[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 113 (Monday, July 29, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9061-S9069]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1997
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate now turn
to the consideration of the legislative appropriations bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 3754), making appropriations for the
Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30,
1997, and for other purposes.
The Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized.
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I am pleased to present the fiscal year 1997
legislative branch appropriations bill to the Senate. The subcommittee
builds upon the success that the Congress achieved last year in
reducing the size and the cost of the legislative branch, and again
demonstrates this Congress' leadership in making strides toward the
imperative of a balanced budget.
The subcommittee's recommendation is an appropriation of
$2,165,081,000. This is a reduction of $22.275 million, or
approximately 1 percent below the program levels in fiscal year 1996.
The bill is $174 million below the requested amount, and compared to
fiscal 1995, the bill reflects a $225 million reduction.
While the legislative branch bill is the smallest in terms of dollars
appropriated, with the adoption of this bill, we will have contributed
nearly one-half billion dollars toward deficit reduction in just 2
fiscal years.
The recommended funding for the Senate is $441.208 million,
approximately $14 million above the 1996 enacted amount. However, the
amount is $48 million below the request.
In large part, the increases reflected in the bill are for cost of
living adjustments for Senate employees and expenses for the Sergeant
at Arms. I point out that Senate employees did not receive the 1996
COLA that was granted to other Federal employees.
Specifically, the Senate's amendment to the bill provides $208
million for Senators' official personnel and office expense account.
This amount is a 2 percent increase from last year's level. The
increase is sufficient to accommodate an expected cost-of-living
adjustment for Senate employees in the 1997 calendar year. The
recommended funding for committees is $69.5 million, a $3 million
increase, again, for cost-of-living adjustments.
For the official mail cost, the funding is reduced by 9 percent. The
recommended funding of $10 million is sufficient, however, to cover
projected costs for fiscal year 1997. Again, Mr. President, I just say
that while this is a reduction from $11 million last year to $10
million last year, in analyzing the trends and expenditures for mail,
we believe we can make this reduction without requiring the Senators to
make any reduction in their mailing. As you know, last year, we
eliminated mass mailing. So we are talking about mail now that is
primarily for the purpose of responding to inquiries from our
constituents.
Funding for salaries and expenses of the Secretary of the Senate is
$14.225 million. That is an increase of $831,000. Funding for salaries
and expenses of Sergeant at Arms is $99.968 million. That is an
increase of $8.880 million. I bring my colleagues' attention to the
fact that combined funding recommendations for the Secretary and the
Sergeant at Arms fiscal year 1997 are still $8 million below the 1995
enacted levels.
The subcommittee appreciates the leadership demonstrated by the
Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms. Each office is
managing a substantial reduction this is fiscal year along with the
compounded challenges rendered by the Congressional Accountability Act.
I remind Members that, last year, we made reductions in the accounts of
the Sergeant at Arms and Secretary of the Senate of between 12.5 and 14
percent. While they have been managing these reduced amounts, they have
also been given an additional responsibility as a result of the
Congressional Accountability Act.
During the subcommittee hearings, the Secretary and Sergeant at Arms
outlined a series of initiatives regarding technology. The subcommittee
is pleased that under the direction of the Senate Rules Committee, the
Senate is taking a long-term strategic planning approach in this area.
The subcommittee looks forward to working with the Rules Committee on
this issue of common concern.
In addition, the subcommittee wishes to thank each of the legislative
branch agencies for their cooperation and contributions in the
development of this year's bill. On a special note, the subcommittee
commends the General Accounting Office for its successful management of
a 2-year, 25-percent reduction in its budget. Managing a funding
reduction of such magnitude in a relatively short period has been very
difficult, and the subcommittee wishes to commend the Comptroller
General and the entire staff at GAO for an outstanding job.
We had quite a discussion at our hearing with the Comptroller General
as to the approach that was taken to downsize this Government agency 25
percent in a 2-year period. That is a substantial reduction. I would
recommend to my colleagues that we
[[Page S9062]]
ought to look at how the GAO went about this process of managing over a
2-year period a reduction of 25 percent in its budget, because they did
it extremely well. They did it with a great deal of thought. They found
ways to use technologies of today to make their operations more
effective and efficient. Again, I think it is a case study in the way
to manage the downsizing of a Government agency. I encourage everybody
to look at what they have done and what they have accomplished.
I will now yield to Senator Murray for any comments she wishes to
make. I thank her and each member of the subcommittee for their hard
work and cooperation in crafting this bill. Again, I want to say to
Senator Murray that I appreciate very much the way we have, during the
past 2 years, been able to work together in, I think, crafting two
appropriations bills that the Senate can be proud of, and should again
be used as an example. Frankly, it was in my mind that we should set an
example for the rest of Government. If we are going to ask people to
spend less and do with less, I think, again, our taking the lead in
doing that is setting a good example.
I now yield to Senator Murray for her comments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise in support of H.R. 3754, the
fiscal year 1997 legislative branch appropriation bill. The bill as
reported by the full committee is a fair and responsible bill.
As Members will recall, this committee took a bold step last year in
recommending a bill that cut spending for the departments and agencies
funded in the legislative branch appropriations bill by $200 million,
or 10 percent. This year, again, we have continued the effort to reduce
the funding levels and streamline the operations of Congress by
recommending a bill that cuts a net of over $22 million from the 1996
enacted level. At the proposed funding level contained in this measure,
the Legislative Branch, in total, will have less funding than in fiscal
year 1991 or 6 years ago.
The major reductions recommended by the committee involve the support
agencies that are so vital to the Congress in order to enable us to
complete our work in an effective and expeditious manner. The committee
this year saves $6.1 million below fiscal year 1996 as a result of the
elimination of the Office of Technology Assessment. I did not
personally support that elimination but, nevertheless, it has been
accomplished and we are saving $6.1 million this year because of OTA's
elimination.
Another major reduction in this year's bill is the cut to the General
Accounting Office. Their budget is reduced by $44,381,000 below fiscal
year 1996. Testimony by the Comptroller General, Mr. Bowsher, made
clear that the GAO can undertake this reduction as part of their
overall, 2-year 25 percent commitment made to the Congress last year.
The amount appropriated for fiscal year 1997 for the GAO is
$338,425,000 and will provide for a personnel ceiling of no more than
3,500 positions. This personnel ceiling amounts to a reduction of 1,825
below the level of GAO's workforce in 1992 when they had a ceiling of
5,325 positions.
As Senators can see, the reductions the committee is recommending
this year are dramatic. However, Mr. President, I believe that the
committee has accomplished these savings in a way that is as fair and
even-handed as possible. We have been careful to ensure that the
organizations and agencies which support Congress and are funded in the
legislative branch appropriation bill are able to carry out their
responsibilities under these reduced budgets as effectively as they
have in the past.
I would have adamantly opposed these budget cuts if they were
undertaken only to save dollars, without recognizing any negative
consequences. It would be fruitless, for example to reduce the budget
of the Congressional Budget Office with their ever-increasing
responsibilities simply for the sake of saying we have achieved
budgetary savings.
With this in mind, I carefully reviewed the testimony of our
witnesses for any indication that cuts of the magnitude we have
recommended would harm the ability of these Congressional-support
agencies to carry out their very important responsibilities. Testimony
received by the subcommittee indicated that these recommended savings
can be achieved while allowing these support agencies to carry out
these responsibilities with no reductions-in-force.
Mr. President, Senator Mack provided members with a detailed
explanation of all of the recommendations contained in the bill, and I
will not take the time of Members by repeating them. I would, however,
call to the attention of Members Section 5 of the administrative
provisions. I included, with the enthusiastic support of Chairman Mack,
language that will enable the Sergeant at Arms to transfer excess or
surplus computer equipment to schools.
In the past, the Senate sold its computers to employees at bargain
prices. Fortunately, this practice has been terminated, and I commend
the Sergeant at Arms for doing so. For the past couple of years, our
computers have simply been transferred to GSA for disposal through the
normal surplus process.
I think Senators should be aware that the Senate disposes of over
1500 computers every year. Over the past 3 years, nearly 5,000
computers have been let go. For the most part, these are IBM-
compatible, 386, 16-megahertz machines. They are a generation old, but
they could be very useful to schools, especially in rural areas, that
may not have a big budget to buy fancy new computers.
I am fortunate to represent Washington State, which is very
aggressive in trying to put computers in the classroom. Our companies
have been generous in donating software and hardware, and people are
excited about giving kids skills that will help them get an edge in
life.
But not every school district is moving aggressively on computers.
Many do not even know how to go about it, and cannot afford it. I am
certain that every Senator is aware of how fast technology is evolving
in our economy. I really believe that, in the future, a child's ability
to compete in the work force will be measured in part by his or her
familiarity with computers. In my view, the earlier they start, the
better.
The Senate will debate the broad role of government in education
technology, and I look forward to having that debate. For now there is
a small, and I think constructive, role for the Senate to play. We can
use the bully pulpit. We can lead by example. We can help school
children by transferring our computers to schools that want or need
them. By doing this, we can help some kids, and we can show the country
we think bringing technology to the classroom is a high priority.
Here is how it will work: the Sergeant at Arms will make sure that
any excess or surplus computers are in good working order. Then he will
make them available to interested schools at the lowest possible cost
to both the Senate and the schools. Most likely, he will transfer these
computers to the General Services Administration. GSA, in turn, will
provide information to schools through its regional offices about
available inventory. The equipment eligible for transfer will include
computers, keyboards, monitors, printers, modems, and other peripheral
hardware as described in the bill.
I envision schools being able to obtain this equipment on a first-
come, first-served basis, for the cost of shipping and handling from
GSA regional offices. The language provides the Sergeant at Arms with
flexibility to determine the best way to complete the transfers.
I think this is a useful change in policy. Again, I appreciate the
help of Chairman Mack on this, and I look forward to working with him
and the Sergeant at Arms to make this work.
Finally, Mr. President, I would point out that there is a provision
included in the House-passed bill--Section 312--that was stricken
pursuant to a motion by Senator Hatfield during full committee markup.
That section deals with so-called ``dynamic'' scoring of certain
measures. Although this provision would apply to House measures only
and, therefore, would normally not be stricken by the Senate in view of
the comity between the Houses that is traditionally recognized, in this
instance there is a Budget Act point of order under Section 306 which
would lie against Section 312 and that was the basis upon which the
committee chairman moved to strike the provision.
[[Page S9063]]
I strongly oppose Section 312 on its merits. I do not believe that
either branch of Congress should be dictating selective macroeconomic
scorekeeping procedures upon either the Congressional Budget Office or
the Joint Committee on Taxation. I will have more to say on this later
during debate on this bill should any attempt be made to revive Section
312 or anything similar to it.
On balance, Mr. President, I believe this is a good bill that
deserves the support of Members. I would hasten to add, however, that I
share the concerns expressed by Senator Reid, a former chairman of this
subcommittee, during the committee's markup of the legislative branch
appropriation bill. Senator Reid stated that we have reached the bottom
of the barrel in cutting the legislative branch appropriation bill.
Once the savings we have undertaken are accomplished in the
Congressional-support agencies over a multi-year period, we cannot look
to these agencies for further budget cuts. These agencies have been
very forthcoming and have understood our need to reduce spending for
the Legislative Branch, and I am deeply appreciative of their
willingness to do so. But, Mr. President, we have indeed reached the
bottom of the barrel.
Mr. President, let me close by commending our subcommittee chairman,
Senator Mack. He has proven himself to be a real leader on legislative
branch issues and has worked with me on a bipartisan basis. I
appreciate it very much. I also wish to express my thanks to the
subcommittee staff--Keith Kennedy, Jim English, and Mary Dewald for
their fine work, and also to recognize the excellent support we had
from Ric Ilgenfritz of my staff and Larry Harris for Senator Mack.
Mr. President, I urge the support of all Members for this bill.
Mr. MACK addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida [Mr. Mack], is
recognized.
Amendments Nos. 5112, 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, and 5117 En Bloc
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I send a series of amendments to the desk
and ask for their consideration en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Florida [Mr. Mack] proposes amendments
numbered 5112, 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, and 5117 en bloc.
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendments be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments en bloc are as follows:
amendment no. 5112
On page 34 line 20, strike all after the word ``Act''
through line 21 and insert: ``such sums as may be necessary
for each of the fiscal years 1997 and 1998.''
Mr. HATFIELD: Mr. President, this amendment would provide for the
reauthorization of the American Folklife Center at the Library of
Congress for fiscal years 1997 and 1998. It is a substitute for the
permanent reauthorization reported by the committee. I am offering this
amendment after conversations with Representative Thomas, the chairman
of the Committee on Oversight in the other body. I understand Chairman
Thomas' concerns about the proper role of the authorization committees
and am willing to respond to his concerns at this time. I hope,
however, that the next Congress will enact a permanent authorization
for the center.
The American Folklife Center in the Library of Congress was created
20 years ago by passage of the American Folklife Preservation Act of
1976. I was pleased to be a cosponsor of the legislation, which enjoyed
broad bicameral and bipartisan support. The legislation was endorsed by
Senators Strom Thurmond and Hubert Humphrey, and by Representative
David Obey and then-Representative Trent Lott. The support was so broad
because the legislation had such obvious merit.
The Library was chosen as the site of the Center for several reasons,
but principal among them was the strength of the Library's folklife
collections. It is not too great a stretch to say that those
collections began at the beginning, when Thomas Jefferson's library was
purchased for the Library of Congress. Jefferson's library included
significant material about Native Americans, and, of course, the
information collected during the expedition of Merriwether Lewis and
William Clark.
Now as then, one has to collect folklife. No one stands with pad and
pencil, recording the lives of workaday Americans. What tends to be
automatically recorded is what we at first think very important: the
coming and going of the elite or infamous, the domestic affairs of the
King or President, the fads that engross the rich and famous, the
history of battles as told by generals. But sometimes the foot soldier
has a better story than the general. The diary kept by Samuel Pepys in
the 1660s is important today because Mr. Pepys went about London and
recorded what he saw. He told about the great fire and the coming of
the Black Death and seeing the first Punch and Judy show. His record of
London is far more interesting than the ones kept by historians
engrossed in the intrigues and peccadilloes that swirled around Charles
the Second.
I believe all of us understand, Mr. President, that the strength of
our Nation proceeds from its smaller places; from small towns in
Missouri and Oregon, from short streets in Brooklyn and Omaha. We know
that it is in the forms of learning transmitted in families, small
communities, the workplace, and in ethnic groups that we develop the
strength of our families, our communities, and our culture. And we know
that the makers of our culture in the smaller places do not bring their
primary documents to the Library of Congress. They are not invited to
elegant dinners in the great hall of the Jefferson building, or courted
in fundraising drives. Theirs is at least as great a contribution as
the millions raised for other efforts, but it cannot be measured in
dollars. It is the Center's great achievement, and ongoing strength,
that it recognizes the value of the everyday, and gives it a home where
it can be cherished as it deserves to be.
It is very important, Mr. President, that the present structure of
the Center be maintained. It is important to have a Board of Trustees
selected from all over the Nation and appointed by the Joint leadership
of Congress. They bring to the Center a diversity of outlook and
purpose that cannot be replicated by the best-intentioned professionals
of the Library's career staff. It is important to have this be a Center
for folklife, and not just another division within the many divisions
of the Library. We could have taken that route in writing the original
enabling legislation, but we were trying to raise up the center out of
the other collections of the Library to be a beacon to the folklife
community across the country. That beacon must be maintained. If it
cannot be maintained at the Library of Congress, then it should be
moved and sustained elsewhere. I believe the Library is the best home
for the Center, but it must get the support expected in a good home.
Mr. President, I hope that ups and downs of the center's
authorization in this Congress will serve as a wake-up call from the
center's board and the center's supporters. I hope the board will be
more attentive to the concerns of the Congressional committees which
oversee the Library's operations. I hope the board will work hard to
supplement federal funding with private fundraising efforts. I hope the
national folklife community will work with the proper authorizing
committees to achieve a permanent reauthorization for the center. And I
hope that the Library of Congress budget for, and the Congress will
provide, funding sufficient to the center's task.
Mr. President, I thank Senator Mack for his cooperation and support
in this matter, and I yield the floor.
amendment no. 5113
On page 8, after line 17 insert:
Sec. 7. (a) Notwithstanding section 1345 of title 31,
United States Code, the Secretary of the Senate may reimburse
any individual employed by the Senate day care center for the
cost of training classes and conferences in connection with
the provision of child care services and for travel,
transportation, and subsistence expenses incurred in
connection with the training classes and conferences.
(b) The Senate day care center shall certify and provide
appropriate documentation to the Secretary of the Senate with
respect to any reimbursement under this section.
Reimbursements under this section shall be
[[Page S9064]]
made from the appropriations account ``MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS''
within the contingent fund of the Senate on vouchers approved
by the Secretary of the Senate.
(c) Reimbursements under this section shall be subject to
the regulations and limitations prescribed by the Committee
on Rules and Administration of the Senate for travel and
related expenses for which payment is authorized to be made
from the contingent fund of the Senate.
(d) This section shall be effective on and after October 1,
1996.
____
amendment no. 5114
On page 8, after line 17 insert:
Sec. 6. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
funds received during fiscal year 1996 by the Sergeant at
Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate in settlement of a contract
claim or dispute, but not to exceed $1,450,000, shall be
deposited into the appropriation account for fiscal year 1997
for the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate within
the contingent fund of the Senate and shall be available in a
like manner and for the same purposes as are the other funds
in that account.
____
amendment no. 5115
(Purpose: To authorize a legislative information system for the Senate)
On page 8, between lines 17 and 18, insert the following:
Sec. . (a) The Secretary of the Senate, with the
oversight and approval of the Committee on Rules and
Administration of the Senate, shall oversee the development
and implementation of a comprehensive Senate legislative
information system.
(b) In carrying out this section, the Secretary of the
Senate shall consult and work with officers and employees of
the House of Representatives. Legislative branch agencies and
departments and agencies of the executive branch shall
provide cooperation, consultation, and assistance as
requested by the Secretary of the Senate to carry out this
section.
(c) Any funds that were appropriated under the heading
``Secretary of the Senate'' for expanses of the Office of the
Secretary of the Senate by the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 1995, to remain available until September
30, 1998, and the Secretary determines are not needed for
development of a financial management system for the Senate
may, with the approval of the Committee on Appropriations of
the Senate be used to carry out the provisions of this
section, and such funds shall be available through September
30, 2000.
(d) The Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate
may prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry
out the provisions of this section.
(e) This section shall be effective for fiscal years
beginning on or after October 1, 1996.
Mr. MACK. I am proposing an amendment on an important matter to the
Senate. I am speaking of the quality and the cost of its legislative
information systems. Two years ago, this committee requested from the
Library of Congress an analysis of the duplication among the
legislative systems supported by the Congress. That study documented
that there is extensive overlap in these systems and that there are
opportunities for reducing that duplication. We then directed the
Library to prepare a plan for creating a single integrated information
system that would serve the entire Congress.
The committee received that report in February of this year. The plan
gives us a useful framework for building a new, coordinated legislative
information system that will better assist the Members of Congress to
carry out their legislative duties. The plan recognizes that there are
various independent responsibilities for legislative information within
the Congress and proposes a technical scheme that takes advantage of
this fact. The new system will therefore require the active support of
all of the offices and agencies within the legislative branch that
assist the Senate and the House in this critical area.
In our commitment to the American people to reduce the size of the
Government, this committee has been reluctant to recommend significant
additional resources for any of the Congress' offices and agencies. We
are not providing any additional funds for this legislative system,
although we will allow the Secretary of the Senate, at his request, to
reprogram some funds to support the Senate's need to modernize the
collection and preparation of its legislative information. We do expect
all legislative branch offices and agencies to support fully this very
important initiative with their existing appropriated funds, which we
believe are sufficient.
This is a challenging task, and will require appropriate policies,
guidelines, and oversight. We hope that the House of Representatives
will join us in this task. If they do not, however, we shall proceed in
the Senate nonetheless. Even without the participation of the House,
the Senate can and must improve its own system and begin to reduce the
duplication that currently exists.
This amendment was prepared in consultation with the Committee on
Rules and Administration. With this amendment, we are taking the next
steps in creating a new legislative information system for the Senate
by designating some of those responsibilities for this system now,
specifically for the Secretary of the Senate, the Congressional
Research Service, and the Library of Congress. The Committee on Rules
and Administration has jurisdiction for this system and will be making
other designations of responsibility as the system progresses.
I am pleased that the distinguished chairman of our Committee on
Rules and Administration shares our views on the importance of these
matters, and that his committee is prepared to oversee the development
of the Senate's new legislative system.
amendment no. 5116
On page 8, after line 17 insert:
SEC. 8. PAYMENT FOR UNACCRUED LEAVE.
(a) In General.--The Financial Clerk of the Senate is
authorized to accept from an individual whose pay is
disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate a payment
representing pay for any period of unaccrued annual leave
used by that individual, as certified by the head of the
employing office of the individual making the payment.
(b) Withholding.--The Financial Clerk of the Senate is
authorized to withhold the amount referred to in subsection
(a) from any amount which is disbursed by the Secretary of
the Senate and which is due to or on behalf of the individual
described in subsection (a).
(c) Deposit.--Any payment accepted under this section shall
be deposited in the general fund of Treasury as miscellaneous
receipts.
(d) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``head
of the employing office'' means any person with the final
authority to appoint, hire, discharge, and set the terms,
conditions, or privileges of the employment of an individual
whose pay is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate.
(e) Applicability.--The section shall apply to fiscal year
1996 and each fiscal year thereafter.
____
Amendment No. 5117
(Purpose: To direct the Congressional Research Service to develop an
electronic congressional legislative information and document retrieval
system)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
Sec. . (a) The Congressional Research Service, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Senate and the heads
of the appropriate offices and agencies of the legislative
branch and with the approval of the Committee on Rules and
Administration of the Senate, shall coordinate the
development of an electronic congressional legislative
information and document retrieval system to provide for the
legislative information needs of the Senate through the
exchange and retrieval of information and documents among
legislative branch offices and agencies. The Secretary of the
Senate, with the oversight and approval of the Committee on
Rules and Administration of the Senate, shall have
responsibility for the implementation of this system in the
Senate. All of the appropriate offices and agencies of the
legislative branch shall participate in the implementation of
the system.
(b) As used in this section--
(1) the term ``legislative information'' refers to that
information and those documents produced for the use of the
Congress by the offices and agencies of the legislative
branch as defined in this section, and such other information
and documents as approved by the Committee on Rules and
Administration of the Senate;
(2) the term ``offices and agencies of the legislative
branch'' means the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, the
Office of Legislative Counsel of the Senate, the Office of
the Architect of the Capitol, the General Accounting Office,
the Government Printing Office, the Library of Congress, the
Congressional Budget Office, and the Sergeant at Arms of the
Senate; and
(3) the term ``retrieval system'' means the indexing of
documents and data, as well as integrating, searching,
linking, and displaying documents and data.
(c) The Library of Congress shall--
(1) assist the Congressional Research Service in supporting
the Senate in carrying out this section; and
(2) provide such technical staff and resources as may be
necessary to carry out this section.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, let me first commend the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Legislative Branch for his foresight in initiating this
effort to improve our legislative information systems. When I became
chairman of the Committee on Rules and Administration I began a review
of our entire program for information technology. This is a rapidly
changing, and
[[Page S9065]]
very expensive area for the Senate. Yet it is vital to all the
operations of the Senate, from the way we pay our bills to the way we
prepare, debate, and pass--or reject--legisation. It is critical,
therefore, that we have sound planning for, and careful implementation
of information technologies that will adequately support our
fundamental work of legislation and oversight. Because of the potential
high cost of technology, and also its ability to support our work, I
can think of very few areas that require such close scrutiny, well-
thought out policies, and effective management Achieving these
objectives has been one of my highest priorities since being appointed
Chair.
We have in the Senate now an historic opportunity to reduce
duplication and to ensure that our use of technology to support our
legislative process is both responsive to the needs of Senators and
also cost effective. The Committee on Rules has taken a number of
important steps to accomplish this, and we are planning to take more in
the near future. I have already noted our strategic review process,
which will continue under my chairmanship. In addition, we have
directed the Secretary of the Senate, in coordination with the Clerk of
the House, to establish standards for the exchange of legislative
information between the two Chambers. The Secretary has done this, and,
I am pleased to report, is well launched on a plan for implementing
these standards. In addition, the committee and the Secretary are about
to let a contract that will provide the Senate with options for the
design of a system that will enable us to collect and prepare our
legislative information on a much more efficient basis. You will recall
that many of our systems were developed over 20 years ago, and while
they have served us well, few would disagree that we can do much better
with the technology that is available to us today. The result will be
that Members and staff of the Senate will have legislative information
that is more accurate, more timely, and more comprehensive, every day,
directly at their desktops. While this program will take several years
to complete fully, we will be able to benefit immediately as each new
component becomes available.
This program will require a long and sustained effort by many people
and many legislative branch organziations, without additional
resources. It will require the establishment of priorities and good
management to ensure these priorities are met. Through this amendment
we are designating the Secretary of the Senate, who has the primary
responsibility for the Senate's legislative information, to provide
overall management of this system. We are also directing the
Congressional Research Service, which understands the legislative
research needs of the Congress, to coordinate with the Committee and
the Secretary the development of the retrieval portion of the system.
Additionally, we have directed the Library of Congress, with its
expertise in the development of information systems, to provide
sufficient staff and technical support to assist CRS in building this
retrieval component. We will need and expect the cooperation and
support of the other legislative branch agencies, including the GPO,
and the GAO and CBO, both of whose reports we will want to include in
the system. And, of course, we will continue to rely upon our own
excellent staff in the Senate Computer Center and the
Telecommunications Office in the creation of this system.
Mr. President, when this initiative is complete, we in the Senate
will have a new, more efficient, and far more useful legislative
information system that will serve the needs of Members and committees.
It will be based on standards that allow us to update it regularly and
as needed. And it will last us well into the next century. It will be
of a quality that is commensurate with our constitutional
responsibilities, and it will aid us greatly as we strive to serve the
citizens of this great country.
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, the first of the amendments is offered on
behalf of Senator Hatfield.
It amends language reported by the committee to provide for a 2-year
reauthorization for the American Folklife Center in the Library of
Congress.
The second amendment extends certain provisions of Federal law to
employees of the Senate for the Employees Child Care Center.
The third amendment provides for the deposit of a contract
termination payment to credit the expenses of the Sergeant at Arms.
The fourth amendment authorizes and directs the Secretary of the
Senate to oversee the development and implementation of a legislative
information system for the Senate.
Funds for that initiative may be derived from funds previously
appropriated for a new financial management system for the Senate with
the approval of the Committee on Appropriations.
The fifth amendment brought to us today by the Disbursing Office
authorizes the Financial Clerk of the Senate to receive payments for
unaccrued annual leave for individuals whose pay is disbursed by the
Senate and deposit those payments in the General Fund of the Treasury
as a miscellaneous receipt.
And, finally, the sixth amendment recommended to us by the Committee
on Rules and Administration addresses the creation of a legislative
branch-wide legislative information system.
Mr. President, all of these amendments have been discussed with
Senator Murray. I believe she has no objection. Therefore, I would ask
that these six amendments be agreed to en bloc.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have had time to review all of these
amendments. There is no objection.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendments are agreed
to.
The amendments (Nos. 5112, 5113, 5114, 5115, 5116, and 5117) were
agreed to.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which
the amendments were agreed to.
Mr. MACK. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 5118
(Purpose: To clarify the uses of Member weblinks)
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, at this time I would like to send an
amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator Leahy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), for Mr. Leahy,
proposes an amendment numbered 5118.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. ____. For the purposes of the United States Senate
Internet Services Usage Rules and Policies, Members of the
Senate may post a link on Senate Internet Services to a
private, public, or nonprofit company, organization, or
municipality located or based in the Member's State if a
disclaimer is included on the same page as the link
specifying that the Member is not endorsing the private,
public, or nonprofit company, organization, or municipality.
Mr. MACK. 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.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. MURRAY. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment just sent to
the desk be laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
Amendment No. 5119
(Purpose: To amend chapter 1 of title 17, United States Code, to
provide for a limitation on the exclusive copyrights of literary works
produced or distributed in specialized formats for use by blind or
disabled persons, and for other purposes)
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, on behalf of myself, and Senators Frahm,
Stevens, Leahy, McConnell, and Bingaman, I send a printed amendment to
the desk. At the proper time I will ask that it be set aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
[[Page S9066]]
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Chafee), for himself,
Mrs. Frahm, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Leahy, Mr. McConnell, and Mr.
Bingaman, proposes an amendment numbered 5119.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following
new section:
SEC. . LIMITATION ON EXCLUSIVE COPYRIGHTS FOR LITERARY
WORKS IN SPECIALIZED FORMAT FOR THE BLIND AND
DISABLED.
(a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 17, United States Code,
is amended by adding after section 120 the following new
section:
``Sec. 121. Limitations on exclusive rights: reproduction for
blind or other people with disabilities
``(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and
710, it is not an infringement of copyright for an authorized
entity to reproduce or to distribute copies or phonorecords
of a previously published, nondramatic literary work if such
copies or phonorecords are reproduced or distributed in
specialized formats exclusively for use by blind or other
persons with disabilities.
``(b)(1) Copies or phonorecords to which this section
applies shall--
``(A) not be reproduced or distributed in a format other
than a specialized format exclusively for use by blind or
other persons with disabilities;
``(B) bear a notice that any further reproduction or
distribution in a format other than a specialized format is
an infringement; and
``(C) include a copyright notice identifying the copyright
owner and the date of the original publication.
``(2) The provisions of this section shall not apply to
standardized, secure, or norm-referenced tests and related
testing material, or to computer programs, except the
portions thereof that are in conventional human language
(including descriptions of pictorial works) and displayed to
users in the ordinary course of using the computer programs.
``(c) For purposes of this section, the term--
``(1) `authorized entity' means a nonprofit organization or
a governmental agency that has a primary mission to provide
specialized services relating to training, education, or
adaptive reading or information access needs of blind or
other persons with disabilities;
``(2) `blind or other persons with disabilities' means
individuals who are eligible or who may qualify in accordance
with the Act entitled ``An Act to provide books for the adult
blind'', approved March 3, 1931 (2 U.S.C. 135a; 46 Stat.
1487) to receive books and other publications produced in
specialized formats; and
``(3) `specialized formats' means braille, audio, or
digital text which is exclusively for use by blind or other
persons with disabilities.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 1 of title 17, United States Code, is
amended by adding after the item relating to section 120 the
following:
``121. Limitations on exclusive rights: reproduction for blind or other
people with disabilities.''.
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, this is an amendment that I am offering on
behalf of myself and those Senators that I just listed.
This amendment is supported by the Association of American
Publishers, the National Federation of the Blind, the American
Foundation for the Blind, the American Printing House for the Blind,
Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic, and the U.S. Copyright Office.
It also has the support of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee,
and we are waiting for approval by the ranking member of the Judiciary
Committee before proceeding.
Mr. President, the amendment I am proposing along with those Senators
I mentioned is an amendment to the legislative branch appropriations
bill regarding books for the blind.
In 1931, the Library of Congress National Library Service for the
Blind and Physically Handicapped was established by an act of Congress.
Since then, funding for this immensely valuable program has been
included in the legislative branch bill, which, of course, funds the
Library of Congress. The National Library Service and a handful of
nonprofit organizations reproduce in specialized formats published
material that is readily available to sighted individuals in libraries,
bookstores, newsstands and countless other locations.
Specialized formats refers to braille, sound recordings--either on
cassette or phonorecord--and new digital formats that can be used for
special software. To make certain that recorded books and magazines are
only used by those for whom they are intended, they are recorded at a
speed that simply does not work on standard tape players.
The National Library Service provides special tape players and record
players to eligible individuals. This equipment is not generally
available to the public. To be eligible to receive this special
equipment, an applicant must be certified by a qualified professional
such as a doctor, nurse or social worker that he or she is unable to
use standard print.
The National Library Service selects the books to reproduce in these
specialized formats.
Frequently, the National Library Service issues request after request
only to wait months for a response from the publisher. These delays are
not because the publishers have a desire to withhold permission; it is
simply a low priority. They just set it aside.
There are still 17 books from the 1995 best seller list for which
permission is still pending.
For our Nation's more than 54,000 blind elementary and secondary
school students, this is a great problem.
The American Printing House for the Blind in Louisville, KY, is the
primary producer of braille textbooks. It is a challenge to reproduce
today's highly visible textbooks in braille format. Maps, charts,
graphs, and illustrations that take up one page in a standard textbook
may require multiple pages of braille or tactile graphics to convey the
same information. All in all, it can take a full year to produce a
braille textbook. Added time consumed by trying to get permission from
publishers makes it certain that the blind student is not in sync with
his classmates.
The amendment Senator Frahm and others and I are introducing seeks to
end the unintended censorship of blind students' access to current
information. The amendment, as I say, is endorsed by the Association of
American Publishers, the National Federation of the Blind, the American
Foundation for the Blind, the American Printing House for the Blind,
and the U.S. Copyright Office.
This is a very simple amendment. This says groups that produce
specialized formats for the blind no longer are required to gain
permission from the copyright holder before beginning production. It is
based on an agreement that was reached last January between the
Association of American Publishers and the National Federation of the
Blind. It includes a very narrow definition of those who are eligible
to undertake such production and applies the definition for eligibility
used by the National Library Service to those who receive
reproductions.
So, Mr. President, as has been said by a member of the National
Federation of the Blind, It should be obvious that the delays here
present a significant barrier which must be overcome if blind people
are to be informed and literate. It is not too much to say that living
successfully in our modern society often depends upon being able to
communicate ideas and facts both orally and in writing.
I conclude by a statement from Marybeth Peters, who is the Register
of Copyrights at the Library of Congress. In testifying before the
Senate Judiciary Committee she said,
Blind and physically handicapped readers have a legitimate
need for prompt and timely access as soon as possible after
works become available to the general reading public.
Textbook materials in particular are commonly out of date
within 1 to 2 years, superseded by new editions.
Passage of this amendment will permit the speedy access to
information that blind people need.
It is my understanding the managers of the bill are prepared to
accept the amendment, but we are waiting for the approval of the
ranking member of the Judiciary Committee.
So, Mr. President, I thank the managers of the bill and hope that
when we receive the approval, as I expect we will, of the ranking
member of the Judiciary Committee, if I am not here, the manager of the
bill might be able to call up this amendment and have it considered in
my absence.
I ask the manager and the ranking member of the committee, if we
receive the approval--the only thing we are waiting for is the approval
of the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. If I could pass that
on, when it is
[[Page S9067]]
received, to the managers, if they could then call up the amendment if
I am not here.
Mr. MACK. I say to the Senator, we will be in a position to do that.
Mr. CHAFEE. I thank the Senator very much. I do not know what the
time schedule is. We may have to move forward rather quickly. So we
will get that information regarding the ranking member as soon as we
can.
Mr. MACK. I am under the impression, since the Senator has offered
the amendment, that his rights have been protected. We will be moving
forward the remainder of this evening and then tomorrow taking whatever
amendments have been agreed to in the unanimous consent request last
week dealing with those amendments.
I have forgotten the time that we were slotted for votes.
It has not been set yet, but, again, the Senator's rights have been
protected since he has offered the amendment.
Mr. CHAFEE. I thank the Senator.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, let me say that I support the amendment
the Senator has offered. We are simply on this side waiting for the
authorizing committee to review it, and hopefully that will come fairly
soon.
Mr. FEINGOLD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Did the Senator from Wisconsin seek
recognition?
Mr. FEINGOLD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Feingold], is
recognized.
Mr. FEINGOLD. I ask the managers if this would be an appropriate time
to offer an amendment? Have they had an opportunity to make their
opening statements?
Mr. MACK. I say to the Senator, this is an appropriate time to offer
an amendment that has been listed in the unanimous-consent request.
Mr. FEINGOLD. I intend to offer the amendment on behalf of the
Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain] and myself. I believe that is one of
the listed items.
Mr. MACK. I believe I would be in a position to object to that. As I
understand it, the unanimous-consent request indicates that there is a
slot for Senator McCain to offer an amendment. I have the right to
object to a request for someone to offer an amendment on someone else's
behalf.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is correct. The
Senator from Wisconsin would have to ask unanimous consent to offer the
amendment.
Mr. FEINGOLD. I ask unanimous consent that I may offer an amendment
on behalf of the Senator from Arizona, who is unable to be here at this
time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. MACK. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. MACK. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Amendment No. 5120
(Purpose: To further restrict legislative post-employment lobbying by
Members and senior staffers)
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment on behalf
of the senior Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain. I send the amendment to
the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Feingold], for Mr. McCain,
for himself and Mr. Feingold, proposes amendment numbered
5120.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place in the bill, add the following:
Sec. . (a) Section 207(e)(1)(A) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``1 year'' and inserting
``2 years''.
(b) Paragraphs (2)(A), (3), and (4)(A) of section 207(e) of
title 18, United States Code, are amended by striking
``within 1 year after'' and inserting ``within 5 years
after''.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I have offered the amendment on behalf
of Senator McCain of Arizona, which is an outgrowth of a bipartisan
effort that relates to the issue of post-employment restrictions on
elected officials and what is more commonly known as the practice of
the revolving-door lobby.
This amendment follows in a long line of congressional reforms that
have been proposed on a bipartisan basis by myself and the Senator from
Arizona and others. Several of us who have been trying to address the
issue of special interest influence have proposed and pursued several
avenues of reform. Whether it is requiring greater disclosure from the
lobbying community or passing new gift restrictions that clamps down on
free vacation trips and fancy dinners, or finally addressing the
woefully inadequate system of campaign finance we are currently saddled
with, it is clear that reforming the Congress has become one of the
preeminent issues among an electorate that has grown to not only view
this institution with cynicism and disdain, but has also developed,
unfortunately, a fundamental distrust of their elected representatives.
Mr. President, restoring the faith of the American people in their
Government is without a doubt one of the most important tasks that
faces us today.
Those of us who have been proposing lobbying reform and gift
prohibitions and campaign finance reform have sometimes been accused by
defenders of the status quo of seeking to limit citizen access to their
elected representatives. But this is not the case.
What we are trying to do is limit special access to elected
representatives, the kind of access that ordinary Americans living in
States like Wisconsin and Arizona do not have. Many of us believe that
it is simply wrong to suggest that just because you have the financial
resources to write out enormous campaign contributions or treat
legislators to expensive meals, that you should therefore have special
access to those Government officials. That is nothing more than
auctioning off democracy to the highest bidder.
A very large part of the culture of special interest influence that
pervades Washington is the revolving door between public service and
private employment. By putting a lock on this revolving door for a
meaningful period of time, we can send a message that those entering
Government employment should view public service as an honor and a
privilege, not as just another rung on the ladder to personal gain and
profit.
Mr. President, the facts show there is a public perception that there
is a problem that needs to be addressed. It is not misguided.
There are countless instances of former Members of Congress who once
chaired or served on committees with jurisdiction over particular
industries or special interests who are now lobbying their former
colleagues on behalf of those very industries or special interests.
Former committee staff directors use their contacts and knowledge of
their former committees to secure lucrative positions in lobbying firms
and associations with interests related to those committees.
Just how fast is the revolving door spinning, Mr. President? Just
look at the countless announcements, after the 1994 elections, of
Government officials leaving the public sector to work for lobbying
firms.
One article announced that an aide leaving her position on the House
Subcommittee on Energy and Power will be working for the lobbying arm
of the American Public Power Association.
Mr. President, another announcement tells us a recently retired
official member of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on select
revenue measures, is joining a Washington lobbying firm as a specialist
on tax policy. Mr. President, we have the former chief of staff to the
chairman of the House Transportation Committee now lobbying the
committee on behalf of a number of transportation interests.
Mr. President, I could go on and on. The problem of the revolving
door lobbying is quite clear, and in my view, and I strongly believe in
the view of
[[Page S9068]]
the author of this amendment, the senior Senator from Arizona, so is
the solution. The solution is clear, too.
The amendment offered by the senior Senator from Arizona today will
strengthen the postemployment restrictions that are already in place.
Keep in mind, Mr. President, postemployment restrictions are not
something new. There is currently a 1-year ban on former Members of
Congress lobbying the entire Congress, as well as a 1-year ban on
senior congressional staff lobbying their former employing entity.
Members and senior staff are also prohibited from lobbying on behalf of
a foreign entity for 1 year.
The McCain amendment will prohibit Members of Congress from lobbying
the entire Congress, not just for 1 year but for 2 years. It doubles
the time. We double the current restriction.
In the most egregious abuses, when a former high-ranking committee
staffer is hired by a special interest to lobby that committee, we
extend the lobbying ban to 5 years. This amendment then bars former
senior staffers, defined as any senior staffer or any staffer earning
in excess of 75 percent of a Member's salary, from lobbying their
former employing entities for a period of 5 years.
For example, the former chief counsel of the Ways and Means Committee
would be prohibited from lobbying any member of that committee or any
committee staffer for a period of 5 years.
Mr. President, some might argue that we are inhibiting these talented
individuals from pursuing careers in policy matters in which they have
become extremely proficient. It may be asked why a former high-level
staffer on the Senate Subcommittee on Communications cannot accept
employment with a telecommunications company. After all, this person
has accumulated years of knowledge of our communication laws and
technology. Why should this individual be prevented from accepting
private sector employment in the communications field?
Of course, Mr. President, our legislation does not do that. Our
legislation does not bar anyone from seeking private sector employment.
That staffer can take the job with the telecommunications company, but
what they cannot do is lobby their former subcommittee for 5 years.
They can consult, they can advise, they can recommended, but they
cannot lobby their former employer. That is it. That is what the McCain
amendment does.
We are only limiting an individual's employment opportunity if they
are seeking to use their past employment with the Federal Government to
gain special access or influence with the Government in return for
personal gain.
Mr. President, we are not here to outlaw the profession of lobbying.
Not only would that be unconstitutional, but I do not think it would
really be addressing the true flaws of our political system. Lobbying,
when done right, is merely an attempt to present the views and concerns
of a particular group. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. In
fact, lobbyists, whether they are representing public interest groups
or Wall Street, can present information to public representatives that
they may not otherwise have or obtain. So it can be helpful.
Mr. President, I strongly believe that there is no more noble
endeavor than to serve in Government, but we need to take immediate
action to restore the public's confidence in their Government and to
rebuild the lost trust between Members of Congress and the electorate.
This amendment is a small, but I think strong step, in that direction.
I urge the Members to give it their support.
I yield the floor.
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator for
working out the situation here a few moments ago. I am glad we were
able to have the amendment offered, and I appreciate the Senator's
understanding with respect to voting this on a voice vote.
I am prepared to accept the amendment and take it to conference.
Mr. FEINGOLD. The manager has correctly stated our understanding. I
appreciate the courtesy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 5120) was agreed to.
Mrs. MURRAY. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. MACK. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. MACK. 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. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise in support of H.R. 3754, in
legislative branch appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997.
The bill, as reported, provides $2.2 billion in new budget authority
and $1.9 billion in outlays for the Congress and other legislative
branch agencies, including the Library of Congress, the General
Accounting Office, and the Government Printing Office, among others.
When outlays from prior year appropriations and other adjustments are
taken into account, the bill totals $2.3 billion in budget authority
and $2.2 billion in outlays. The bill is under the subcommittee's
602(b) allocation by $23 million in budget authority and $49 million in
outlays.
I want to commend the distinguished chairman and ranking member of
the legislative branch subcommittee for producing a bill that is
substantially within their 602(b) allocation. I am pleased that this
bill continues to hold the line on congressional spending.
I urge the Senate to adopt this bill and to avoid offering amendments
which would cause the committee to exceed its 602(b) allocation.
appointment of a deputy librarian
Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I would like to bring the attention of the
Senate to committee report language concerning the Library of Congress
and the appointment and responsibilities of a deputy librarian.
I also note the presence of the chairman of the Joint Committee on
the Library, Senator Hatfield, and the chairman of the Senate Committee
on Rules and Administration. I wonder if they would care to engage in a
brief colloquy regarding this issue.
But let me first read the report language in question.
The committee has reviewed the findings and recommendations
of the recent audits of the Library, and believes that the
single most important action to be taken would be the
appointment of a deputy librarian fully empowered to be the
chief executive officer of the Library. The management tasks
identified in the audit reports are daunting, and must be
given full-time attention. The extraordinary demands already
placed upon the Librarian in any number of external arenas
and in developing a vision for the Library's transition into
a digital future make it impossible for him to deal with the
day-to-day administration of the Library's operations. Those
responsibilities must be delegated to the Deputy Librarian
and the committee looks forward to that being done as soon as
the deputy position is filled.
Mr. President, the committee's phrasing in its instruction to the
Library to empower the Deputy Librarian as the chief executive officer
was done so advisedly. The committee is aware that the specific
recommendation in the GAO management audit suggested that the deputy
act as the chief operating officer. And, indeed the library is in the
process of selecting a deputy librarian to fill the position as a chief
operating officer.
However, the committee wishes to make it crystal clear that, in our
considered judgment, and for the reasons outlined in the report which I
have just read, the Deputy Librarian should be charged with the
responsibilities of a chief executive officer.
The title and terminology are not as important as the idea that this
committee will be looking to the deputy as the accountable authority in
the day-to-day management of the institution.
I yield to our most distinguished chairman of the Appropriations
Committee who also serves as the chairman of the Joint Committee on the
Library.
Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, the chairman of the subcommittee was
good enough to consult with me in the development of the report
language he has just read, and I concur wholeheartedly in the direction
given to the Library in that language. Our Librarian of Congress, Dr.
James Billington,
[[Page S9069]]
is an extraordinary individual of numerous talents and many
achievements, but no one individual can possibly personally direct all
the Library's activities. When the position of Deputy Librarian is
filled, the Librarian should delegate to him the responsibility and the
authority to deal with the day-to-day administration of the Library's
operations. The Librarian has written to me to indicate he intends to
do exactly that, and I look forward to the beneficial effects of that
delegation of responsibility. I yield the floor.
Mr. MACK. I yield to our most distinguished chairman of the Committee
on Rules and Administration for his comments on the issue.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I share with both distinguished chairmen,
the views as expressed in committee report 104-323 relating to the
appointment and responsibilities of a deputy librarian of the Library
of Congress.
In our meeting of the Joint Committee on the Library, ably chaired by
the distinguished senior Senator from Oregon, we discussed the critical
need for a deputy librarian, fully vested with the authority to run the
day-to-day operations and management of the institution.
Each of us recognize the many responsibilities already placed on the
Librarian, including those by outlined by statute. His responsibilities
in developing a vision for the Library into the 21st century is an
enormous task. Promoting this vision within the institution, in the
Congress, and indeed throughout the Nation requires an immense amount
of time and energy. The Librarian has done a tremendous job in this
critical area. We applaud his efforts and wish him greater and
continued success. I know we all look forward to working with the
Librarian as he continues to set the course for the future of the
Library.
____________________