[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 54 (Wednesday, April 24, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H3746-H3754]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PAPERWORK ELIMINATION ACT OF 1996
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 409 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 409
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule
XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 2715) to amend chapter 35 of title 44, United
States Code, popularly known as the Paperwork Reduction Act,
to minimize the burden of Federal
[[Page H3747]]
paperwork demands upon small businesses, educational and
nonprofit institutions, Federal contractors, State and local
governments, and other persons through the sponsorship and
use of alternative information technologies. The first
reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate
shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Small Business. After
general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider
as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the
five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute
recommended by the Committee on Small Business now printed in
the bill. Each section of the committee amendment in the
nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. During
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on
the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has
caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional
Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII.
Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. At the
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the
Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with
such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may
demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted
in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and
amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
{time} 1230
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). The gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. Linder] is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall], pending
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
(Mr. LINDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks and include extraneous material.)
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 409 is an open rule
providing for the consideration of H.R. 2715, the Paperwork Elimination
Act of 1996. This rule provides 1 hour of general debate divided
equally between the chairman and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Small Business.
House Resolution 409 makes in order as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Small Business
now printed in the bill. Any Member will have the opportunity to offer
an amendment to the bill under the 5-minute rule. Finally, the rule
provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions as is
the right of the minority. Under this rule, the Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis
of whether the Member offering an amendment has had that amendment
preprinted in the Congressional Record.
I am pleased this bill will be considered under an open rule, which
was unanimously approved by the Rules Committee yesterday. While the
chairman of the Small Business Committee testified to the Rules
Committee that she did not expect many amendments, this rule will
provide the entire House with sufficient time to offer amendments and
express any persisting apprehension about the bill.
Mr. Speaker, the American people have endured a brutal winter and
welcome the arrival of spring. Unfortunately, our citizens still must
deal with a blizzard of Federal paperwork requirements. As we approach
the 21st century, the Paperwork Elimination Act recognizes the coming
of non-paper-dependent information technologies, and will help reduce
the avalanche of paper that has covered American taxpayers and small
businesses.
I strongly supported the Paperwork Reduction Act that this Congress
passed during the consideration of the Contract With America. That bill
reduced the information collection burdens on the public and assured a
more efficient and productive administration of information resources.
Today's legislation builds upon the progress in paperwork reduction
brought about by the enactment of that reform legislation.
The legislation before us today will further reduce the burden of
Federal paperwork on small businesses and individuals by providing for
the optional use of electronic technologies to meet the demands of
Federal paperwork regulations. The American people spend billions of
hours every year filling out Federal forms and submitting records to
the Government, and it makes sense to allow those who have the capacity
to comply with regulations by computer to take advantage of the
information superhighway.
The Rules Committee heard testimony that the amount of time and
effort spent by our citizens in complying with Federal regulatory
paperwork represents a dollar value equal to 9 percent of the gross
domestic product. The time and effort filling out paperwork would be
better spent on the creation of new jobs.
I have always believed that those nations that have achieved the most
impressive growth in the past have not been those with rigid Government
controls, and we all know that Federal regulations and paperwork
requirements are strangling job creation and productivity. Excessive
Government regulatory mandates are not beneficial to economic
development, and this bill enables small businesses and all taxpayers
to save valuable time and money.
The Paperwork Elimination Act of 1996 has received considerable
support, and I want to recognize Chairman Jan Meyers and Representative
Peter Torkildsen, chairman of the Small Business Committee's Government
Programs Subcommittee. Their bill effectively reduces the paperwork
burden, and also benefits the environment by reducing both the need for
and the disposal of paper products. They have crafted sound legislation
which I believe will receive overwhelming bipartisan support.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2715 was favorably reported out of the Committee
on Small Business by voice vote, and this rule received the unanimous
support of the Rules Committee. I urge my colleagues to support this
rule, and I look forward to a thoughtful debate on the Paperwork
Elimination Act of 1996.
Mr. Speaker, I submit the following extraneous material for
inclusion in the Congressional Record:
THE AMENDMENT PROCESS UNDER SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE,\1\ 103D CONGRESS V. 104TH CONGRESS
[As of April 23, 1996]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
103d Congress 104th Congress
Rule type ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of rules Percent of total Number of rules Percent of total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open/Modified-open \2\.............. 46 44 62 59
Modified Closed \3\................. 49 47 26 25
Closed \4\.......................... 9 9 17 16
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 104 100 105 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This table applies only to rules which provide for the original consideration of bills, joint resolutions or
budget resolutions and which provide for an amendment process. It does not apply to special rules which only
waive points of order against appropriations bills which are already privileged and are considered under an
open amendment process under House rules.
\2\ An open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule. A
modified open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule
subject only to an overall time limit on the amendment process and/or a requirement that the amendment be
preprinted in the Congressional Record.
\3\ A modified closed rule is one under which the Rules Committee limits the amendments that may be offered only
to those amendments designated in the special rule or the Rules Committee report to accompany it, or which
preclude amendments to a particular portion of a bill, even though the rest of the bill may be completely open
to amendment.
\4\ A closed rule is one under which no amendments may be offered (other than amendments recommended by the
committee in reporting the bill).
[[Page H3748]]
SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE, 104TH CONGRESS
[As of April 23, 1996]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disposition of
H. Res. No. (Date rept.) Rule type Bill No. Subject rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 38 (1/18/95)........... O................ H.R. 5........... Unfunded Mandate A: 350-71 (1/19/
Reform. 95).
H. Res. 44 (1/24/95)........... MC............... H. Con. Res. 17.. Social Security....... A: 255-172 (1/25/
H.J. Res. 1...... Balanced Budget Amdt.. 95).
H. Res. 51 (1/31/95)........... O................ H.R. 101......... Land Transfer, Taos A: voice vote (2/
Pueblo Indians. 1/95).
H. Res. 52 (1/31/95)........... O................ H.R. 400......... Land Exchange, Arctic A: voice vote (2/
Nat'l. Park and 1/95).
Preserve.
H. Res. 53 (1/31/95)........... O................ H.R. 440......... Land Conveyance, Butte A: voice vote (2/
County, Calif. 1/95).
H. Res. 55 (2/1/95)............ O................ H.R. 2........... Line Item Veto........ A: voice vote (2/
2/95).
H. Res. 60 (2/6/95)............ O................ H.R. 665......... Victim Restitution.... A: voice vote (2/
7/95).
H. Res. 61 (2/6/95)............ O................ H.R. 666......... Exclusionary Rule A: voice vote (2/
Reform. 7/95).
H. Res. 63 (2/8/95)............ MO............... H.R. 667......... Violent Criminal A: voice vote (2/
Incarceration. 9/95).
H. Res. 69 (2/9/95)............ O................ H.R. 668......... Criminal Alien A: voice vote (2/
Deportation. 10/95).
H. Res. 79 (2/10/95)........... MO............... H.R. 728......... Law Enforcement Block A: voice vote (2/
Grants. 13/95).
H. Res. 83 (2/13/95)........... MO............... H.R. 7........... National Security PQ: 229-100; A:
Revitalization. 227-127 (2/15/
95).
H. Res. 88 (2/16/95)........... MC............... H.R. 831......... Health Insurance PQ: 230-191; A:
Deductibility. 229-188 (2/21/
95).
H. Res. 91 (2/21/95)........... O................ H.R. 830......... Paperwork Reduction A: voice vote (2/
Act. 22/95).
H. Res. 92 (2/21/95)........... MC............... H.R. 889......... Defense Supplemental.. A: 282-144 (2/22/
95).
H. Res. 93 (2/22/95)........... MO............... H.R. 450......... Regulatory Transition A: 252-175 (2/23/
Act. 95).
H. Res. 96 (2/24/95)........... MO............... H.R. 1022........ Risk Assessment....... A: 253-165 (2/27/
95).
H. Res. 100 (2/27/95).......... O................ H.R. 926......... Regulatory Reform and A: voice vote (2/
Relief Act. 28/95).
H. Res. 101 (2/28/95).......... MO............... H.R. 925......... Private Property A: 271-151 (3/2/
Protection Act. 95).
H. Res. 103 (3/3/95)........... MO............... H.R. 1058........ Securities Litigation .................
Reform.
H. Res. 104 (3/3/95)........... MO............... H.R. 988......... Attorney A: voice vote (3/
Accountability Act. 6/95).
H. Res. 105 (3/6/95)........... MO............... ................. ...................... A: 257-155 (3/7/
95).
H. Res. 108 (3/7/95)........... Debate........... H.R. 956......... Product Liability A: voice vote (3/
Reform. 8/95).
H. Res. 109 (3/8/95)........... MC............... ................. ...................... PQ: 234-191 A:
247-181 (3/9/
95).
H. Res. 115 (3/14/95).......... MO............... H.R. 1159........ Making Emergency Supp. A: 242-190 (3/15/
Approps. 95).
H. Res. 116 (3/15/95).......... MC............... H.J. Res. 73..... Term Limits Const. A: voice vote (3/
Amdt. 28/95).
H. Res. 117 (3/16/95).......... Debate........... H.R. 4........... Personal A: voice vote (3/
Responsibility Act of 21/95).
1995.
H. Res. 119 (3/21/95).......... MC............... ................. ...................... A: 217-211 (3/22/
95).
H. Res. 125 (4/3/95)........... O................ H.R. 1271........ Family Privacy A: 423-1 (4/4/
Protection Act. 95).
H. Res. 126 (4/3/95)........... O................ H.R. 660......... Older Persons Housing A: voice vote (4/
Act. 6/95).
H. Res. 128 (4/4/95)........... MC............... H.R. 1215........ Contract With America A: 228-204 (4/5/
Tax Relief Act of 95).
1995.
H. Res. 130 (4/5/95)........... MC............... H.R. 483......... Medicare Select A: 253-172 (4/6/
Expansion. 95).
H. Res. 136 (5/1/95)........... O................ H.R. 655......... Hydrogen Future Act of A: voice vote (5/
1995. 2/95).
H. Res. 139 (5/3/95)........... O................ H.R. 1361........ Coast Guard Auth. FY A: voice vote (5/
1996. 9/95).
H. Res. 140 (5/9/95)........... O................ H.R. 961......... Clean Water Amendments A: 414-4 (5/10/
95).
H. Res. 144 (5/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 535......... Fish Hatchery-- A: voice vote (5/
Arkansas. 15/95).
H. Res. 145 (5/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 584......... Fish Hatchery--Iowa... A: voice vote (5/
15/95).
H. Res. 146 (5/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 614......... Fish Hatchery-- A: voice vote (5/
Minnesota. 15/95).
H. Res. 149 (5/16/95).......... MC............... H. Con. Res. 67.. Budget Resolution FY PQ: 252-170 A:
1996. 255-168 (5/17/
95).
H. Res. 155 (5/22/95).......... MO............... H.R. 1561........ American Overseas A: 233-176 (5/23/
Interests Act. 95).
H. Res. 164 (6/8/95)........... MC............... H.R. 1530........ Nat. Defense Auth. FY PQ: 225-191 A:
1996. 233-183 (6/13/
95).
H. Res. 167 (6/15/95).......... O................ H.R. 1817........ MilCon Appropriations PQ: 223-180 A:
FY 1996. 245-155 (6/16/
95).
H. Res. 169 (6/19/95).......... MC............... H.R. 1854........ Leg. Branch Approps. PQ: 232-196 A:
FY 1996. 236-191 (6/20/
95).
H. Res. 170 (6/20/95).......... O................ H.R. 1868........ For. Ops. Approps. FY PQ: 221-178 A:
1996. 217-175 (6/22/
95).
H. Res. 171 (6/22/95).......... O................ H.R. 1905........ Energy & Water A: voice vote (7/
Approps. FY 1996. 12/95).
H. Res. 173 (6/27/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 79..... Flag Constitutional PQ: 258-170 A:
Amendment. 271-152 (6/28/
95).
H. Res. 176 (6/28/95).......... MC............... H.R. 1944........ Emer. Supp. Approps... PQ: 236-194 A:
234-192 (6/29/
95).
H. Res. 185 (7/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 1977........ Interior Approps. FY PQ: 235-193 D:
1996. 192-238 (7/12/
95).
H. Res. 187 (7/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1977........ Interior Approps. FY PQ: 230-194 A:
1996 #2. 229-195 (7/13/
95).
H. Res. 188 (7/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1976........ Agriculture Approps. PQ: 242-185 A:
FY 1996. voice vote (7/18/
95).
H. Res. 190 (7/17/95).......... O................ H.R. 2020........ Treasury/Postal PQ: 232-192 A:
Approps. FY 1996. voice vote (7/18/
95).
H. Res. 193 (7/19/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 96..... Disapproval of MFN to A: voice vote (7/
China. 20/95).
H. Res. 194 (7/19/95).......... O................ H.R. 2002........ Transportation PQ: 217-202 (7/21/
Approps. FY 1996. 95).
H. Res. 197 (7/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 70.......... Exports of Alaskan A: voice vote (7/
Crude Oil. 24/95).
H. Res. 198 (7/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 2076........ Commerce, State A: voice vote (7/
Approps. FY 1996. 25/95).
H. Res. 201 (7/25/95).......... O................ H.R. 2099........ VA/HUD Approps. FY A: 230-189 (7/25/
1996. 95).
H. Res. 204 (7/28/95).......... MC............... S. 21............ Terminating U.S. Arms A: voice vote (8/
Embargo on Bosnia. 1/95).
H. Res. 205 (7/28/95).......... O................ H.R. 2126........ Defense Approps. FY A: 409-1 (7/31/
1996. 95).
H. Res. 207 (8/1/95)........... MC............... H.R. 1555........ Communications Act of A: 255-156 (8/2/
1995. 95).
H. Res. 208 (8/1/95)........... O................ H.R. 2127........ Labor, HHS Approps. FY A: 323-104 (8/2/
1996. 95).
H. Res. 215 (9/7/95)........... O................ H.R. 1594........ Economically Targeted A: voice vote (9/
Investments. 12/95).
H. Res. 216 (9/7/95)........... MO............... H.R. 1655........ Intelligence A: voice vote (9/
Authorization FY 1996. 12/95).
H. Res. 218 (9/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1162........ Deficit Reduction A: voice vote (9/
Lockbox. 13/95).
H. Res. 219 (9/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1670........ Federal Acquisition A: 414-0 (9/13/
Reform Act. 95).
H. Res. 222 (9/18/95).......... O................ H.R. 1617........ CAREERS Act........... A: 388-2 (9/19/
95).
H. Res. 224 (9/19/95).......... O................ H.R. 2274........ Natl. Highway System.. PQ: 241-173 A:
375-39-1 (9/20/
95).
H. Res. 225 (9/19/95).......... MC............... H.R. 927......... Cuban Liberty & Dem. A: 304-118 (9/20/
Solidarity. 95).
H. Res. 226 (9/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 743......... Team Act.............. A: 344-66-1 (9/27/
95).
H. Res. 227 (9/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 1170........ 3-Judge Court......... A: voice vote (9/
28/95).
H. Res. 228 (9/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 1601........ Internatl. Space A: voice vote (9/
Station. 27/95).
H. Res. 230 (9/27/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 108.... Continuing Resolution A: voice vote (9/
FY 1996. 28/95).
H. Res. 234 (9/29/95).......... O................ H.R. 2405........ Omnibus Science Auth.. A: voice vote (10/
11/95).
H. Res. 237 (10/17/95)......... MC............... H.R. 2259........ Disapprove Sentencing A: voice vote (10/
Guidelines. 18/95).
H. Res. 238 (10/18/95)......... MC............... H.R. 2425........ Medicare Preservation PQ: 231-194 A:
Act. 227-192 (10/19/
95).
H. Res. 239 (10/19/95)......... C................ H.R. 2492........ Leg. Branch Approps... PQ: 235-184 A:
voice vote (10/
31/95).
H. Res. 245 (10/25/95)......... MC............... H. Con. Res. 109. Social Security PQ: 228-191 A:
H.R. 2491........ Earnings Reform. 235-185 (10/26/
Seven-Year Balanced 95).
Budget.
H. Res. 251 (10/31/95)......... C................ H.R. 1833........ Partial Birth Abortion A: 237-190 (11/1/
Ban. 95).
H. Res. 252 (10/31/95)......... MO............... H.R. 2546........ D.C. Approps.......... A: 241-181 (11/1/
95).
H. Res. 257 (11/7/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 115.... Cont. Res. FY 1996.... A: 216-210 (11/8/
95).
H. Res. 258 (11/8/95).......... MC............... H.R. 2586........ Debt Limit............ A: 220-200 (11/10/
95).
H. Res. 259 (11/9/95).......... O................ H.R. 2539........ ICC Termination Act... A: voice vote (11/
14/95).
H. Res. 261 (11/9/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 115.... Cont. Resolution...... A: 223-182 (11/10/
95).
H. Res. 262 (11/9/95).......... C................ H.R. 2586........ Increase Debt Limit... A: 220-185 (11/10/
95).
H. Res. 269 (11/15/95)......... O................ H.R. 2564........ Lobbying Reform....... A: voice vote (11/
16/95).
H. Res. 270 (11/15/95)......... C................ H.J. Res. 122.... Further Cont. A: 229-176 (11/15/
Resolution. 95).
H. Res. 273 (11/16/95)......... MC............... H.R. 2606........ Prohibition on Funds A: 239-181 (11/17/
for Bosnia. 95).
H. Res. 284 (11/29/95)......... O................ H.R. 1788........ Amtrak Reform......... A: voice vote (11/
30/95).
H. Res. 287 (11/30/95)......... O................ H.R. 1350........ Maritime Security Act. A: voice vote (12/
6/95).
H. Res. 293 (12/7/95).......... C................ H.R. 2621........ Protect Federal Trust PQ: 223-183 A:
Funds. 228-184 (12/14/
95).
H. Res. 303 (12/13/95)......... O................ H.R. 1745........ Utah Public Lands.....
H. Res. 309 (12/18/95)......... C................ H.Con. Res. 122.. Budget Res. W/ PQ: 230-188 A:
President. 229-189 (12/19/
95).
H. Res. 313 (12/19/95)......... O................ H.R. 558......... Texas Low-Level A: voice vote (12/
Radioactive. 20/95).
H. Res. 323 (12/21/95)......... C................ H.R. 2677........ Natl. Parks & Wildlife Tabled (2/28/96).
Refuge.
H. Res. 366 (2/27/96).......... MC............... H.R. 2854........ Farm Bill............. PQ: 228-182 A:
244-168 (2/28/
96).
H. Res. 368 (2/28/96).......... O................ H.R. 994......... Small Business Growth. .................
H. Res. 371 (3/6/96)........... C................ H.R. 3021........ Debt Limit Increase... A: voice vote (3/
7/96).
H. Res. 372 (3/6/96)........... MC............... H.R. 3019........ Cont. Approps. FY 1996 PQ: voice vote A:
235-175 (3/7/
96).
H. Res. 380 (3/12/96).......... MC............... H.R. 2703........ Effective Death A: 251-157 (3/13/
Penalty. 96).
H. Res. 384 (3/14/96).......... MC............... H.R. 2202........ Immigration........... PQ: 233-152 A:
voice vote (3/21/
96).
H. Res. 386 (3/20/96).......... C................ H.J. Res. 165.... Further Cont. Approps. PQ: 234-187 A:
237-183 (3/21/
96).
H. Res. 388 (3/20/96).......... C................ H.R. 125......... Gun Crime Enforcement. A: 244-166 (3/22/
96).
H. Res. 391 (3/27/96).......... C................ H.R. 3136........ Contract w/America PQ: 232-180 A:
Advancement. 232-177, (3/28/
96).
H. Res. 392 (3/27/96).......... MC............... H.R. 3103........ Health Coverage PQ: 229-186 A:
Affordability. Voice Vote (3/29/
96).
H. Res. 395 (3/29/96).......... MC............... H.J. Res. 159.... Tax Limitation Const. PQ: 232-168 A:
Amdmt.. 234-162 (4/15/
96).
H. Res. 396 (3/29/96).......... O................ H.R. 842......... Truth in Budgeting Act A: voice vote (4/
17/96).
H. Res. 409 (4/23/96).......... O................ H.R. 2715........ Paperwork Elimination .................
Act.
H. Res. 410 (4/23/96).......... O................ H.R. 1675........ Natl. Wildlife Refuge. .................
H. Res. 411 (4/23/96).......... O................ H.J. Res. 175.... Further Cont. Approps. .................
FY 1996.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Codes: O-open rule; MO-modified open rule; MC-modified closed rule; C-closed rule; A-adoption vote; D-defeated;
PQ-previous question vote. Source: Notices of Action Taken, Committee on Rules, 104th Congress.
[[Page H3749]]
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. HALL of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 409 is an open rule
which will allow full and fair debate on H.R. 2715, a bill to reduce
the burden of Federal paperwork requirements for small businessmen and
individuals.
The bill, the Paperwork Elimination Act, follows last year's
enactment of the Paperwork Reduction Act. It is a continuation of
Congress' efforts to reduce the demands made on our citizens as a
result of Federal regulation.
As my colleague from Georgia has described, this rule provides 1 hour
of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Small Business.
Under this rule, amendments will be allowed under the 5-minute rule,
the normal amending process in the House. All Members, on both sides of
the aisle, will have the opportunity to offer amendments.
This rule is an easy one for me to support. The normal committee
process was followed before the bill was presented to the Rules
Committee. The Small Business Committee held a public hearing to
consider the bill's provisions. Then the committee held a markup,
amended the bill, and reported it by voice vote.
Mr. Speaker, this is an example of the kind of rule the Rules
Committee should be reporting. This is the kind of process the House
should be following.
I urge the adoption of the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Regula). Pursuant to House Resolution
409 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 2715.
The Chair designates the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Taylor]
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, and requests the gentleman from
Indiana [Mr. Burton] to assume the chair temporarily.
{time} 1237
in the committee of the whole
Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R.
2715) to amend chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, popularly
known as the Paperwork Reduction Act, to minimize the burden of Federal
paperwork demands upon small businesses, educational and nonprofit
institutions, Federal contractors, State and local governments, and
other persons through the sponsorship and use of alternative
information technologies, with Mr. Burton of Indiana, Chairman pro
tempore, in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentlewoman from Kansas [Mrs. Meyers] and the
gentleman from New York [Mr. LaFalce] each will be recognized for 30
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Kansas [Mrs. Meyers].
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
(Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to cosponsor and
support the Paperwork Elimination Act of 1996, legislation which is
sponsored by Congressman Torkildsen.
This legislation is a winner. Potentially, it will contribute to
billions of dollars of savings in reduced regulatory compliance costs
that small business and the public must pay in order to meet the
Federal Governments paperwork demands. It is not only user friendly, it
is also environmentally and public friendly.
I urge my colleagues vote for this bill.
Congressman Torkildsen is the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Government Programs of the Small Business Committee. As a result of his
work, the full committee voted unanimously on March 29 to report the
bill favorably. This bill enjoys bipartisan support. The administration
testified, welcomed the congressional support and attention the bill
represents, and suggested an amendment which was adopted. The Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration joined in the
support. So did the small business witnesses.
We on the Small Business Committee have heard testimony that the
dollar cost of Federal paperwork demands approximates $510 billion
annually. In 1992 that dollar amount estimate of the time and effort
the American public spends to meet regulatory paperwork requirements
equalled 9 percent of the gross domestic product. I believe that
percentage would be about the same today.
Small business pays a disproportionate share of that burden. That
huge figure gives you a picture of the cumulative costs. Too
frequently, these costs are barriers to job creation, job preservation,
and economic productivity. They are the costs of Government which are
hidden taxes because the money must be paid, and it is not paid by
Government spending or collected by the Internal Revenue Service.
Given the significant role small business and small business
entrepreneurs play in our economy, it makes common sense to do what is
possible to eliminate and reduce these costs. The Paperwork Elimination
Act emphasizes the opportunity provided to reduce costs by electronic
compliance with the information demands of regulatory compliance.
This bill builds on the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. We passed
that legislation as part of the Contract With America last session.
Every Democrat and Republican voted for that measure and the President
enthusiastically singed it last May. It went into effect his past
October.
The Congress established burden reduction goals for the executive
branch in that act. We in the House were particularly enthusiastic that
the goals be established and that we try to meet them. For the next 2
years, the goals is to reduce the overall burden of Federal paperwork
requirements by 10 percent. For the following 4 years the goal becomes
5 percent each year.
There were and continue to be serious skeptics as to whether these
goals can be reached. We all agree that the Federal Government should
aspire and do what it can to reach them. After all, 10 percent of $510
billion would be a hidden tax reduction of $51 billion.
For many of us, and I think we should thank Mr. Torkildsen for
continuing to work on this, what makes those goals reasonable is the
promise of the information age we live in. New information
technologies, such as the growing use of computers and modems, which
even the children are learning to use, holds out the promise that the
paperwork costs can be reduced. If the Government gets smarter in
leading the way for the public's use of new technology, those reduction
goals can be reached.
The Paperwork Elimination Act is intended to help.
It requires Federal agencies to think strategically and consider how
to provide electronic options to regulatory compliance each and every
time an agency comes up with a new proposal for reporting,
recordkeeping, or disclosure of information.
It requires that the electronic option be considered when agencies
review their continuing information demands every 3 years. And it
requires the Director of OMB, through the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs [OIRA], to oversee and implement the Governmentwide
adoption of the electronic option.
Lastly, it adds to the existing reporting requirement to Congress
that instances of successes and failures be brought to the Congress'
attention. That will enhance our oversight function and give us
feedback on whether the reduction goals are being met.
[[Page H3750]]
Mr. Chairman, I believe this bill strikes a blow for a commonsense
approach to regulatory and paperwork relief that all of us should
support.
{time} 1245
I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clinger],
chairman of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. We share
jurisdiction with that committee, and Chairman Clinger reviewed the
work that we had done on it and waived his jurisdiction.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my chairman.
H.R. 2715, the Paperwork Elimination Act of 1996, was originally
referred to both the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and
to the Small Business Committee; however, after reviewing the
legislation as reported from the Small Business Committee, the
Government Reform Committee waived jurisdiction to formally consider
the bill.
I believe that this legislation should be considered and passed
without any delay. It is good for the Government and is good for those
who are required to provide information to the Government. Moreover, it
does not cost money.
Mr. Chairman, this bill simply provides that the Government should
take steps to allow, and even encourage, the use of electronic
information technology in order to reduce the burden on individuals and
businesses that disclose information to the Government. It does not
require these information providers to use electronic means to supply
the data; it merely permits them to do so if they have the capacity,
and many do.
Enactment of this bill will simply recognize that paper copies are
not the only way to provide data to the Government. It may well be
easier for citizens to transmit data electronically and it is certainly
easier for the Government to receive it this way. Thus, I view this
bill as a winner for all concerned.
I know of no opposition to the bill, and I urge all Members to
support it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Torkildsen].
Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
the time, and I want to applaud the gentlewoman's leadership in moving
this bill through the full committee and to the House floor.
Mr. Chairman, the legislation before us, the Paperwork Elimination
Act of 1996, will require the Federal Government to get smart about the
information age we live in. It requires the executive branch to become
computer user friendly and allow small business and individuals the
option to file all information required by the Federal Government
electronically. It also requires Federal agency to make documents and
publications available electronically as well.
Small business bears the disproportionate share of these reporting
costs. The legislation today focuses on how the use of electronic
submission, maintenance and disclosure of information demanded by the
Federal Government can reduce the cost on small business. But State and
local governments, government contractors, educational and nonprofit
institutions, and the public at large will also benefit by the
improvements in this bill.
This legislation potentially eliminates billions of dollars of cost
that small business and others face in meeting Federal information
demands.
I would also like to thank the bill's cosponsors for their support of
this effort, as well, and also the bipartisan comments of support from
the other side of the aisle. This really has been a bill that we have
worked together with support from both sides of the aisle, from both
the White House as well as the legislative branch, and that is why the
bill is moving as quickly as it is.
Mr. Chairman, where I come from in New England, small business
represents 53 percent of the private work force. Viewing our economy,
small business plays an increasing role in creating new jobs as well as
sustaining existing jobs. In 1993, industries dominated by small firms,
from banking to tourism and everything in between, posted a net gain of
over 1 million jobs, as opposed to industries dominated by large firms
which lost 200,000 jobs. So clearly small business has been the engine
for job growth in New England and other areas.
On the national level, the role that small business plays in the
health of our economy is compelling. Small business accounts for more
than three-quarters of all businesses that export. Small business
contributed roughly 40 percent of the Nation's new high technology jobs
during the last decade.
The health of small business is vital to our economy. The focus of
the Paperwork Reduction Act is to find ways to reduce the costs of
complying with government mandates by using electronic means to meet
regulatory paperwork requirements. This will promote the advantages of
the information age we live in, and explore the use of new information
technologies and eliminate barriers to job creation caused by wasteful
paperwork requirements.
Mr. Chairman, the information needs of the Federal regulatory system
touch everything. Paperwork demands range from tax returns, health care
reimbursement forms, and contract bids, to OSHA material data work
sheets and EPA chemical reporting forms. Over and over again, there is
a need, and sometimes it is very legitimate, a need for information for
the Federal Government to fulfill its functions. This legislation says
the Government must provide an electronic option for these demands.
The bill builds upon and complements the Paperwork Reduction Act of
last year, legislation which this Congress passed unanimously. It
amends that Act by specifying that small business and people with
access to computers and modems should be able to use them when dealing
with the Federal Government.
Again, let me emphasize this is an option for small business and
individuals. It is not a requirement that they go out and computerize,
although most small businesses do have at least one computer now. This
is an option for them to report electronically.
I want to stress that that option is key to the bill's success. We
would not be here if it were another mandate on small business. Indeed,
this is an option, but one that will save small business extensive
money in meeting their reporting requirements.
Also importantly, though, this bill will save money for the Federal
Government, as well. Once an agency is on-line to receive computer-
generated information, it will reduce its own cost of manually
inputting information for paper reports.
Federal paperwork requirements are nothing more than hidden taxes of
Government programs. The Committee on Small Business has heard
testimony that these costs easily run into the hundreds of billions of
dollars, and they are costs that have to be paid. They are not paid in
cash to the Federal Government, but they are paid nonetheless. It is
important that we reduce some of those costs through this bill.
Mr. Chairman, this legislation importantly is also environmentally
friendly, as it substitutes paper with an electronic option. You do not
need the paperwork. You do not need the actual forms to file with the
Federal Government. Therefore, you do not have to produce the paper.
Therefore, you do not have to cut down the number of trees you would
need for those reams and reams of paper.
Let me give just a little example. For example, if you are a
physician, you have to file this form, this one-page form, with HCFA on
average about 8,000 times per physician. Now, 8,000 times is
represented by the reams of paper right here. In 1 year, one physician
just filing this one form, not counting the other forms they have to
file with HCFA and other agencies, would have to use this much paper
just for this one form.
Instead of producing all these forms that have to be filed, for every
physician to file with HCFA, that information could be filed
electronically. It could be stored on something as small as this disk.
So you are saving space. You are helping the environment by not
needing to produce as much paper. You are saving costs to the Federal
Government as well, because they will not
[[Page H3751]]
have to convert these handwritten forms into computer information,
which is what their normal practice is. Most Federal agencies, when
they receive these forms, do have someone convert them back from paper
technology into computer technology. By taking out this paper mid-step,
we will be able to save a great deal of cost, both for the private
sector as well as for the taxpayers who have to pay the costs of that
Federal agency.
Again, that is just one example out of thousands of reports that are
required each and every year. In addition, there is a cost savings
associated with this as well.
Filing the old-fashioned way on paper, one may find out in 6 or 8
weeks that there was a mistake. Maybe the person filling out the form
left one space blank. Maybe they had the wrong serial number, some
minor error. It will take 6 to 8 weeks just to receive notice that an
error was made. The form has to be resubmitted.
In the meantime, your business, your operation is not receiving
reimbursement for the service provided, or perhaps you are not in
technical compliance with the reporting requirement, if it is a
different type of form. By filing electronically, errors will be able
to be spotted and corrected much more quickly, again saving time and
money both for the private sector as well as for the Federal agency
involved.
I think it is important to note that this is a step that will make
the Federal Government friendly to the computer age; that we are saying
that the Federal Government should be doing everything it can to make
use of the great advances in technology that have happened, that have
been developed mostly here in America, to see that anyone trying to
create jobs will not have to pay any more than is necessary to meet
these requirements.
This bill, the Paperwork Elimination Act, does not replace the
Paperwork Reduction Act. At the same time we want to make sure that
people can file any information electronically, we still want to keep
an eye on reducing the actual cost of putting that information together
and make sure that no information is being requested unless it is
absolutely necessary for the public good and for the Federal Government
to meet its legally obligated mission.
But this bill, this legislation, will go a long way in saying the
Federal Government is willing to take the steps necessary to see that a
small business, whether 1 or 5 or 50 employees, to see that small
business has no more cost required on it than is absolutely necessary.
That savings is good for that small business, it is good for job
creation, it is good for the economy in general, and it is also good
for the taxpayers.
I again applaud the gentlewoman from Kansas [Mrs. Meyers], the Chair
of the committee, for the great leadership she has shown on this bill
and all issues dealing with small business. I again urge all my
colleagues to vote for this legislation.
Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York [Ms. Velazquez].
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2715,
the Paperwork Elimination Act of 1996, and to commend Chairwoman Myers
for her work on this issue.
In this age of growing technology, we should encourage and offer even
more opportunities for small businesses to improve productivity through
technology. H.R. 2715 will make it easier for many small businesses to
provide information electronically to the Government, resulting in a
reduced paperwork burden.
I would caution though, this legislation is not the answer to all
small business problems. As the use of information technology
flourishes, a gap is growing larger between the technology haves and
the have-nots.
It is true that a great many Americans send and receive electronic
mail with their personal computers. Many conduct bank transactions
online, from home. The Internal Revenue Service reported that at least
11 million Americans filed their Federal income taxes electronically.
But the whole truth is, the technology users I just described do not
live in the lower-income communities, like mine. Most of my
constituents do not have access to technology. This means many of the
small businesses in my community are quickly falling into the widening
technology gap.
These businesses cannot afford to hire experts to develop software
applications. They will not be taking advantage of the electronic
option provided by this bill--let alone afford the expensive initial
investment in computer equipment.
Although I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation--keep
in mind that we need to take this bill a step further. We must continue
to look for ways that will help small, disadvantaged businesses again
access to information technology. If we fail to do so, we may very well
lose one of the most vibrant sectors of our economy.
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. LoBiondo].
Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Chairman, I come to the floor today as a proud
cosponsor of the Paperwork Elimination Act. I commend the gentleman
from Massachusetts [Mr. Torkildsen] for introducing this legislation
and the gentlewoman from Kansas [Mrs. Meyers], chairwoman, for her role
in bringing this to the floor.
Last year we passed the Paperwork Reduction Act. Now we are going to
pass the Paperwork Elimination Act to further improve agency efficiency
and responsiveness to the public. This bill recommends that our
country's small businesses and Federal agencies move into the
electronic information age. Some small businesses are required to file
forms with up to 50 different Federal, State and local agencies.
{time} 1300
This is absolutely incredible when you think about it. I believe that
more of their time should be spent concentrating on providing quality
goods and services to their customers. I believe this is an important
piece of legislation for small businesses in my own district in
southern New Jersey, as well as for small businesses around the
country.
It provides small business owners with a more efficient and effective
means to quickly complete agency requirements, thereby allowing them to
get on with growing and improving their small businesses.
Mr. Chairman, before serving in Congress, I spent my time in a small
business, in a small family business in southern New Jersey. Along with
my father and my brother and some other family members, we struggled
with some of the very problems that we are attempting to address today.
I witnessed year after year where the requirements just seemed to grow
more and more on what we were expected to provide back in the form of
paperwork.
Now, as it was stated before, this will not be an answer to the
entire problem, but it is certainly a step in the right direction,
because for the district that I represent in southern New Jersey that
has so many small businesses that are trying to make ends meet, that
are trying to do the right thing to provide jobs, this will give them
an opportunity to see a small glimmer of hope.
I try, as I am sure my colleagues do, to attend as many business and
Chamber meetings as I can when home on district work periods. This is
something that I hear over and over again: Will you please put a human
face on what you are doing in Washington and understand the
implications of the decisions you make on those of us who live in the
real world?
Mr. Chairman, in that real world, the paperwork requirements are a
tremendous problem. It is one we are beginning to recognize today, and
I am very proud that we will have the opportunity to move this forward.
So again, I am asking all my colleagues to yet again demonstrate our
commitment, the commitment of this Congress, to easing the regulatory
burden on American small businesses by supporting this Paperwork
Elimination Act.
Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Minnesota [Mr. Luther].
Mr. LUTHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Paperwork
Elimination Act. This legislation builds on the Paperwork Reduction Act
passed by the House last year, which was one of the top recommendations
of the White House Conference on Small Business held last year.
[[Page H3752]]
I think Members of both parties can agree that the Federal paperwork
demands on small businesses and individuals have become too time-
consuming, expensive, and burdensome. It is estimated that business
owners and ordinary citizens spend as much as 6 billion hours per year
responding to Federal reporting requirements, ranging from employment
forms from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to Internal Revenue Service
returns, 6 billion hours of time that could be spent generating
increased economic growth or helping kids with a school project.
H.R. 2715 provides the option of electronically submitting
information needed to comply with Federal regulations. Small businesses
and individuals can now send and receive mail, complete financial
transactions, and read magazines and newspapers from their personal
computer. There is no reason why they should not have the option of
completing Federal Government forms by computer. Where possible, we
need to simplify and streamline Government so that interaction with
Government becomes more of a positive experience rather than a chore.
As a Member of the Committee on Small Business, I urge support for
this legislation in order to better enable small businesses to compete
and individuals to be productive in today's world.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the author, the ranking member, and the
chairman.
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may
consume to the gentlewoman from Washington [Ms. Dunn].
Ms. DUNN of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2715
and would like to thank the gentlewoman from Kansas, Chairman Meyers,
and the gentleman from Massachusetts, Chairman Torkildsen, for their
steadfast work on this legislation. The Paperwork Elimination Act is
excellent legislation, and the efforts of the committee are to be
commended.
This bill is a streamlining government bill, and my original intent
was to offer a pro-small business friendly amendment to this
legislation. After being informed, however, that the amendment would be
opposed by the minority on technical grounds, I have decided to
withdraw the amendment, with the intent of proposing it as part of some
future legislation. I do, however, want to explain the rationale for
the amendment.
Quite simply, the language I intended to offer requires that in-House
agency printing of Government information be limited to certain levels
so as to allow for agency convenience. Meanwhile, however, it ensures
that larger nonclassified jobs are outsourced to the private sector for
maximum savings to the taxpayer.
Under my proposal, in-House convenience would be a limit of 1,000
units, or sheets of paper, or for a multipage document up to 5,000
sheets of paper. The current regulatory limit is 5,000 and 25,000, but
clearly this limit is much too high. There is no question, for example,
that a job requiring 50 reams of paper is a job a local printer can do
for less than the Government Printing Office.
Mr. Chairman, so you can see that my amendment was intended to act in
unison and as a complement toward the goal of H.R. 2715, which is
streamlining Government.
My amendment is pro-small business. Most private printers are the mom
and pop types of shops that all of us have in our own districts. If we
insist that the Federal Government send its work out for a competitive
bid, all of those small businesses will have an opportunity to bid on
this work and drive down the cost to the taxpayer in the process.
The beauty of it is it is the small business community who would have
benefited most, small businesses and the American taxpayer. Of course,
with more work going to the private sector, small businesses may have
the need to step up their work force to meet the increased demand,
thereby making this a worker-friendly amendment as well.
My amendment is highly taxpayer friendly. The Government Printing
Office has an outstanding procurement office with a proven record of
purchasing printing more cheaply from the private sector than can be
done by the Federal Government. The agencies are not fully availing
themselves of this service, and that is the heart of this issue.
My amendment would save the taxpayers precious resources at a time
when every dollar counts. This amendment is efficiency in Government.
The amendment makes Government smaller by streamlining printing
operations.
How many print shops do we need in the Federal Government, Mr.
Chairman? Certainly not one in every Federal agency. In the President's
own words from a statement dated July 22, 1994, he says ``Reform
legislation can improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of
Government printing by maximizing the use of the private sector
printing capability through open competitive procedures and by limiting
Government-owned printing resources to those necessary to maintain a
minimum core capacity.''
In explanation of the amendment, Mr. Chairman, we visited this issue
before, and I would add under Democratic leadership. Section 207 of the
Legislative Branch Appropriations Act of 1995 reaffirms congressional
intent that the GPO, and the GPO only, is the sole source of
procurement of printing, including duplicating, for the entire Federal
Government.
Mr. Chairman, as we look for ways to decrease the paperwork burden
generated by the Federal Government, we must look at both the
unnecessary paperwork it demands, as well as the unnecessary paperwork
it does. As you might say, there are two sides to the paper, especially
when the paper generated within the Federal Government is costing
taxpayers millions more than they should be paying.
A preliminary CBO score of this provision which I have revised from
legislation that I introduced earlier in this Congress indicates a
savings to the taxpayer of around $150 million per year. I would have
hoped my colleagues might have supported my amendment on this basis,
and because it is pro-small business, protaxpayer, prostreamlining
Government.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the adoption of my amendment in some
future legislation, and I urge the support of the Paperwork Elimination
Act.
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would like to comment that there are more
than 21 million small businesses in this country, according to current
estimates. In recent years, these small enterprises have employed 54
percent of the private work force, contributed 52 percent of all sales
in the United States, generated 50 percent of the private gross
domestic product, and in 1994, they were responsible for an estimated
62 percent of the new jobs created. Thus, the term small is rather
misleading when it comes to the real impact on our economy of small
business.
I think it is important that we let them do what they do best, and
that is generate innovative ideas, create jobs, and stimulate the
economy. That is why this bill is so important, that we release them as
much as possible from the burdens of paperwork.
These paperwork demands range from tax forms, loan applications,
contract bids, EPA's chemical reporting for manufacturers to OSHA's
material data sheets; all of these are informational requirements. We
all know what we are talking about when we are talking about paperwork
reduction and elimination.
Mr. Chairman, the bill is important, and I urge the support of my
colleagues.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HORN. Mr. Chairman, as America rushes forward into the
information age, the Federal Government is not keeping up. Instead of
using new technology to streamline the application and reporting
processes that individuals, State and local governments, businesses and
nonprofits must provide--the paper pile continues to grow ever higher.
For those at the grassroots, time, money, and jobs are lost in the
process.
The Paperwork Elimination Act serves to cut through the reams of
documents--particularly those which affect small businesses, and
educational, and nonprofit institutions. It will minimize their burden
through the use of computer technology. As a former University
president, I know how effective this act will be.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on the Paperwork Elimination Act. In a few
days, I will introduce a measure authorizing and encouraging electronic
reporting. But today's vote is a beginning in reducing and eliminating
unnecessary steps in the governmental processes.
[[Page H3753]]
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2715, the
Paperwork Elimination Act.
At the end of March, Mr. Chairman, this legislation was reported out
of the Small Business Committee by a voice vote.
Mr. Chairman, this is a non-controversial bill. It would accomplish
several much needed reforms. First, Mr. Speaker, this bill would
minimize the burden of Federal paperwork demands on small businesses
through the use of alternative electronic information technologies.
Second, this bill would direct the Office of Management and Budget to
act as the administrative body responsible for directing the Federal
Government's efforts to promote and monitor the use of this new
technology. Although, this would increase the administrative costs to
OMB, it would not significantly impact the budget. Nor, Mr. Speaker,
would it create new mandates for Federal agencies because it does not
require agencies to acquire and implement these new technologies. The
authority to do this already exists.
Mr. Chairman, small businesses are the engine that drive our economy.
They employ a large percentage of our work force and indeed, job growth
in small firms is far outstripping that in large companies, which are
laying off whole sections of the work force.
Mr. Chairman, this legislation will go a long way in removing the
onerous paperwork burdens of small businesses, freeing them to
concentrate their energies and creativity to producing higher quality
products and expanding the economy.
Mr. Chairman, I commend Chairwoman Meyers for her diligent efforts in
bringing this worthwhile legislation to the House floor and I encourage
my colleagues to support H.R. 2715.
Mr. LaFALCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the
bill shall be considered by sections as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment. Pursuant to the rule, each section is considered
as having been read. During consideration of the bill for amendment,
the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in
recognition to a Member offering an amendment that has been printed in
the designated place in the Record. Those amendments will be considered
as having been read.
The Clerk will designate section 1.
The text of section 1 is as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Paperwork Elimination Act of
1996''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 1?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 2.
The text of section 2 is as follows:
SEC. 2. PURPOSES.
The purpose of this Act is to--
(1) minimize the burden of Federal paperwork demands upon
small businesses, educational and non-profit institutions,
Federal contractors, State and local governments, and other
persons through the sponsorship and use of alternative
information technologies, including the use of electronic
maintenance, submission, or disclosure of information to
substitute for paper; and
(2) more effectively enable Federal agencies to achieve the
purposes of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code,
popularly known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act.''
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 2?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 3.
The text of section 3 is as follows:
SEC. 3. AUTHORITY AND FUNTIONS OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE
OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET.
(a) Direction and Oversight of Information Technology.--
Section 3504(a)(1)(B)(vi) of title 44, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(vi) the acquisition and use of information technology,
including the use of alternative information technologies,
such as the use of electronic submission, maintenance, or
disclosure of information to substitute for paper.''.
(b) Promotion of Use of Electronic Information
Technology.--Section 3504(h) of title 44, United States Code,
is amended by striking ``and'' after the semicolon at the end
of paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (5) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at the
end the following:
``(6) specifically promote the optional use of electronic
maintenance, submission, or disclosure of information where
appropriate, as an alternative information technology to
substitute for paper.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 3?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 4.
The text of section 4 is as follows:
SEC. 4. ASSIGNMENT OF TASKS AND DEADLINES.
Section 3505(a)(3) of title 44, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of
subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (C) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at
the end the following:
``(D) a description of progress in providing for the use of
electronic submission, maintenance, or disclosure of
information to substitute for paper, including the extent to
which such progress accomplishes reduction of burden on small
businesses or other persons.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 4?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 5.
The text of section 5 is as follows:
SEC. 5. FEDERAL AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES.
(a) Providing for Use of Electronic Information
Management.--Section 3506(c)- (1)(B) of title 44, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end of clause (ii) and by adding at the end
the following:
``(iv) provides for the optional use, where appropriate, of
electronic maintenance, submission, or disclosure of
information; and''.
(b) Promotion of Electronic Information Management.--
Section 3506(c)(3)(C) of title 44, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``or'' after the semicolon at the end of
clause (ii), by adding ``or'' after the semicolon at the end
of clause (iii), and by adding at the end the following:
``(iv) the promotion and optional use, where appropriate,
of electronic maintenance, submission, or disclosure of
information.''.
(c) Use of Alternative Information Technologies.--Section
3506(c)(3)(J) of title 44, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
``(J) to the maximum extent practicable, uses alternative
information technologies, including the use of electronic
maintenance, submission, or disclosure of information, to
reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and
responsiveness to the public.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 5?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 6.
The text of section 6 is as follows:
SEC. 6. PUBLIC INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES; SUBMISSION
TO DIRECTOR; APPROVAL AND DELEGATION.
Section 3507(a)(1)(D)(ii) of title 44, United States Code,
is amended by striking ``and'' after the semicolon at the end
of subclause (V), by adding ``and'' after the semicolon at
the end of subclause (VI), and by adding at the end the
following:
``(VII) a description of how respondents may, if
apprppriate, electronically maintain, submit, or disclose
information under the collection of information.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 6?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 7.
The text of section 7 is as follows:
SEC. 7. RESPONSIVENESS TO CONGRESS.
Section 3514(a)(2) of title 44, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of
subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end of
subparagraph (D) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at
the end the following:
``(E) reduced the collection of information burden on small
businesses and other persons through the use of electronic
maintenance, submission, or disclosure of information to
substitute for paper maintenance, submission, or disclosure
of information, including--
``(i) a description of instances where such substitution
has added to burden; and
``(ii) specific identification of such instances relating
to the Internal Revenue Service.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 7?
If not, the Clerk will designate section 8.
The text of section 8 is as follows:
SEC. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect October 1, 1997.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 8?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Burton of Indiana) having assumed the chair, Mr. Taylor of North
Carolina, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration
the bill (H.R. 2715) to amend chapter 35 of title 44, United States
Code, popularly known as the Paperwork Reduction Act, to minimize the
burden of Federal paperwork demands upon small businesses,
[[Page H3754]]
educational and nonprofit institutions, Federal contractors, State and
local governments, and other persons through the sponsorship and use of
alternative information technologies, pursuant to House Resolution 409,
he reported the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted by the
Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1315
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). Under the rule, the
previous question is ordered.
The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that
a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is
not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 418,
nays 0, not voting 14, as follows:
[Roll No 130]
YEAS--418
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allard
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker (CA)
Baker (LA)
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Beilenson
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Bevill
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Bliley
Blute
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boucher
Brewster
Browder
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brownback
Bryant (TN)
Bryant (TX)
Bunn
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cardin
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chapman
Chenoweth
Christensen
Chrysler
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clinger
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Coleman
Collins (GA)
Collins (IL)
Collins (MI)
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cooley
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cremeans
Cubin
Cunningham
Danner
Davis
de la Garza
Deal
DeFazio
DeLauro
DeLay
Dellums
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Dornan
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Durbin
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Fields (LA)
Filner
Flake
Flanagan
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (CT)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frisa
Frost
Funderburk
Furse
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Geren
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Green (TX)
Greene (UT)
Greenwood
Gunderson
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hancock
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Heineman
Herger
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hoke
Holden
Horn
Hostettler
Hoyer
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jacobs
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (SD)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Johnston
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kim
King
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaFalce
LaHood
Lantos
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lightfoot
Lincoln
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Longley
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Martini
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Metcalf
Meyers
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Molinari
Mollohan
Montgomery
Moorhead
Moran
Morella
Murtha
Myers
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Orton
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pastor
Paxon
Payne (NJ)
Payne (VA)
Pelosi
Peterson (FL)
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickett
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Pryce
Quillen
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reed
Regula
Richardson
Riggs
Rivers
Roberts
Roemer
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rose
Roth
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Sabo
Salmon
Sanders
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer
Schiff
Schumer
Scott
Seastrand
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stockman
Stokes
Studds
Stump
Stupak
Talent
Tanner
Tate
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Tejeda
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thornton
Thurman
Tiahrt
Torkildsen
Torres
Torricelli
Towns
Traficant
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Volkmer
Vucanovich
Walker
Walsh
Wamp
Ward
Waters
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
White
Wicker
Williams
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Zeliff
Zimmer
NOT VOTING--14
Dicks
Fields (TX)
Foglietta
Hastings (FL)
Houghton
Kasich
Laughlin
Livingston
McDade
Menendez
Parker
Schroeder
Whitfield
Wilson
{time} 1332
Mr. OWENS changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________