the government of the District of Columbia 
through the establishment of the District of Columbia Financial 
Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority, and for other 
purposes, with Senate amendments thereto, and concur in the Senate 
amendments.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Clerk read the Senate amendments, as follows:

       Senate amendments:
       Page 7, line 2, strike out ``or''
       Page 7, line 6, strike out ``States.'' and insert 
     ``States;''
       Page 7, after line 6, insert:
       (3) to amend, supersede, or alter the provisions of title 
     11 of the District of Columbia Code, or sections 431 through 
     434, 445, and 602(a)(4) of the District of Columbia Self-
     Government and Governmental Reorganization Act (pertaining to 
     the organization powers, and jurisdiction of the District of 
     Columbia courts); or
       (4) to authorize the application of section 103(e) or 
     303(b)(3) of this Act (relating to issuance of subpoenas) to 
     judicial officers or employees of the District of Columbia 
     courts.
       Page 10, strike out lines 7 to 9 and insert:
       (4) maintains a primary residence in the District of 
     Columbia or has a primary place of business in the District 
     of Columbia.
       Page 12, strike out lines 17 to 24, and insert:
       (c) Inapplicability of Certain Employment and Procurement 
     Laws.--
       (1) Civil service laws.--The Executive Director and staff 
     of the Authority may be appointed without regard to the 
     provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing 
     appointments in the competitive service, and paid without 
     regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of 
     chapter 53 of that title relating to classification and 
     General Schedule pay rates.
       (2) District employment and procurement laws.--The 
     Executive Director and staff of the Authority may be 
     appointed and paid without regard to the provisions of the 
     District of Columbia Code governing appointments and 
     salaries. The provisions of the District of Columbia Code 
     governing procurement shall not apply to the Authority.

  Mr. DAVIS (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the Senate amendments be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). Is there objection 
to the request of the gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the original request 
of the gentleman from Virginia?
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I yield to 
the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis], to 
explain the nature of the Senate amendments.
  Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  The Senate has passed the District of Columbia Financial 
Responsibility and Management Assistance Act with several technical and 
clarifying amendments and has returned it to the House.
  The Houses are not in formal disagreement on the issue. I do not find 
the amendments to be in conflict with the nature or the purpose of the 
bill as passed by the House, and I am prepared to accept them and send 
them, send the bill, to the President for his signature.
  The amendments deal with such items as ensuring that the courts are 
protected, the application of District laws to the Authority, and a 
clarification of the qualification of the members of the Authority.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I further reserve the right to object.
  (Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I, 
too, have examined the amendments, and I will not object to them.
  I am inserting a statement from the gentlewoman from Illinois [Mrs. 
Collins], the ranking minority member of the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight, and the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee] 
at this point in the debate.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. NORTON. Further reserving the right to object, I yield to the 
gentleman from New York.
  Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief.
  I just would like to say that it has been my great pleasure to work 
with the distinguished Delegate from Washington, our Nation's Capital, 
who serves with such grace and distinction, the gentlewoman from the 
District of Columbia [Ms. Norton], and it has been my pleasure also to 
work on this bill with the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis], a 
freshman Member from Virginia, and the people of Northern Virginia 
showed great wisdom in sending this young man to us at this time.
  This was a bipartisan bill, passed unanimously by the House under the 
leadership of the committee chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
[Mr. Clinger], who guided all of us in this endeavor.
  This will bring closure to the first step in restoring our Nation's 
Capital City.
  I have enjoyed working with all the Members and with the truly 
responsible members of city government.
  Again, it is a bipartisan effort that we all can take pride in, and I 
urge unanimous support.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1345, the District of 
Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act of 
1995, as amended by the Senate last night.
  The amendments made by the Senate are, for the most part, clarifying 
in nature. The amendment on page 7 involves the relationship of the 
Authority with the District of Columbia courts. The amendment on page 
12 clarifies the applicability of certain employment and procurement 
laws to the Authority's Executive Director and staff.
  The amendment on page 10 of the House engrossed bill modifies a 
provision of the legislation dealing with the required qualification 
for appointment to the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility 
and Management Assistance Authority. As the bill now before us reads, 
persons appointed to the Authority must all ``be individuals who 
maintain a primary residence in the District of Columbia or who have a 
primary place of business in the District of Columbia.''
  This is a useful change because while maintaining the requirement 
that all appointees have clear ties to the District, it at the same 
time broadens the pool of persons eligible to be selected. In that 
regard, I think it is clear that having ``a primary place of business 
in the District'' is broader than having to own a business here. There 
are certainly many people who are not the actual owners of a business 
located in the District, but whose primary place of business is there. 
For example, an accountant who works for an accounting firm in the 
District of Columbia can surely be said to have the District as their 
primary place of business.
  Owning a business, and doing business are not necessarily the same 
thing, and not everyone who has a primary place of business is the 
owner of that business.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good compromise with the Senate and I urge my 
colleagues to agree to H.R. 1345 as amended by the State.
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. NORTON. Further reserving the right to object, I yield to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania, the distinguished chairman of the full 
committee.
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me.
  I just want to rise and commend you and the gentleman from Virginia 
[Mr. Davis], the gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh], and the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Dixon] for a truly, I think, historic bipartisan 
effort to bring to the District of Columbia the kind of control that I 
think is going to be necessary to restore the District to fiscal 
sanity.
                      [[Page H4422]] {time}  1130

  You have been absolute giants in achieving this, and I think it is so 
important this has been a bipartisan effort. I think it was absolutely 
essential that we got together as a Congress to accomplish this, so my 
hat is off to all of you. It was not an easy job. I know the hours, the 
days, the weeks that were involved in it. The gentleman from Virginia 
[Mr. Davis] particularly who was the chief architect of this, he 
deserves all the credit that he is going to receive for accomplishing 
this, and to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia [Ms. Norton] 
I say, ``Again thank you so much for all you have done to make this 
happen.''
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlemen for 
their kind and gracious remarks and for all of their unyielding help 
and determination during this very difficult process. I am pleased that 
it is at an end and it has received such remarkable support in this 
House, in the Senate, and I applaud especially the efforts of the 
subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis], who has 
worked untiringly for fair results.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, in the bill originally passed by the House, 
we set out to require that members of the Authority have a stake in 
this city, and used as evidence the payment of personal income or 
business taxes in the District. As part of the technical amendments 
adopted in the Senate, this language, for the purpose of clarification, 
was modified to require members to maintain a primary residence or have 
a primary place of business in the District. As with the original House 
provision, it is intended that members of the Authority have a clear 
tax-based stake in the District. Such a stake exists where a person 
pays personal income taxes or, because his or her primary place of 
business is headquartered in the District, pays business taxes to the 
District. Such a stake, however, clearly does not exist where a person 
merely, by virtue of employment, works in the District but pays no 
business taxes in the District. As an indication of this intent, the 
Senate agreed to eliminate a requirement of employment in one of its 
proposals. By so doing they agreed to the elimination of individuals 
who work for the government or for private employers but live elsewhere 
and pay no personal or business taxes in the District of Columbia. As 
reiterated in each of the hearings on this legislation held by the 
House Subcommittee on the District of Columbia, such basic 
stakeholdership is critical to the ultimate legitimacy and success of 
such authorities.
  Section 202(g) allowing line-item authority by the Mayor and the city 
council is necessary during the control period because the finances all 
of the revenue of the District must be treated as a whole and the same 
financial discipline applied in the same fashion to all units that are 
funded by the District of Columbia government. Home rule requires that 
first the school board and then the Mayor and the city council initiate 
any necessary designation and realignment of expenditures before any 
action may be taken by the Authority. Therefore, there was no way to 
avoid line-item authority by any of the city's elected leaders. 
However, Congress intends no interference with the Home Rule Act 
jurisdiction of the elected board of education. Although no agency is 
protected from cuts that may be necessary to bring the city's budget as 
a whole into line, Congress does not intend that there be raiding of 
the school system budget. The Authority and, if necessary, the Congress 
itself will enforce the board of education's existing legal 
prerogatives.
  Nor does the Congress endorse recent implications that it would be 
best for the Board of Education, the school system, or the 
Superintendent to be under the jurisdiction of other elected officials. 
The residents of the District, elected officials, or the Authority may 
make appropriate recommendations in this regard. However, it is not 
appropriate for Congress to make such a significant change without 
receiving a recommendation pursuant to hearings and a thoughtful 
process, and Congress has no evidence that would warrant such a change 
at this time. In H.R. 1345, Congress has made only those changes 
necessary to meet the financial emergency that is the subject matter of 
this legislation.
  The Home Rule Charter establishes the Board of Education as an 
independent agency of the District government and gives it the 
statutory authority and jurisdiction to determine all questions of 
general policy related to the schools, direct expenditures, appoint the 
superintendent of schools, enter into negotiations and binding 
contracts, provide state certification for personnel, and control the 
use of public school buildings and grounds. While H.R. 1345 gives line-
item authority over the school system's budget to the Mayor and city 
council, it is not intended to change the relationship between the 
board of education and city council. Just as the Authority should not 
be able to reorder the priorities of the Mayor and the city council, 
the Mayor and the council should not be able to reorder the board of 
education's educational priorities.
  Elected officials and the Authority need to be especially vigilant in 
guarding the school board's independence. Because there is no bright 
line between budget and policy, it would not be difficult to trespass 
into the legitimate areas reserved for the school board. One important 
way to avoid this problem is, before a final decision is made on any 
line-item cut in the school system's budget, there should be 
collaboration and an effort to reach consensus among elected officials 
and the superintendent of schools. This is how the Mayor and the 
council will relate to the Authority and it is how they in turn should 
relate to the schools.
  We note that District of Columbia elected officials have worked 
collaboratively in the past to establish a formula for public school 
funding similar to funding formulas in many school districts, and these 
efforts should be continued.
  Since Congress gave the district authority to cut the school system's 
budget during the fiscal year, that authority has been used to make 
large cuts in the school system's budget late in the fiscal year. 
September is the time in the fiscal year when the city scrambles to 
balance its budget by ordering cuts to make up for agency overspending. 
These actions destabilize school operations and directly impact on 
local funding. While it is true that the school system spends most of 
its budget at the beginning of the fiscal year, and spending activities 
drop during the summer months, the system needs its budgeted money to 
reopen schools in September, the last month in the fiscal year. If the 
council is able to raid the school system's budget late in the fiscal 
year, the board may be unable to balance its budget. Every effort 
should be made to do careful planning to avoid sudden and unplanned 
cuts.
  Finally, the Congress is particularly concerned that there be no 
political influence in the operation of the schools or in matters such 
as the awarding of contracts.
  Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that the 
District of Columbia Subcommittee's ranking member, Eleanor Holmes 
Norton, and the subcommittee's Chair, Tom Davis, were able to reach 
agreement with members of the other body on minor technical changes in 
this bill. Their determination to produce a bipartisan and bicameral 
piece of legislation has paid off for them and for the residents of the 
District of Columbia. These two members are to be commended for their 
fine work.
  H.R. 1345, the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and 
Management Assistance Act, is a carefully crafted bill which balances 
the interests of the District and Federal Governments. It provides the 
District with the relief it desperately needs from the extreme 
financial crisis confronting it, while it also assures the continued 
delivery of essential public services to local residents, Federal 
agencies, and the many millions of our constituents who visit the 
Nation's Capital each year.
  I will continue to work closely with Chairmen Clinger, Tom Davis, and 
Eleanor Norton, to ensure that the Congress does its fair share to help 
restore the District's financial health and bring an end to the need 
for this new Authority. I want to see the District back on its feet, 
and soon.
  I am pleased that this bill won the unanimous support of our Members 
when it was considered on the House floor earlier this week. It 
deserved the same here today.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the District 
of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act. 
This act will create a presidentially-appointed Financial Control Board 
to oversee the budget and finances of the District of Columbia 
government.
  The city of Washington, DC, is our Nation's Capital and I believe 
that the U.S. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that this city 
remains financially solvent and a shining example of our Nation's 
commitment to cities.
  As a former member of the city council of the city of Houston, TX, I 
clearly understand the critical issues confronting many of our Nation's 
cities, such as a shrinking tax base, high unemployment, an increase in 
crime and, in many instances, a loss of hope among many residents.
  Some Americans believe that we should abandon our cities. However, I 
still strongly believe in our Nation's cities. They deserve our 
unequivocal support to become economically viable again. Our cities 
also deserve our support because they serve as central places where all 
Americans can assemble to celebrate our common cultural heritage.
  I applaud my colleagues, Eleanor Holmes Norton of the District of 
Columbia and Thomas Davis of Virginia for their efforts to secure 
passage of this bill. After this bill becomes law and the Financial 
Control Board completes its work, I believe that the District of 
Columbia will emerge as an even greater city and a powerful symbol of 
our Nation's promise.
   [[Page H4423]] Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of 
objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). Is there objection 
to the initial request of the gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________