Congressional Record, Volume 145 Issue 23 (Tuesday, February 9, 1999)

[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 23 (Tuesday, February 9, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H527-H528]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MANAGEMENT RESTORATION ACT OF 1999

Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Government Reform be discharged from further consideration
of the bill (H.R. 433) to restore the management and personnel
authority of the Mayor of the District of Columbia, and ask for its
immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, although I do
not intend to object, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Davis) for the purpose of explaining the bill.
(Mr. DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, this is a new era in
the District of Columbia; and it is my strong belief that the time has
come to shift substantial authority from the Control Board back to the
city's elected mayor and give the elected mayor the greater flexibility
he has sought over top personnel. This bill gives Mayor Williams the
tools he needs to do the job.
H.R. 433 does not alter the time period or the conditions for the
Control Board to function in an active phase. The bill takes nothing
away from the Control Board's ability to intervene if necessary during
a control period which still exists, but it does give the mayor direct
control over the reporting and the hiring authority of some of his top
personnel.
If we want democracy to succeed, we need to allow the elected
leadership in the cities to start making decisions, standing behind
those decisions, without being second-guessed every step of the way.
My thanks also to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) for
being the original cosponsor in the legislation, along with the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), and of course
to my friend the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and the gentleman
from California (Mr. Horn) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Scarborough), who I am requesting be added as sponsors today.
The Congressional Budget Office has certified this bill would not
affect the Federal budget. I would urge passage of H.R. 433.
(Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time under my reservation, I
would like to say a few words in support of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, my special thanks to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Burton), the chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the
ranking member, and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) for the
priority they have each given to H.R. 433.
Our bill returns full legal authority over nine agencies to the Mayor
and unfettered authority to confirm the mayor's appointees to the City
Council. Both Mayor Tony Williams and the council will be able to carry
out their responsibilities as elected officials without risk of being
overruled.
It is important to note that this House was not responsible for
withdrawing this authority. A Senator's attachment to the President's
all-important revitalization package that was incorporated into the
1997 Balanced Budget Act was responsible.
It is now appropriate for the House to initiate action to devolve
democratic control to locally-elected officials, and all indications
are that the Senate is prepared to do the same and empower the new
Mayor and the revitalized City Council.
The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) deserves credit for carving
H.R. 433 out of my D.C. Democracy 2000 Act. H.R. 433 is the first part
of that act. The chairman and I are in agreement that the second part
of the act to retire the Control Board a year early must await the
building of a track record by the new Mayor and council.
I thank the House leadership and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr.
Burton) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) for bringing H.R.
433 to the floor as one of the first bills of the 106th Congress. In
doing so, the House has shown, as nothing else could, that this body is
prepared to build a new relationship with the District of Columbia.
I want to thank Speaker Dennis Hastert, Democratic Leader Dick
Gephardt, and Chairman Tom Davis for their leadership in bringing the
``District of Columbia Management Restoration Act of 1999'' to the
House floor today. This bill incorporates key provisions of my bill,
H.R. 214, the District of Columbia Democracy 2000 Act (D.C. Democracy
2000), which return to the Office of the Mayor authority over the
city's nine largest agencies and the ability to hire and fire senior
managers in the government, and return to the City Council full
authority to approve mayoral appointees without control board
intervention. I am especially grateful to Mr. Davis for taking Section
3 of D.C. Democracy 2000, the only section that is ripe for
consideration at this time. The bill accomplishes this transfer of
power through repeal of the Faircloth attachment to the District of
Columbia Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997,
which had vested control of the management reform of the city's nine
largest agencies with the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility
and Management Assistance Authority (Authority).
The purpose of the District of Columbia Management Restoration Act of
1999 is to ensure that the new city administration has sufficient
control of the District government to be held accountable in
preparation for the expiration of the control period. This bill carries
out the purpose of the Authority Act ``to ensure the most efficient and
effective delivery of services, by the District government during a
period of fiscal emergency.'' P.L. 104-8, Title I Sec. 2(b)(2). On
January 2nd, Alice Rivlin, for the Authority, signed a memorandum of
agreement (MOA) delegating authority to the Mayor to run the District
government to the fullest extent allowed by existing law. Viewed from
the front lines of the District government's present progress, the
Authority's considered judgment was that a transition to Home Rule
through the delegation of power to the new Mayor was necessary in
advance of the transfer of ultimate power at the end of the control
period; a clean line of reporting authority unmistakably identifying
the responsible officials was necessary for efficient and effective
government operational reform; and Mayor Williams, in his role as Chief
Financial Officer, had already demonstrated his capacity to administer
complicated operations.
This section amends existing law to complete a transfer of power that
the Authority desired but could not make because of the wording of the
statute and, in effect, to place in law the MOA. The Authority
transferred to the Mayor its jurisdiction over nine operating agencies,
but believed it was unable to return the authority to hire and fire
department heads. In returning this power, the bill seeks to enhance
and facilitate the Mayor's ability to control managers. It eliminates
the possibility of an illusion of an appeal to a higher authority
beyond the Mayor to acquire or retain a position.
The advantage of having a government that knows that it and it alone
will be fully accountable cannot be overestimated in a democracy.
Whatever justification some may have found for the denial of self-
government has been stripped away by the growing fiscal health of the
District government and its prudence in management of its finances and
operations. Beyond securing more revenue, city officials have already
shown that they know what to do with it. Their decision to use surplus
revenues to pay down the city's accumulated deficit demonstrates they
can and will make tough financial choices. In the face of the
sacrifices that District residents have made and the unanticipated
surpluses that have been produced, there is no justification for
delaying a return to coherent and fully accountable self-government.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill crucial to the continued
revitalization of the nation's capital.
Mr. Speaker, continuing my reservation of objection, I yield to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) for a brief statement.

[[Page H528]]

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, this is the culmination really of
years of determination and dedication on the part of the delegate and
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) and of the
chairman of the D.C. authorizing committee, the gentleman from Virginia
(Mr. Davis).
This is in no way critical of the D.C. Financial Control Board, but
it is the culmination of a vision. It had to start with fiscal
responsibility. It had to be bolstered by economic opportunity. But it
also had to include responsible stewardship.
We have that responsible stewardship, that leadership, in Mayor
Williams. This is a reflection of the fact that those who have worked
tirelessly for the District of Columbia truly believe in democracy,
truly believe that the citizens of the District of Columbia are capable
of governing themselves.
This gives them that opportunity, and if in the future we hope to
hold the D.C. government responsible for its actions, we can only do
that by giving them the authority to make those decisions. You cannot
have one without the other. You cannot hold them responsible without
giving them the authority to make decisions on their own. This gives
them that authority.
This is the least we can do for the District of Columbia, and, again,
this is what it was all about. It happened a lot sooner than many
people expected, but I know that it is what the gentlewoman from the
District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) had every confidence would occur, as
did the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis).
I want to particularly thank them. As I started my remarks thanking
them, I conclude my remarks by thanking them and I thank those who have
worked along with them to ensure that the District of Columbia will one
day be the jewel of our democracy, the true capital city of our great
Nation.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the bill, as follows:

H.R. 433

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 ``District of Columbia
Management Restoration Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds as follows:
(1) Among the major problems of the District of Columbia
government has been the failure to clearly delineate
accountability.
(2) The statute establishing the District of Columbia
Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority
proved necessary to enable the District to regain financial
stability and management control.
(3) The District has performed significantly better than
the Congress had anticipated at the time of the passage of
the Authority statute.
(4) The necessity for a financial authority has resulted in
a diffusion of responsibility between the Mayor, the Council,
and the Authority pending the time when the District
government would assume the home rule status quo ante.
(5) This lack of clear lines of reporting authority, in
turn, has led to some redundancy and confusion about
accountability and authority.
(6) The Authority statute requires the Authority to
``ensure the most efficient and effective delivery of
services, including public safety services, by the District
government'' and to ``assist the District government in . . .
ensuring the appropriate and efficient delivery of
services''.
(7) With the coming of a new administration led by Mayor
Anthony Williams, the Authority has taken the first step to
ensure the accountability that will be necessary at the
expiration of the control period by delegating day-to-day
operations over city agencies previously under control of the
Authority to the Mayor.
(8) The Congress agrees that the best way to ensure clear
and unambiguous authority and full accountability is for the
Mayor to have full authority over city agencies so that
citizens, the Authority, and the Congress can ascertain
responsibility.
(9) The transition of authority to the new administration
will take nothing from the Authority's power to intervene
during a control period.

SEC. 3. RESTORATION OF MANAGEMENT AND PERSONNEL AUTHORITY OF
MAYOR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

(a) In General.--Subtitle B of title XI of the Balanced
Budget Act of 1997 (DC Code, sec. 47-395.1 et seq.) is
repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1604(f)(2)(B) of the
Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-34; 111 Stat.
1099) is repealed.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read
the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.

____________________