[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 66 (Wednesday, May 24, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4356-S4358]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001--Continued

  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, we come to the time where we have another 
25 minutes before the time comes for voting. I had been expecting the 
Senator from Alaska. He is still tied up in a previous meeting. So we 
will look forward to hearing from him.
  It has been an interesting experience for me to serve as chairman of 
this particular subcommittee on Appropriations. There are those who say 
this subcommittee does not matter very much because its dollar 
allocation is the lowest of all of the subcommittees in the 
Appropriations Committee, with the exception of the District of 
Columbia. I disagree. I think this subcommittee, in fact, can have as 
much impact on the Government as some of the others that have greater 
amounts of money to spend because of its area of jurisdiction.
  I will take a little of the time here to express my gratitude for the 
opportunity of chairing this subcommittee and for those with whom we 
work. The subcommittee deals with the Architect of the Capitol. That is 
a term that most people in the country do not understand. They would 
think of the Architect of the Capitol as the person who sits down and 
draws the lines on paper that produces the building of the Capitol. 
That is what architects do.
  They do not realize that the Architect of the Capitol is charged with 
the responsibility of maintaining the Capitol. In this situation, I 
have been able to go around and meet those people who oversee the 
activities that go on with respect to maintaining our operation. They 
work for the Architect of the Capitol, and they are concerned with such 
things as the air-conditioning, the cleaning, the repairs, the 
restoration of the Brumidi paintings about which the Senator from West 
Virginia spoke.

[[Page S4357]]

  We take it for granted that this beautiful place will always remain 
beautiful. It takes a virtual army of people working behind the scenes 
to see that this is, in fact, the case.
  I have spoken of my business experience. I remember one company where 
I worked where a particular manager was under very heavy pressure from 
top management to show improved results on the bottom line. This 
manager was determined to do that. Pretty soon the reports started 
coming in that the bottom line was getting better and getting better, 
and he basked in the glow of the approval that he got for his tough 
measures and his great turnaround procedures.
  Then the bill came due, and we discovered what he had been doing. He 
had been increasing his bottom line by cutting back on his maintenance 
budget. And all of a sudden the facilities over which he had 
responsibility began to show the deterioration. In that company, we 
ultimately had to pay enormous capital costs to restore the facilities 
to the level they should have been at by virtue of significant day-to-
day maintenance. Yes, he could make the bottom line look better 
temporarily by shutting down the day-to-day maintenance, but, overall, 
he cost us a great deal of money.
  That is the responsibility of the Architect of the Capitol: To see to 
it that, overall, this entire complex works. It is not only the 
Capitol. He has the responsibility for the Senate office buildings and 
the House office buildings.
  We have watched the renovation of the Dirksen Office Building go 
forward under the direction of the Architect of the Capitol. I am happy 
to be able to report that it is on time and under budget. For those who 
say that every Federal program is a boondoggle, this is one that is 
moving forward. As an occupant of a Dirksen Building suite in the 
renovated area, I can tell you that this office space will be good for 
the next 30 or 40 years before it has to be done again. It is being 
done properly, it is being done intelligently, and it is being done 
within the allocated budget.
  Something that I did not know anything about until I became chairman 
of this subcommittee is the Botanic Garden.
  I have all my life driven by the Botanic Gardens without ever going 
in and without ever having any understanding of what went on inside. 
The Architect of the Capitol came to me when I got this assignment and 
said: Let's go down and take a look at the Botanic Gardens. Well, one 
walk through the Botanic Gardens made it clear that there had been a 
lot of delay and neglect of ordinary maintenance. This was a major 
mess.
  Now, under the direction of the Architect of the Capitol, the Botanic 
Gardens are being raised up to the level where they should be. One may 
ask: Who cares about the Botanic Gardens? I asked the somewhat impudent 
question: How many Americans come to the Botanic Gardens? How many see 
this? Well, if it were in a city other than Washington, DC, it would be 
a major tourist attraction. There are literally millions of Americans 
who go through the Botanic Gardens every year. It had been allowed to 
deteriorate and had to be brought up to proper standards.
  I could go on and on about the work of the Architect of the Capitol. 
It is significant work, and it requires a great deal of effort. I am 
delighted to be involved in understanding that.
  I see other Members coming to the floor. I want them to know I am not 
filibustering, but I don't want the time to go just in a quorum call, 
when I have an opportunity to express my gratitude for the assignment 
that I have. If anyone has something they want to say, just give me a 
signal and I will conclude quickly.
  Absent that, I will talk about the Library of Congress. The Library 
of Congress Thomas Jefferson building is one of the hidden jewels, 
architecturally, in this town. I always tell tourists from Utah, when 
they come and visit me in my office, to go see the Jefferson building. 
They say: Well, we are going to go see the major sites. We are going to 
go to the Vietnam War Memorial. We are going to go to the Lincoln 
Memorial and the Jefferson Memorial and the new FDR Memorial, and so 
on. I only have so much time.
  I say: I don't care how limited your time is. If you have any time at 
all, walk down the street and walk into the Jefferson building.
  This is the most beautiful building on Capitol Hill except for the 
Capitol itself. It represents in many ways the story of America.
  My favorite story about the Library of Congress and the building is 
one that is told about Boris Yeltsin, when he walked into the Jefferson 
building. He stood there and looked around, and then turned to his 
guide and said: How did you Americans get a building like this? You 
didn't have any czars?
  Well, maybe we didn't have any czars, but we had the Army Corps of 
Engineers, and we had the American spirit 100 years ago that said 
America has arrived. America is going to take its place as one of the 
major nations of the world. In that spirit of enthusiasm and 
excitement, they built the Jefferson building to house the Library of 
Congress. That building came in under budget and on time. It stands as 
a reminder of the spirit of manifest destiny that we associate with 
Theodore Roosevelt. The building was finished before Theodore Roosevelt 
became President, but it was in that era that it happened. That is a 
reminder that all Americans ought to have as part of their history.
  It has been magnificently restored by the Congress, and by this 
subcommittee. Admittedly, it was restored prior to my being involved 
with the subcommittee, but it is something we in Congress should be 
proud of because it is part of the heritage we leave to our children 
and our grandchildren. They can come to Capitol Hill--yes, the Capitol 
and the continuity of democracy that is represented here--but there is 
also the commitment to knowledge and spreading that knowledge that is 
represented by the largest and finest library in the world. It exists 
to serve the Congress. It is sustained by the Congress. It is part of 
the responsibility of this particular subcommittee.
  I am delighted with the opportunity of serving in this capacity. I 
appreciate the support we have received not only from the full 
committee but from all of the Members of the Senate as well.
  I see my friend from Connecticut is here. I am happy to yield the 
floor.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, if I may, I commend our colleague from Utah 
for the job he and the ranking Democrat, Senator Feinstein of 
California, have done on this bill. I echo his sentiments about the 
role we play as custodians of these buildings.
  I noted earlier that all of us on a daily basis greet students who 
come to the Nation's Capital as part of the graduation programs of 
various schools. I had the wonderful privilege earlier today of meeting 
a group of students from Woodstock, a school in Connecticut, as part of 
their eighth grade graduation.
  It is a violation of the rules of the Senate to identify anybody who 
is in the galleries, and I won't do that. I am not going to identify 
any school groups in the gallery. If you happen to notice somebody 
dressed in green up there, you might notice someone who might come from 
that school along the way. They are very attentive students and 
interested about these buildings. As I explained to them, these are 
their buildings. We are mere custodians of them.
  I associate myself with the remarks of the Senator from Utah and the 
Senator from California. We are doing what we can to see to it that 
they are secure and well cared for so that future generations will be 
able to enjoy them as much as this generation does.
  I thank the Chair and 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. BENNETT. 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 S. 2603, the 
pending legislative branch appropriations bill for fiscal year 2001, as 
reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee.
  I commend the distinguished subcommittee chairman, Senator Bennett, 
and the distinguished ranking member, Senator Feinstein, for bringing a 
balanced bill to the floor. The bill supports ongoing Senate operations 
and those of the congressional support agencies we depend upon, such as 
the

[[Page S4358]]

Congressional Budget Office, the Library of Congress, the Government 
Printing Office, and the General Accounting Office. It also sustains a 
commitment to increased security for the entire Capitol complex and the 
thousands of visitors we receive each day.
  The bill as reported to the Senate provides $1.7 billion in new 
budget authority and $1.45 billion in new outlays for the operations of 
the Senate, joint items, and our related agencies. The House will add 
the funding for its operations to its version of this bill. When 
outlays from prior-year budget authority, funding for House items, and 
other actions are taken into account, the bill totals $2.6 billion in 
both budget authority and outlays for fiscal year 2001.
  The Senate bill is at the subcommittee's 302(b) allocation for budget 
authority, and it is $4 million in outlays below the 302(b) allocation. 
The Senate bill is $54 million in budget authority and $53 million in 
outlays above the FY 2000 level. It is $216 million in budget authority 
and $169 million in outlays below the budget request.
  I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a table displaying the 
Senate Budget Committee scoring of the reported bill be inserted in the 
Record at this point.

S. 2603, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS, 2001--SPENDING COMPARISONS--
                          SENATE-REPORTED BILL
                     [Fiscal Year 2001, $ millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        General
                                        Purpose    Mandatory     Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate-reported bill \1\:
    Budget authority................       2,500          97       2,597
    Outlays.........................       2,498          97       2,595
Senate 302(b) allocation:
    Budget authority................       2,500          97       2,597
    Outlays.........................       2,502          97       2,599
2000 level:
    Budget authority................       2,449          94       2,543
    Outlays.........................       2,448          94       2,542
President's request:
    Budget authority................       2,716          97       2,813
    Outlays.........................       2,667          97       2,764
 
  SENATE-REPORTED BILL COMPARED TO:
 
Senate 302(b) allocation:
    Budget authority................  ..........  ..........  ..........
    Outlays.........................          -4  ..........          -4
2000 level:
    Budget authority................          51           3          54
    Outlays.........................          50           3          53
President's request:
    Budget authority................        -216  ..........        -216
    Outlays.........................        -169  ..........        -169
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes adjustment for House-only items not considered in Senate.
 
Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Totals adjusted for
  consistency with scorekeeping conventions.

                Little Scholars Child Development Center

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague from 
Utah, Senator Bennett, for his excellent work on the FY 2001 
Legislative Branch Appropriations bill and the attention he and his 
staff have paid to my concerns. I would like to engage in a brief 
colloquy with Senator Bennett on one of my priorities, the issue of 
extending health and retirement benefits to employees of the Library of 
Congress' child care center.
  As the Senator knows, providing quality and affordable child care is 
a very important issue to me. I was, therefore, shocked to learn that 
child care workers in the Legislative Branch are not all afforded the 
same benefits. While employees of both the Senate and the House child 
care centers receive Federal health and retirement benefits, employees 
of the Library of Congress' child care center, the Little Scholars 
Child Development Center, do not. I ask Senator Bennett if he agrees 
that employees of all Legislative Branch child care centers should be 
provided benefits in a consistent manner?
  Mr. BENNETT. I thank the Senator from Vermont for bringing this issue 
to my attention. Like him, members of my staff have also had their 
children enrolled in the Little Scholars Center and speak highly of the 
staff and quality of the care there. In this competitive job market, it 
is very important that Legislative Branch child care centers be able to 
attract and retain quality staff. I share the Senator from Vermont's 
goal that health and retirement benefits are extended to employees of 
the Library of Congress' child care center as soon as possible.
  I inform Senator Jeffords that I have received a copy of a memo, 
dated May 24, from Teresa Smith, Director of the Library's Human 
Resource Services, to John D. Webster, Director of the Library's 
Financial Services, committing to working out a fair and equitable 
agreement on the issue of extending benefits to employees of the center 
with the governing board of the child care center. Rest assured, my 
staff and I will be monitoring the Library's progress towards this goal 
with the intent that this issue be resolved before the beginning of the 
next fiscal year.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I thank Senator Bennett for his attention to this 
important matter and am pleased that he shares my belief that the 
Legislative Branch should set an example of high child care standards 
for the rest of the Federal government to follow.
  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
memorandum of which I spoke be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the memorandum was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                               Memorandum


                   library of congress, may 24, 2000.

     To: John D. Webster, Director, Financial Services.
     From: Teresa Smith, Director, Human Resource Services.
     Subject: Little Scholars Child Development Center.
       The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to your 
     request for information regarding the Little Scholars Child 
     Development Center (Center) and to provide preliminary 
     comments regarding the draft legislation that would provide 
     Federal benefits to the Center's staff.
       The Center began operations in 1993 and has an enrollment 
     of 100 children (13 Library of Congress, 29 Senate, 17 House, 
     17 other Federal, 24 public). The Library and the Library of 
     Congress Child Care Association (LCCCA) have entered into a 
     Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to run the Center. The 
     Library and the Architect of the Capitol are responsible for 
     providing facilities and certain administrative support 
     services to the LCCCA. The LCCCA is responsible for hiring 
     the Center's staff and running the program. The Center has a 
     staff of 28 with a payroll of approximately $650,000. The 
     LCCCA pays for current payroll taxes (FICA) and health 
     benefits costs.
       Human Resource Services (HRS) and Office of General Counsel 
     are now working with the LCCCA to update the MOU. We are 
     committed to working out a fair and equitable agreement in a 
     timely manner and are ready to meet with the LCCCA as soon as 
     arrangements can be made.
       HRS believes that the proposed legislation is premature 
     because a number of issues should be discussed prior to 
     submitting any legislation and the MOU update needs to be 
     finalized first. For example, the proposed legislation is 
     based upon the Senate child care model, which operates in a 
     different administrative environment than the Library. The 
     Library uses a contractor to handle benefit accounting and 
     does not have a direct accounting relationship with the 
     Office of Personnel Management. In addition to the estimated 
     increase in the Library's government contributions for LCCCA 
     staff of $130,000, the Library would need to significantly 
     change its administrative operations to handle the 
     legislation which may be avoided with a further evaluation of 
     the alternatives. With more time, HRS and the LCCCA may be 
     able to work out a better model for use at the Center. The 
     Library believes that other changes to the Center's legal 
     authority may be appropriate, which would be accomplished 
     more effectively at the same time as any other proposed 
     changes and after an analysis of the practices of other day 
     care centers.
       In summary, HRS believes that the proposed legislative 
     change is premature and would like to first have the 
     opportunity to work through the MOU issues and then on a 
     joint request for legislative changes.

  Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that no other 
amendments be in order to the bill. I further ask consent that 
following the vote in relation to the Mikulski amendment, the bill be 
advanced to third reading, a vote occur on the question of third 
reading, and following that vote, the bill be placed back on the 
calendar.
  Finally, I ask unanimous consent that the previous agreement be 
modified to allow for those two back-to-back votes to begin at 10:45 on 
Thursday morning, with the same 10 minutes in order prior to the 10:45 
a.m. vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BENNETT. I yield the floor.
  Mr. STEVENS. 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. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.




                          ____________________