[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 68 (Thursday, May 8, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H3822-H3827]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       PROVIDING EXPENSES OF CERTAIN COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE OF 
                   REPRESENTATIVES IN 108TH CONGRESS

  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of today, I 
call up the resolution (H. Res. 148) providing for the expenses of 
certain committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred 
Eighth Congress, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Culberson). Pursuant to the order of the 
House today, the resolution is considered read for amendment.
  The text of House Resolution 148 is as follows:

                              H. Res. 148

       Resolved, 

     SECTION 1. COMMITTEE EXPENSES FOR THE ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH 
                   CONGRESS.

       (a) In General.--With respect to the One Hundred Eighth 
     Congress, there shall be paid out of the applicable accounts 
     of the House of Representatives, in accordance with this 
     primary expense resolution, not more than the amount 
     specified in subsection (b) for the expenses (including the 
     expenses of all staff salaries) of each committee named in 
     subsection.
       (b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts 
     referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, 
     $10,623,640; Committee on Armed Services, $12,377,680; 
     Committee on the Budget, $11,869,572; Committee on Education 
     and the Workforce, $14,922,183; Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, $19,117,623; Committee on Financial Services, 
     $16,995,487; Committee on Government Reform, $20,400,000; 
     Committee on Homeland Security, $11,028,787; Committee on 
     House Administration, $10,374,974; Permanent Select Committee 
     on Intelligence, $7,809,730; Committee on International 
     Relations, $16,037,995; Committee on the Judiciary, 
     $17,248,067; Committee on Resources, $14,910,527; Committee 
     on Rules, $5,669,311; Committee on Science, $12,301,690; 
     Committee on Small Business, $6,372,008; Committee on 
     Standards of Official Conduct, $3,443,150; Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure, $17,682,505; Committee on 
     Veterans' Affairs, $6,776,617; and Committee on Ways and 
     Means, $16,521,319.

     SEC. 2. FIRST SESSION LIMITATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Of the amount provided for in section 1 
     for each committee named in subsection (b), not more than the 
     amount specified in such subsection shall be available for 
     expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
     January 3, 2003, and ending immediately before noon on 
     January 3, 2004.
       (b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts 
     referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, 
     $5,292,225; Committee on Armed Services, $5,943,675; 
     Committee on the Budget, $5,894,018; Committee on Education 
     and the Workforce, $7,398,237; Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, $9,385,902; Committee on Financial Services, 
     $8,144,280; Committee on Government Reform, $10,000,000; 
     Committee on Homeland Security, $5,657,656; Committee on 
     House Administration, $5,028,573; Permanent Select Committee 
     on Intelligence, $3,773,567; Committee on International 
     Relations, $7,693,249; Committee on the Judiciary, 
     $8,422,720; Committee on Resources, $7,360,564; Committee on 
     Rules, $2,816,332; Committee on Science, $6,072,465; 
     Committee on Small Business, $3,080,591; Committee on 
     Standards of Official Conduct, $1,636,825; Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure, $8,722,428; Committee on 
     Veterans' Affairs, $3,225,344; and Committee on Ways and 
     Means, $8,063,151.

     SEC. 3. SECOND SESSION LIMITATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Of the amount provided for in section 1 
     for each committee named in subsection (b), not more than the 
     amount specified in such subsection shall be available for 
     expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
     January 3, 2004, and ending immediately before noon on 
     January 3, 2005.
       (b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts 
     referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, 
     $5,331,415; Committee on Armed Services, $6,434,005; 
     Committee on the Budget, $5,975,554; Committee on Education 
     and the Workforce, $7,523,946; Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, $9,731,721; Committee on Financial Services, 
     $8,851,207; Committee on Government Reform, $10,400,000; 
     Committee on Homeland Security, $5,371,131; Committee on 
     House Administration, $5,346,401; Permanent Select Committee 
     on Intelligence, $4,036,163; Committee on International 
     Relations, $8,344,746; Committee on the Judiciary, 
     $8,825,346; Committee on Resources, $7,549,963; Committee on 
     Rules, $2,852,979; Committee on Science, $6,229,225; 
     Committee on Small Business, $3,291,417; Committee on 
     Standards of Official Conduct, $1,806,325; Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure, $8,960,077; Committee on 
     Veterans' Affairs, $3,551,273; and Committee on Ways and 
     Means, $8,458,168.

     SEC. 4. VOUCHERS.

        Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers 
     authorized by the committee involved, signed by the chairman 
     of such committee, and approved in the manner directed by the 
     Committee on House Administration.

     SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.

        Amounts made available under this resolution shall be 
     expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the 
     Committee on House Administration.

     SEC. 6. ADJUSTMENT AUTHORITY.

        The Committee on House Administration shall have authority 
     to make adjustments in amounts under section 1, if necessary 
     to comply with an order of the President issued under section 
     254 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act 
     of 1985 or to conform to any reduction in appropriations for 
     the purposes of such section 1.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment printed in the resolution, 
modified by the amendment reported by the Clerk in conjunction with 
that previous order, is adopted.
  The text of House Resolution 148, as amended, is as follows:

       Resolved, 

[[Page H3823]]

     SECTION 1. COMMITTEE EXPENSES FOR THE ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH 
                   CONGRESS.

       (a) In General.--With respect to the One Hundred Eighth 
     Congress, there shall be paid out of the applicable accounts 
     of the House of Representatives, in accordance with this 
     primary expense resolution, not more than the amount 
     specified in subsection (b) for the expenses (including the 
     expenses of all staff salaries) of each committee named in 
     such subsection.
       (b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts 
     referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, 
     $10,327,531; Committee on Armed Services, $11,931,357; 
     Committee on the Budget, $11,869,572; Committee on Education 
     and the Workforce, $14,673,371; Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, $18,622,138; Committee on Financial Services, 
     $13,696,487; Committee on Government Reform, $19,614,435; 
     Committee on House Administration, $8,527,057; Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence, $7,809,730; Committee on 
     International Relations, $14,552,695; Committee on the 
     Judiciary, $14,048,616; Committee on Resources, $13,509,424; 
     Committee on Rules, $5,669,311; Committee on Science, 
     $11,690,845; Committee on Small Business, $5,120,301; 
     Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, $3,071,250; 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, $16,461,893; 
     Committee on Veterans' Affairs, $5,486,795; and Committee on 
     Ways and Means, $15,976,288.

     SEC. 2. FIRST SESSION LIMITATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Of the amount provided for in section 1 
     for each committee named in subsection (b), not more than the 
     amount specified in such subsection shall be available for 
     expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
     January 3, 2003, and ending immediately before noon on 
     January 3, 2004.
       (b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts 
     referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, 
     $5,084,900; Committee on Armed Services, $5,871,876; 
     Committee on the Budget, $5,856,333; Committee on Education 
     and the Workforce, $7,047,896; Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, $9,101,042; Committee on Financial Services, 
     $6,601,085; Committee on Government Reform, $9,740,963; 
     Committee on House Administration, $4,122,092; Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence, $3,780,487; Committee on 
     International Relations, $6,993,645; Committee on the 
     Judiciary, $6,957,554; Committee on Resources, $6,492,029; 
     Committee on Rules, $2,797,898; Committee on Science, 
     $5,711,401; Committee on Small Business, $2,535,261; 
     Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, $1,527,825; 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, $7,982,558; 
     Committee on Veterans' Affairs, $2,703,328; and Committee on 
     Ways and Means, $7,828,037.

     SEC. 3. SECOND SESSION LIMITATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Of the amount provided for in section 1 
     for each committee named in subsection (b), not more than the 
     amount specified in such subsection shall be available for 
     expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
     January 3, 2004, and ending immediately before noon on 
     January 3, 2005.
       (b) Committees and Amounts.--The committees and amounts 
     referred to in subsection (a) are: Committee on Agriculture, 
     $5,242,632; Committee on Armed Services, $6,059,481; 
     Committee on the Budget, $6,013,239; Committee on Education 
     and the Workforce, $7,625,475; Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce, $9,521,097; Committee on Financial Services, 
     $7,095,402; Committee on Government Reform, $9,873,472; 
     Committee on House Administration, $4,404,965; Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence, $4,029,243; Committee on 
     International Relations, $7,559,050; Committee on the 
     Judiciary, $7,091,062; Committee on Resources, $7,017,395; 
     Committee on Rules, $2,871,413; Committee on Science, 
     $5,979,444; Committee on Small Business, $2,585,041; 
     Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, $1,543,425; 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, $8,479,334; 
     Committee on Veterans' Affairs, $2,783,466; and Committee on 
     Ways and Means, $8,148,251.

     SEC. 4. VOUCHERS.

        Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers 
     authorized by the committee involved, signed by the chairman 
     of such committee, and approved in the manner directed by the 
     Committee on House Administration.

     SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.

        Amounts made available under this resolution shall be 
     expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the 
     Committee on House Administration.

     SEC. 6. ADJUSTMENT AUTHORITY.

        The Committee on House Administration shall have authority 
     to make adjustments in amounts under section 1, if necessary 
     to comply with an order of the President issued under section 
     254 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act 
     of 1985 or to conform to any reduction in appropriations for 
     the purposes of such section 1.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney).
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here today to consider H. Res. 148, an omnibus 
funding resolution providing for the expenses of certain committees of 
the United States House of Representatives in the 108th Congress.
  In February of this year, the Chair, myself, and the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Larson), ranking member, reviewed what was presented 
to us by each Chair and ranking member of each committee. They 
presented a budget request to the Committee on House Administration and 
introduced individual resolutions to support their funding requests. 
This resolution, H. Res. 148, the omnibus primary expense resolution, 
combines all of the individual resolutions that came from those 
committees into one bill, excluding the Select Committee on Homeland 
Security.
  I am pleased to put before the House a bipartisan resolution that can 
be supported by a majority of Members on both sides of the aisle. I 
feel that both chairmen and ranking members will agree that this 
carefully crafted agreement will provide sufficient funding for them to 
carry out the duties and responsibilities for which they are charged.
  As we all know, the Select Committee on Homeland Security was created 
at the beginning of this Congress. That committee will provide an 
important oversight function, overseeing the newly created Department 
of Homeland Security and ensuring that the combined agencies are doing 
the job we all expect of them with regards to protecting our homeland 
and its security. However, due to the fact that the Homeland Security 
Budget represents a special situation with regard to this funding 
cycle, we have not included them in this omnibus funding resolution, 
but they will instead be considered separately. During this cycle 
committees requested from the Committee on House Administration a total 
of $252.5 million in spending. This is $49 million more than what was 
authorized in the 107th Congress and represents a 24.1 percent 
requested increase.
  In removing Homeland Security from the equation, the request by 
committees total $241.5 million, which is a $37.9 million increase over 
the 107th authorized levels and an 18.6 percent increase. This 
resolution reduces the amount requested by committees by $18.6 million, 
or a 7.7 percent decrease.
  House Resolution 148, as amended, provides for expenses of all 
committees other than Homeland Security and authorizes $222.8 million, 
a 9.4 percent increase, and that is 9.4 percent over a 2-year period. 
This is a $19.3 million increase over the 107th congressional 
authorized levels.
  It should be noted that the 108th Congress funding level of $222.8 
million in this resolution is still lower than the funding levels in 
the 103rd Congress in both constant and actual dollars. The mark for 
the 103rd Congress was $223.3 million and when adjusted for inflation 
amounts to $284.7 million in 2003 dollars. This means that while 10 
years have lapsed since the beginning of the 103rd Congress, our 
funding levels are just now reaching the levels authorized in that 
Congress on a real dollar business basis because of the drastic costs 
instituted in the 104th Congress. On a constant dollar basis, we are 
significantly under the adjusted amount by approximately $62 million.
  The reason I mention this, Mr. Speaker, is it shows, I think, prudent 
history on the part of the House for the committees to continue to do 
their job. Yet if we look back at the 103rd Congress, we are living I 
think within a very reasonable presented budget. I am proud of the 
numbers we are putting forward with this resolution. As I stated 
earlier, I feel that most, not all, but most Members will be able to 
widely support this measure.
  This resolution also carries forward a goal that we have reached in 
the 107th Congress whereby committees allocated at least one third of 
their resources to the minority. Since the 104th Congress, we have 
strived to reach the goal of dividing committee resources on a two-
thirds/one-third basis between the majority and minority of each 
committee. I am proud to say that committee chairmen have worked with 
their respective ranking members and produced agreements that provide 
for a two-thirds/one-third split of resources. And it is important to 
note that if not for the leadership of Speaker Hastert in cooperation 
with the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), our ranking member, 
this goal absolutely would never have been reached nor would we have 
been able to continue to ensure the fair division of the resources in 
this resolution.
  Also I want to thank both the gentleman from California (Chairman 
Thomas) and the gentleman from

[[Page H3824]]

Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), minority whip, for their work on this issue while 
in their previous assignments in setting this into motion.
  When the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) was the ranking member 
of the committee and I became the Chair 2 years ago, we decided this 
was going to absolutely finally be completed, and we did that. And when 
the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) became our ranking member, 
which we are so happy to have him in that position of leadership, he 
was insistent with the tenacity that I think his ranking members need 
to be aware of to make sure that goal that was attained should be kept 
and would be kept. So this is an argument that went right off the table 
because we completely agree with the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
Larson) that that is the only fair way to do it, and I hope this sets a 
precedent that after we are not in these positions it continues to be 
two-thirds/one-third split always.
  I also want to thank the chairmen of each committee and their ranking 
member on their cooperation with each other on this matter.
  In addition to the funding issues that are part of this process, the 
committee identified two special categories of requests that we feel 
need to be addressed separately from the regular funding process. I 
believe it is important to ensure that we put forth the most accurate 
reflection of the amounts we are providing to committees and those 
numbers should not be distorted and inflated with other special needs.
  Here I refer to requests to upgrade committee hearings rooms and 
requests for disaster recovery equipment. In the 107th Congress, we 
removed hearing room upgrade requests from the normal committee funding 
process, as those costs would have severely distorted the actual 
amounts it cost to run each committee.

                              {time}  1745

  It was also felt that the hearing room served an institutional 
function and, therefore, upgrades should be paid for out of a 
centralized House fund where appropriate.
  Hearing rooms were in desperate need of refurbishing. Most have not 
seen an upgrade in decades. Having removed the upgrades from the 
committee funding process, we were able to make significant progress 
towards bringing our hearing rooms up to 21st century standards. While 
we have not finished all of our main and subcommittee hearing rooms as 
yet, we are well on our way to making the proceedings of committees 
more accessible and user-friendly to the general public.
  In the 104th Congress when the switch was flipped and Thomas became 
online and brought the Congress to the world and the world was able to 
view Congress, we then had to embark on the technological upgrades. I 
mention this because it would be very, very unfair for the first time 
really in our Nation's history to embark on these technical upgrades, 
it would be unrealistic to ask these committees to be able to do their 
function and to pay for this.
  The beauty of this Congress as this continues, and we are going to 
work with our ranking member, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. 
Larson), and all the other members of the committee, the beauty of it 
is if you cannot get to Washington, D.C., you do not have to be shut 
out of the process. The public will be able to watch their Congress and 
know what the Congress is doing; and I think this is a very, very 
laudable, good goal that we have to, again, encourage the upgrades to 
continue.
  On a different, but related, note, the 108th Congress has seen a 
substantial, but understandable, amount of requests from committees 
with regard to disaster recovery equipment directly related to the 
events of September 11 and the subsequent biological attacks directed 
at this Capitol complex with the anthrax brought into our complex.
  Like the hearing room upgrades, the protection of committee data was 
thought to serve an institutional function. Therefore, the cost of 
providing the mechanism that gives committees an alternative off-site 
storage site for data in the event of a catastrophic event should be 
borne by the House, and, again, not by committees individually.
  Further, providing an enterprise solution for off-site data storage 
ensures that a common standard will be applied for the equipment 
purchased and used to provide back-up storage for committee data. The 
committee will continue to work with the proper entities in the House 
and consult with other committees to ensure that a secure, standard 
enterprise system is instituted that will satisfy the needs of 
committees.
  In conclusion, I again would like to thank from my end of it the 
Speaker for his leadership, and also the Democratic leader, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi). I would like to thank the 
ranking member, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), for his 
efforts in working with the ranking members and with the majority in 
order to assist us in fashioning an agreeable bipartisan resolution 
that could be supported by minority Members on the floor and majority 
Members. I appreciate the patience and cooperation, and I will stress 
patience, that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) has shown. 
Without that, we would not be here today on the floor with this 
resolution.
  Thanks also should go out to the chairmen of the committees and the 
ranking members who submitted, for the most part, very fair and 
reasonable budget requests.
  I would also like to thank the staff of the majority and minority on 
the committee, both sides, who have worked diligently to make sure this 
institution can continue and can service the constituents across this 
Nation, as the committees do and should.
  I also want to note in closing that there has been a spirit on this 
committee, and it has been noted in the media, a spirit in this 
committee that was in the last Congress and has continued with the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) and also the minority members 
being able to express their view, push their point of view, and fight 
the good fight for what they believe in and for us to be able to also 
weigh in on the opinions. But at the end of the day, we realized that 
working together for the good of the committees and this institution is 
something that is working for the people of the Nation.
  So I am very proud of the committee members, and I am very proud of 
our ranking member, his integrity and diligence, due diligence, for not 
only the ranking members, but for the good of the whole of the 
committees.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that Members support this carefully crafted 
bipartisan resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me begin by expressing my support for House 
Resolution 148, which provides an overall average of a 9.4 percent 
increase in funding for the 19 committees under the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on House Administration; and I want to thank, again, the 
chairman of this committee for his outstanding work and effort. This 
is, after all, an extraordinarily important action that we are taking 
today. This funds the work of our committees, so in essence it funds 
the work of the people of this country.
  The process through which this resolution was developed and the 
majority's commitment to ensuring equitable treatment for the minority 
indicates the healthy respect for the work of this institution and the 
vital contributions that both sides of the aisle make in enacting and 
overseeing public policy.
  The committee chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), and his 
staff must be commended for their commitment to equity and 
bipartisanship.
  I also want to express my gratitude to my leader, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Pelosi), and her staff. Her leadership was 
critical to the progression towards fairness in the allocation of 
committee resources between the majority and the minority. As any 
outstanding leader would, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) 
early on chose to focus on the legitimate institutional needs of the 
House committee system. I thank her for that; and I thank her for her 
vision, her clarity, and her focus on the continued need for diversity 
in our committees, technological enhancement, and an

[[Page H3825]]

outreach to Members, so that they are able to perform their tasks to 
their utmost ability. She reached out to the gentleman from Illinois 
(Speaker Hastert) and to his staff to make sure that the committee 
funding for the House of Representatives did not get caught up in the 
same partisan bickering that previous Congresses had.
  Without question, her leadership and decision to put politics aside 
has made my job much easier. I commend the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Pelosi) and the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) for 
working in conjunction to aid and abet the cause of this great 
institution of ours.
  Mr. Speaker, I think all of our colleagues will agree that the 
proposed 9.4 percent increase in committee funding from the 107th 
Congress level is fiscally responsible and in fact quite thrifty, 
especially when three factors are considered: the committee workload, 
the committee staff compensation, and the mission-critical 
technological upgrades that the chairman so adequately addressed in his 
remarks.
  Let me say as a person who is enjoying the experience of serving on 
this committee for the first time, we had the chairmen come before us 
and enunciate their specific concerns about the workload that they now 
possess, their desire to reach out beyond the Beltway, their specific 
concern as it relates to events that have transpired since September 
11, and the new kind of pressure that so many of our committees find 
themselves under with expanding jurisdictions and issues that 
heretofore were not part of the day-to-day business of this 
institution. The Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Veterans 
Affairs, and the Committee on International Relations all were 
particularly impacted in this past legislative session, so I am pleased 
that we were able to provide adequate funding for those specific 
committees.
  Congress will confront many issues, including the heightened policing 
needed for the Nation's accounting, financial and pension systems, 
which will impose new demands on the Committee on Ways and Means, the 
Committee on Financial Services, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce, as well the 
investigation of the Space Shuttle Columbia tragedy, all important 
issues that fall squarely on the shoulders of our various committees 
impacted by this decision.
  As to the committee staff itself, again I want to thank the various 
Chairs who came before our committee, to a person all concerned that 
there be equity. Since COLAs are already in place for the United States 
Senate and the executive branch, it is increasingly important that 
staffers who work for our House committees get the same kind of just 
reward and equity they richly deserve. They carry out the great work of 
our various committees here. The work this institution's committee 
staffs conduct on behalf of the American people is no less important 
than the work conducted by their peers in the Senate and the executive 
branch, and their monthly paychecks must reflect that.
  Again, I thank the chairmen of the various committees who came 
forward and made that one of their top concerns as well.
  As the chairman has pointed out, mission-critical technology upgrades 
equally are important as we continue to reach out to our constituents 
to make sure that they receive the most up-to-date data in a timely 
fashion. This can be a costly, but essential, activity; and we expect 
that a separate vehicle will be used to meet some of the essential 
institutional needs, but many technological needs cannot wait for later 
action. Again, I appreciate the great efforts that were put forward in 
the committee.
  Most of all, I would like to focus on the great equity that this 
chairman has brought to the committee. I am a new ranking member to 
this committee, but I am well aware of its past history. The gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) reminded me in subcommittee that it was not 
always the practice of the Democratic majority to provide the same kind 
of equity that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) has pursued and the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) along with him in the previous 
session, and I am proud to join in this session. Repeatedly and with 
the support of the Democratic leader, the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Pelosi), and the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert), the 
issue of two-thirds/one-third funding has been uppermost in my concern 
and those of the Members of the minority, and also the way that those 
dollars are handled equitably within the committee process.
  The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) has continually stepped forward, 
not only in words, but in deeds, to insist upon that kind of equity 
within our committees, and I thank him for that. It has been especially 
important to our Committee on Small Business. The gentlewoman from New 
York (Ms. Velazquez) has made this issue important, and I thank the 
chairman for stepping forward and aiding and abetting her cause and the 
concerns of that committee.
  Lastly, I would like to conclude by saying that I do think that it is 
important that when you are working in a bipartisan nature like this 
that you have an esprit de corps.
  I want to thank my members of the minority on our committee, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) and the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Millender-McDonald), who have submitted remarks for the Record. 
Both bring great value to this committee process, and especially in 
carrying out the mission of our leader, the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Pelosi).
  Mr. Speaker, let me begin by expressing my support for House 
Resolution 148, which provides for an overall average 9.4 percent 
increase in funding for the 19 committees under the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on House Administration from the level set in the 107th 
Congress.
  The process through which this resolution was developed, and the 
Majority's commitment to ensuring equitable treatment for the Minority, 
indicate a healthy respect for the work of this institution and the 
vital contributions that both sides of the aisle make in enacting and 
overseeing public policy. The Committee Chairman, Rep. Bob Ney, and his 
staff must be commended for their commitment to comity and 
bipartisanship.
  I also want to express my gratitude to my Leader, Nancy Pelosi, and 
her staff. Her leadership was critical to the progress toward fairness 
in the allocation of committee resources between the Majority and 
Minority which this resolution represents. As any outstanding leader 
would, Leader Pelosi early-on chose to focus on the legitimate 
institutional needs of the House committee system. She reached out to 
Speaker Hastert and his staff to make sure that the committee funding 
work of House Administration did not get caught up in the same partisan 
bickering that had plagued committee funding in previous Congresses. 
Without question, her leadership and decision to put politics aside 
made my job much, much easier. I commend Leader Pelosi and Speaker 
Hastert.
  I think my colleagues will agree that the proposed 9.4 percent 
increase in committee funding from the 107th Congress level is a 
fiscally-responsible and in fact quite thrifty, especially when three 
key factors are considered: Factor #1: Increased committee workload: 
September 11, 2001 cast into sharp focus the need for the U.S. House of 
Representatives to examine the gaps and deficiencies in this nation's 
military and security apparatus. While I expect the new House Select 
Committee on Homeland Security to lead the charge in this area in the 
108th Congress, virtually no House committee has been spared 
responsibilities because the issue of security extends to the 
jurisdiction of virtually every House committee. In addition, the 
recent military action in Iraq, combined with the immense diplomatic 
and reconstruction challenges associated with its successful 
resolution, will impose new oversight and legislative demands on 
several House committees, particularly the Committees on Armed 
Services, Veterans Affairs, and International Relations.
  Other significant committee duties that were never contemplated at 
the beginning of the 107th Congress but will confront the committee 
system in 108th Congress include heightened policing of the nation's 
accounting, financial, and pension systems, which will impose new 
demands on the Committees on Ways & Means, Financial Services, 
Education & the Workforce, and Energy & Commerce, and investigating the 
Space Shuttle Columbia tragedy, a critical mission that will fall 
largely to the Science Committee.
  Factor #2 Committee staff compensation/cost-of-living adjustments. I 
was greatly encouraged that virtually all the committee chairs sought 
cost-of-living adjustments for their committee staff personnel on par 
with COLAs already in place in the U.S. Senate, the Executive Branch, 
House MRA's and House support offices like the Chief Administrative 
Office. If House committees are to attract and retain the

[[Page H3826]]

best and brightest staffers the market has to offer, committees must 
properly compensate them. The work this institution's committee staff 
conduct on behalf of the American people is no less important than the 
work conducted by their peers in the Senate and Executive Branch. Their 
monthly paychecks must reflect that.
  Factor #3 Mission-critical technology upgrades: Virtually every 
committee chairman and his ranking Minority member told us that they 
confront the immediate need of implementing disaster-recovery programs 
in the event that their committee is unable to conduct regular business 
in its House office space. Central to meeting this need is developing 
off-campus computer systems to store mission-critical data--a costly 
but essential activity. We expect that a separate vehicle will be used 
to meet this essential institutional need. But many technology needs 
cannot wait for later action.
  I am pleased to report that in most instances, the 9.4 percent 
increase accounts for cost-of-living increases since the 107th funding 
resolution.
  Managed properly by committee chairmen and their ranking minority 
members, I am confident that the proposed average 9.4 percent increase 
will provide most House committees adequate resources over the next two 
years to match the 4.1 percent pay increase that President Bush has 
provided to federal employees in the Executive Branch under the Federal 
Pay Comparability Act of 1990, a decision that the U.S. Senate quickly 
followed with respect to its committee staff compensation policies and 
that House Committees would be wise to follow.
  It is my view that the proposed 9.4 percent increase is modest. One 
question is whether the proposed 9.4 percent increase is enough to 
permit the Chairmen and their ranking minority members to carry out the 
ambitious agendas they described to the Committee of House 
Administration in March, perform crucial oversight and legislative 
responsibilities as they relate to the post-September 11 environment, 
and respond to exigencies that no amount of planning can predict.
  Mitigating my concern about the adequacy of the proposed 9.4 percent 
increase is the Majority's oft-repeated commitment to the ``\2/3\-\1/3\ 
principle.''
  This common-sense principle will provide ranking minority members and 
the Minority committee staffs a minimum of \1/3\ of the total funds, 
\1/3\ of the total staff positions, and the discretion to expend those 
funds within appropriate administrative guidelines, with no unusual 
constraints on the Minority.
  Because the principle sets only a floor, not a ceiling, committee 
chairmen can always grant additional spending and hiring authority to 
their ranking minority members. It is my fervent hope that chairmen 
will be favorably disposed to grant such authority as circumstances may 
require.
  Were this a previous era in committee funding, I would be concerned 
that in cases where committee resources are just enough to cover basic 
committee needs, chairmen might be inclined to deprive the Minority of 
\1/3\ of the resources. Fortunately, it is not a previous era. In two 
days of committee funding hearings in March, I specifically asked each 
chairman if he intended to honor this important principle in the 108th 
Congress. The answer, to my satisfaction, was ``yes.''
  In the spirit of ``trust but verify,'' I will monitor closely the 
distribution of resources to the ranking minority members of each 
committee during the 108th Congress. I expect no problems, however. 
Practiced faithfully, \1/3\-\2/3\ principle will help ensure that the 
House committee operate in as non-partisan a manner as possible. The 
American people deserve nothing less.
  I thank the distinguished Chairman for bringing House Resolution 148 
to the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not have additional speakers; but I do want to say 
one thing, too, in closing from my end of it. I thanked our Speaker, 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), but I also want to thank 
Scott Palmer and Ted Van Der Meid of the Speaker's staff, who have 
helped us throughout this process. I think it is important to recognize 
them.
  Mr. Speaker, I again stress that we have tremendous committees that 
have important obligations, and that is why this budget is important 
for our Members to support.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss as well if I did not thank my staff 
personally for the hard work that they have put forward in putting 
these deliberations together. I would also like to acknowledge Bill 
Cable, who was a valued member of this staff who is moving on, as well, 
and who we had a small party for today. His help in assisting George 
Shevlin was invaluable.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  One thing I wanted to express, I do appreciate, and the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) is here, but I do appreciate that the 
gentleman from Maryland and the gentleman from Connecticut both 
indicated if, in fact, the body would change here in the numbers of who 
controls the Chamber they in fact will keep this ratio. I just want to 
add though in all sincerity on behalf of the majority, let us not put 
that to the test.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. NEY. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I felt compelled to come to the floor because 
I wanted to thank the gentlemen for the very kind comments that they 
had to say about my working on the Committee on House Administration. I 
know the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), the 
former President of the Connecticut Senate, and I both had that honor 
having been selected by our colleagues to head our State Senates. He is 
more than a worthy successor and I am very proud of the work that he is 
doing on this committee and I want to congratulate him.
  The Committee on House Administration is uniquely an institutional 
committee that tries to provide the resources to Members, to staff so 
that we can serve our constituents better and so that staff will have 
an environment and the ability to serve well. I congratulate the 
gentleman from Connecticut for his work.
  I know that the gentleman from Connecticut, like myself, has found 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), the chairman of the Committee on 
House Administration, to be an extraordinarily positive leader in this 
House and one who wants to do things and do things right and does not 
care about the politics, does not care about partisanship, is 
extraordinarily easy to work with, and I want to again say how much I 
enjoyed working with him.
  If there is one downside to my ``promotion'' to the position of 
Democratic whip, it was that I left the Committee on House 
Administration on which I had served for I think approximately 14 
years. And serving with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), when I look 
back on the congressional career, whenever it ends, I want the 
gentleman to know when I look back on my career, one of the highlights 
will be the opportunity to serve with the gentleman from Ohio, to serve 
this institution and, indeed, in the cosponsorship of the Help America 
Vote Act, to serve our country as well.
  I thank the gentleman for his kind words but, more than that, I want 
to thank him for his service to this institution and to this country. 
He does a great job. I know that the gentleman will enjoy and is 
enjoying working with the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), who 
is also, like the gentleman from Ohio and like me, committed to making 
sure that we operate in a way that will bring credit not to 
Republicans, not to Democrats, but to the House of Representatives and 
facilitate the work on behalf of the American people. I thank the 
gentleman from Ohio for his kind words and I thank the gentleman from 
Connecticut as well.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to thank the 
gentleman. Prior to his arrival I had praised the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the minority whip, but I also want to mention 
something, and I have said this a lot of times. We have a homeland 
security bill coming up. It was a pleasure having the relationship with 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) on that committee and members 
on that side of the aisle making the institution work. But during 9/11, 
when we had very, very tough decisions to make in this body that 
involved the Speaker's Office and at that time Leader Gephardt, and the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and myself and members of that 
committee, there was not one single time

[[Page H3827]]

that the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) ever, ever injected one 
ounce of politics in tough decisions which an individual could have 
done, and he never did it, and neither did the members of that 
committee on either side of the aisle. They hung together with what I 
call our Capitol family. We appreciate that. I will never forget it. We 
also hated to lose the gentleman, but we like the gentleman from 
Connecticut, too.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I would just like to add that in the presence of a great leader like 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and, as he indicated, also a 
former President of the Maryland legislative Senate, what an 
outstanding job that he has done in this committee. It is always great 
when one is able to stand on the shoulders of those who came before 
you, and the work that he has done for this committee has set a very 
important and exemplary example of how we should conduct ourselves here 
on the floor and in the committee. On behalf of all of those committee 
members and the committee staff who especially appreciate the 
gentleman's commitment to the one-third/two-thirds ratio, we extend our 
great thanks, love and devotion. In a word, the gentleman is a class 
act, as is the chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), and as we 
continue this love fest here on the floor of the House of 
Representatives.
  Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers on our side, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, Chairman Ney and Ranking Member 
Larson, I am pleased to offer my support today in favor of H. Res. 148 
to fund committees of the House of Representatives during the 108th 
Congress.
  As the Committee on House Administration moves forward with its 
mission of overseeing the functions of the House, I want to make sure 
that as opportunities arise for companies to do business with the 
House, African American, Women and other minority-owned firms are 
included in the awarding of contracts. With the construction of the 
Visitors Center offering up to $100 million in contracts for Sequence 
1, and $125 million in contracts to be awarded for Sequence 2, it is 
imperative that African American, Women and minority owned businesses 
have as much opportunity to submit and win bids as do majority-owned 
firms. Along these lines, I sent a letter to the Architect of the 
Capitol Alan Hantman on April 16 stating my interest in being informed 
regarding the status of the House's outreach efforts to include 
eligible women and minority-owned firms in ongoing construction 
projects.
  As of 2001, we know that according to the Small Business 
Administration, 259,143 contracts totaling $15.6 billion were awarded 
to small disadvantaged firms nationwide. Overall, small disadvantaged 
businesses won 7.12 percent of contracts awarded across the country in 
2001 according to the Congressional Research Service. Given this 
information, we must do all we can to ensure that minority-owned firms, 
which frequently come under the heading of small disadvantaged 
businesses are able to bid on and win contracts awarded by the House. I 
have a keen interest in this matter, given that my home State of 
California is one of four states across the country accounting for 35 
percent of all businesses owned by African Americans as documented by 
the U.S. Census Bureau. Right here, the District of Columbia is home to 
the nation's highest percentage of African American-owned firms at 24 
percent, yet only 2.5 percent of the District's business receipts come 
from these companies as reported by the U.S. Census. Further, the State 
of Maryland ranks second with 12 percent of the country's African 
American-owned businesses which generate 1.4 percent of Maryland's 
business tax receipts. It is clear from these numbers that as Members 
of the House, we can do more to assure African American, Women and 
other minority-owned firms greater access to contracts under our 
jurisdiction.
  I wholeheartedly support the bipartisan nature of the funding 
resolution put forth by this committee, and I applaud the Chairman and 
Ranking Member as they continue to make efforts to make contracting 
opportunities controlled by the House more available to minority 
business owners.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Culberson). All time for debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the previous question is 
ordered on the resolution, as amended.
  The resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________