[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.
____________________