[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 3, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3223-H3225]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




ESTABLISHING A COMMISSION ON STRUCTURAL ALTERNATIVES FOR FEDERAL COURTS 
                               OF APPEAL

  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 908) to establish a Commission on Structural Alternatives for the 
Federal Courts of Appeals, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                H.R. 908

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT AND FUNCTIONS OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a Commission on 
     Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals 
     (hereinafter referred to as the ``Commission'').
       (b) Functions.--The functions of the Commission shall be 
     to--
       (1) study the present division of the United States into 
     the several judicial circuits;
       (2) study the structure and alignment of the Federal Court 
     of Appeals system, with particular reference to the Ninth 
     Circuit; and
       (3) report to the President and the Congress its 
     recommendations for such changes in circuit boundaries or 
     structure as may be appropriate for the expeditious and 
     effective disposition of the caseload of the Federal Courts 
     of Appeals, consistent with fundamental concepts of fairness 
     and due process.

     SEC. 2. MEMBERSHIP.

       (a) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of 10 
     members appointed as follows:
       (1) One member appointed by the President of the United 
     States.
       (2) One member appointed by the Chief Justice of the United 
     States.
       (3) Two members appointed by the Majority Leader of the 
     Senate.
       (4) Two members appointed by the Minority Leader of the 
     Senate.
       (5) Two members appointed by the Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (6) Two members appointed by the Minority Leader of the 
     House of Representatives.
       (b) Appointment.--The members of the Commission shall be 
     appointed within 60 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (c) Vacancy.--Any vacancy in the Commission shall be filled 
     in the same manner as the original appointment.
       (d) Chair.--The Commission shall elect a Chair and Vice 
     Chair from among its members.
       (e) Quorum.--Six members of the Commission shall constitute 
     a quorum, but 3 may conduct hearings.

     SEC. 3. COMPENSATION.

       (a) In General.--Members of the Commission who are 
     officers, or full-time employees, of the United States shall 
     receive no additional compensation for their services, but 
     shall be reimbursed for travel, subsistence, and other 
     necessary expenses incurred in the performance of duties 
     vested in the Commission, but not in excess of the 
     maximum amounts authorized under section 456 of title 28, 
     United States Code.
       (b) Private Members.--Members of the Commission from 
     private life shall receive $200 for each day (including 
     travel time) during which the member is engaged in the actual 
     performance of duties vested in the Commission, plus 
     reimbursement for travel, subsistence, and other necessary 
     expenses incurred in the performance of such duties, but not 
     in excess of the maximum amounts authorized under section 456 
     of title 28, United States Code.

     SEC. 4. PERSONNEL.

       (a) Executive Director.--The Commission may appoint an 
     Executive Director who shall receive compensation at a rate 
     not exceeding the rate prescribed for level V of the 
     Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title 5, United 
     States Code.
       (b) Staff.--The Executive Director, with the approval of 
     the Commission, may appoint and fix the compensation of such 
     additional personnel as the Executive Director determines 
     necessary, without regard to the provisions of title 5, 
     United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive 
     service or the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of 
     chapter 53 of such title relating to classification and 
     General Schedule pay rates. Compensation under this 
     subsection shall not exceed the annual maximum rate of basic 
     pay for a position above GS-15 of the General Schedule under 
     section 5108 of title 5, United States Code.
       (c) Experts and Consultants.--The Executive Director may 
     procure personal services of experts and consultants as 
     authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, at 
     rates not to exceed the highest level payable under the 
     General Schedule pay rates under section 5332 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       (d) Services.--The Administrative Office of the United 
     States Courts shall provide administrative services, 
     including financial and budgeting services to the Commission 
     on a reimbursable basis. The Federal Judicial Center shall 
     provide necessary research services to the Commission on a 
     reimbursable basis

     SEC. 5. INFORMATION.

       The Commission is authorized to request from any 
     department, agency, or independent instrumentality of the 
     Government any information and assistance the Commission 
     determines necessary to carry out its functions under this 
     Act. Each such department, agency, and independent 
     instrumentality is authorized to provide such information and 
     assistance to the extent permitted by law when requested by 
     the Chair of the Commission.

     SEC. 6. REPORT.

       No later than 18 months following the date on which its 
     sixth member is appointed in accordance with section 2(b), 
     the Commission shall submit its report to the President and 
     the Congress. The Commission shall terminate 90 days after 
     the date of the submission of its report.

     SEC. 7. CONGRESSIONAL CONSIDERATION.

       No later than 60 days after the submission of the report, 
     the Committees on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate shall act on the report.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission 
     such sums, not to exceed $900,000, as may be necessary to 
     carry out the purposes of this Act. Such sums as are 
     appropriated shall remain available until expended.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule the gentleman from 
North Carolina [Mr. Coble] and the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Lofgren], each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Coble].


                             General Leave

  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from North Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  [Mr. COBLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.]
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I rise in support of H.R. 908, a bill to establish a Commission on 
Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals.
  An amended version of this bill is presented for passage under 
suspension of the rules. The amendment to the reported bill makes the 
following changes:
  It reduces the time established in the bill, as introduced, in which 
the commission must come to a conclusion to 18 months from the 
appointment of the sixth member of the commission as opposed to 2 years 
from enactment.
  Second, due to the reduction in time, funding for the commission is 
reduced from $1.3 million to $900,000, $500,000 of which has already 
been appropriated.
  And third, the size of the commission will be reduced from 12 members 
to 10 members with 2 members being appointed by each of the majority 
leader of the Senate, the minority leader of the Senate, the Speaker of 
the House, and the minority leader of the House. Additionally the 
President and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will appoint one 
member each.
  H.R. 908 was introduced in response to recurring attempts to divide 
the largest of the Federal judicial circuits, the ninth.

                              {time}  1430

  However, if properly implemented, the commission proposal represents 
a sound approach to a problem of national concern, and that is the 
explosive growth in the caseload of all of the courts of appeals.
  The time is right, it seems to me, for a careful, objective study 
aimed at determining whether that structure can adequately serve the 
needs of the 21st century. The task of the commission would be to carry 
out that study.
  The proposed commission would be the first of its kind since the 
Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate System, also 
known as the Hruska Commission, which completed its work in 1975, or 
more than two decades ago. Needless to say, dramatic changes have taken 
place in the work of the Federal courts in those two decades, but there 
have been no structural alterations except for the division of the old 
fifth circuit and the creation of the Court of Appeals for the Federal 
Circuit.

[[Page H3224]]

  As I have indicated, under the amended version of H.R. 908, the 
commission will have 18 months to carry out its work. It also includes 
a requirement that the initial appointments to the commission be made 
within 60 days of the date of enactment. That will help to assure that 
the process will not be delayed unduly. The study is a responsible 
method to evaluate any prospective split in the ninth circuit and is 
generally overdue.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to add as well that this is not to be 
exclusively restricted to the ninth circuit. This commission, 
hopefully, will examine the entire system and come back with a 
recommendation that the commission deems appropriate.
  Many people have been involved in this. We have compromised here and 
there. It was initially designed to be a 2-year study. That has been 
reduced to 18 months. So many people have given and taken on this, and 
I think it is, in its present form, a good bill and I urge its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  H.R. 908, as the chairman has just outlined, creates a commission to 
study the structural alternatives for the Federal appellate court 
system. With the expanding caseload in our Federal courts, there is 
concern throughout the Nation and in the circuits, and nowhere has that 
concern been greater than in the ninth circuit, composed of my home 
State of California, as well as the States of Oregon, Washington, 
Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, Alaska, and Hawaii.
  As the chairman has mentioned, increases in the number of filings in 
the Federal courts have greatly outpaced the growth in the Federal 
judiciary and has greatly enlarged the caseload of each judge, often to 
more than manageable levels. As we approach the next century, I think 
it is entirely appropriate to examine the structure of the Federal 
judiciary, and I strongly support this legislation.
  While it is true that the initial impetus for this bill were 
proposals to split the ninth circuit, the proposed commission actually 
has a broader mandate, as the chairman has just outlined, than studying 
the ninth circuit. In fact, as we enter the 21st century, we need to 
take a look at the entire range of possibilities.
  Certainly the commission could make a recommendation to split one of 
the circuits, to reconfigure the circuits and the Congress could follow 
the Commission's recommendation or be free to choose another 
alternative. But whatever we intend to do, I know that we will be 
better off with the expert advice that this commission will provide to 
us. It is always better to have good, thoughtful, expert advice than to 
simply move forward, especially in dealing with the judiciary.
  So I am happy to join the chairman of the committee and my colleagues 
on the Committee on the Judiciary in urging support for the passage of 
this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde], the chairman of the House Committee 
on the Judiciary.
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. I am strongly in support of H.R. 908. It was reported unanimously 
by the Committee on the Judiciary and addresses in a comprehensive 
manner and in a bipartisan manner some of the concerns that exist about 
the Federal court system.
  This bill creates a Commission on Structural Alternatives for the 
Federal Courts of Appeals. In 1990, the Federal Courts Study Committee 
that had been created by statute in 1988 concluded the appellate courts 
were experiencing a crisis of volume. The study committee expressed the 
view that--

       Within as few as 5 years, the Nation would have to decide 
     whether or not to abandon the present circuit structure in 
     favor of an alternative structure that might better organize 
     the more numerous appellate judges needed to grapple with the 
     swollen caseload.

  The committee's report presented several structural alternatives, but 
did not endorse any of them. Instead, it called for further inquiry and 
discussion. The proposed commission would thus take up where the 
Federal Court Study Committee left off.
  It is important to note that recent statistics reflect the fact that 
in fiscal 1996, the number of appeals filed in the 12 regional courts 
of appeals rose 4 percent to 51,991. This is an all-time high in 
filings, with eight circuits reporting increases. Clearly, this study 
the committee proposed in H.R. 908 could not be more timely.
  The goal of the commission will be to study the entire Federal 
appellate court system, but, of course, with a particular view toward 
addressing the problems facing the largest and most diverse circuit we 
have, the ninth. The bipartisan structure of the commission is designed 
to guarantee a fair process, give credibility to the commission's 
recommendations and ensure the integrity of the Federal court system. 
We cannot subject something as important as the structure of our courts 
to political gamesmanship or predetermine the commission's 
recommendations.
  Problems do exist in the size and makeup of the ninth circuit, and 
the committee is convinced that the commission established in this bill 
will examine these problems in an equitable fashion. The study called 
for in H.R. 908 is a responsible method to evaluate the structure of 
the Federal appellate courts and make recommendations that can provide 
a sound foundation for congressional action in the future, and so I 
strongly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 908.
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Alaska [Mr. Young].
  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend, the 
gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Coble], for yielding me this time 
and for working so hard. I do believe I had something to do with this 
working on a compromise between the gentleman from Montana [Mr. Hill], 
and of course the chairman of the committee itself.
  I strongly support H.R. 908, but I want to talk about the ninth 
circuit itself. It is an empire. A lot of people do not understand 
this. It covers a land mass the size of Western Europe, including nine 
States and two territories. It serves over 15 million people, more than 
our largest city, larger than New York or Los Angeles. It is a 
monstrous responsibility, and it is a court that is overburdened at 
this time.
  If I can say another thing about Alaska. Sometimes I think one of the 
reasons it is overburdened is they take cases that mean very little. We 
have a highway that we would like to extend 2\1/2\ miles, that 
everybody agrees with in the State of Alaska, including the State 
itself and all those people in the small community, with a railroad 
that goes through a tunnel at this time. And because the trustees of 
Alaska filed a suit, the ninth circuit decided to hold up construction 
for 6 months.
  Now, this is an example of a court being out of touch with the people 
of America and the people they represent. Not judicially. They had to 
review.
  So I suggest one thing. I would like to split the court. This bill 
does not do that. I am the extreme. I think the court should be split 
at this time so it serves the people as a whole, not to guard massive 
cities. But I cannot do this.
  So this bill right now is a compromise to set up the commission to 
establish what I think they will find out, that I am correct, that the 
court should be split. It is the right thing, and I urge the passage of 
this legislation.
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Montana [Mr. Hill].
  Mr. HILL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House 
Resolution 908, and I want to thank particularly the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Hyde] and the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Coble] 
and their staffs for their work in bringing this revised version of 
House Resolution 908 to the floor. I especially want to thank the 
gentleman from North Carolina for accommodating my concerns and the 
people of Montana.
  Mr. Speaker, justice delayed is justice denied. We need to study the 
problems of the Ninth Circuit Court and address the concerns that 
Montanans have expressed to me, that they are not obtaining the same 
level of judicial

[[Page H3225]]

consideration as residents of other circuits.
  Considering the size of the circuit, the Ninth Circuit is comprised 
not only of Montana but eight other States and two principalities. The 
Ninth Circuit Court is about twice the size of the next circuit court 
in both population and geography. The caseload is among the highest. It 
is the fastest growing area of the Nation and the time to complete an 
average appeal is more than 14 months, which is 4 months longer than 
the national average. Its 28 judges are about twice the recommended 
number for an appellate court.
  Mr. Speaker, I have worked hard and will continue to work with other 
Members of Congress to address this problem. The sooner we study the 
problems of the Ninth Circuit Court, the sooner Montanans' justice will 
be neither denied nor delayed.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that although there may be at this point 
different hunches on how we are going to go, there is unanimity that 
this bill before us today should be supported and will yield good and 
thoughtful answers to the Congress as we struggle to make our appellate 
court system work very well for all Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida). The question is on 
the motion offered by the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Coble] 
that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 908, as 
amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________