[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 120 (Tuesday, August 2, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1486-E1487]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 
                                  2011

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, August 1, 2011

  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
H.R. 2480, ``The Administrative Conference of the United States 
Reauthorization Act of 2011,'' which authorizes $2.75 million in 
appropriations to the Administrative Conference of the United States 
for each of the fiscal years from 2012 through 2014. The Administrative 
Conference of the United States (ACUS) is considered both an 
independent agency and a federal advisory committee, and is charged 
with providing guidance to Congress on matters of administrative law. 
The recommendations put forth by the ACUS have resulted in significant 
savings and increases the efficiency of federal agencies.
  As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I have the privilege 
of having worked closely with the Administrative Conference of the 
United States (ACUS) over the years and become familiarized with many 
of their initiatives. ACUS is a federal agency charged with making 
recommendations for the improvement of administrative agencies and 
their procedures, particularly with respect to efficiency and fairness.
  The ACUS was established 50 years ago by President John F. Kennedy 
and became a permanent independent agency in less than 4 years. The 
purpose of the ACUS is to develop recommendations for improving 
procedures by which federal agencies administer regulatory, benefit, 
and other government programs; the ACUS has served as a private-public 
think tank that conducts basic research on how to improve the 
regulatory and legal process. It has broad jurisdiction over 
administrative procedure to study the efficiency, adequacy, and 
fairness of the administrative procedure used by administrative 
agencies in carrying out administrative programs, and make 
recommendations to administrative agencies, collectively or 
individually, and to the President, Congress, or the Judicial 
Conference of the United States.
  Further, the ACUS facilitates the interchange among administrative 
agencies of information potentially useful in improving administrative 
procedure, collects information and statistics from administrative 
agencies and has published extensive reports evaluating and improving 
administrative procedure.
  The members of the ACUS represent both the public and private 
sectors. Individuals from private sector members are generally 
attorneys and scholars selected to ensure broad representation of the 
views of private citizens and utilize diverse experience. Over the 
years its membership spans the ideological spectrum. For example, 
Justice Antonin Scalia, before his appointment to the bench, served as 
the chair of ACUS from 1972 to 1974. Justice Breyer was a member of 
ACUS and actively participated in its activities from 1981 to 1994. In 
the past, both Justices Breyer and Scalia testified in strong support 
of ACUS. According to Justice Breyer, ``The Administrative Conference 
is unique in that it develops its recommendations by bringing together 
at least four important groups of people: top-level agency 
administrators; professional agency staff; private (including ``public 
interest'') practitioners; and academicians. ACUS will typically 
commission a study by an academician . . . who often has the time to 
conduct the study. . . . The professor will spend time with agency 
staff. . . . The professor's draft will be reviewed . . . by private 
practitioners, who bring to it a critically important practical 
perspective. The upshot is likely to be a work-product that draws upon 
many different points of view, that is practically helpful and that 
commends general acceptance.'' (Letter from Justice Stephen Breyer to 
Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Chair, Subcomm. on Administrative Oversight 
and the Courts of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary (Aug. 21, 
1995).
  The ACUS has made many government wide recommendations; among its 
most influential recommendations have been ACUS's proposals 
facilitating judicial review of agency decisions and eliminating 
various technical impediments to such review. They recommended a model 
administrative civil penalty statute that has served as the basis for 
dozens of pieces of legislation. The ACUS has developed and promoted 
procedures implementing the Negotiated Rulemaking Act, which encourages 
consensual resolution in a process that takes into account the needs of 
various affected interests. In addition, ACUS is credited with playing 
a prominent role in improving the nation's legal system by issuing 
recommendations designed ``to eliminate excessive litigation costs and 
long delays.'' For example, Congress, in response to an ACUS 
recommendation, passed the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act in 
1990, which established a framework for agencies to resolve 
administrative litigation through alternative dispute resolution. It 
has been noted that half of the budget of ACUS is devoted to trying to 
find ways to reduce, or eliminate government litigation within and by 
the Government. The ACUS saves tax payers dollars and in a time of 
economic crisis every penny counts.
  The ACUS serves to focus attention on the need for the federal 
government to be made more efficient, less big, and more accountable. 
It was viewed as one of the leading federal proponents of practical 
ways to reduce administrative litigation. In this regard, ACUS actively 
promoted information-technology initiatives, such as developing methods 
by which the public could participate electronically in agency 
rulemaking proceedings to increase public access to government 
information and foster greater openness in government operations.
  We have witnessed a number of successes under the ACUS. The ACUS is a 
vital tool in improving upon a process. There has been a lot of talk on 
the Hill of late about efficiency, streamlining process, and reducing 
costs. The fundamental purpose of the ACUS is to find out how to ensure 
that our government is operating in the most effective manner possible. 
The more efficiently we are able to operate the lower our cost. It has 
been estimated that ACUS saved the federal government and the private 
sector many multiples of its expenditure over the years it was in 
operation. Just one agency alone--the Social Security Administration--
estimated that ACUS's recommendation to change that agency's appeals 
process would result in approximately $85 million in savings. ACUS 
helped federal agencies

[[Page E1487]]

to implement the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990, which 
resulted in savings estimated to be many millions of dollars. The 
President of the American Arbitration Association asserted that ACUS's 
encouragement of ADR saved ``millions of dollars that would otherwise 
be frittered away in litigation costs.''
  Accordingly, the elimination of ACUS in 1995 was described by several 
observers as being ``penny-wise, pound foolish.'' Even after its demise 
in 1995, Congress continued to assign ACUS various responsibilities 
apparently unaware of the Conference's termination. Finally, after a 
15-year hiatus, ACUS was reauthorized and appropriated funding.
  Currently, President Obama nominated Paul R. Verkuil to serve as 
chair of ACUS in November 2009 and he was confirmed by the Senate in 
March 2010. The ACUS formally resumed operations in April 2010.
  Then since its recent Reauthorization the ACUS has started to do what 
it does best figuring out ways to decrease expenses and increase 
efficiency. Current cost-saving projects underway at ACUS include the 
following:
  A study on the use of video hearings in administrative agencies and 
how they can generate ``significant savings;'' a study on rulemaking 
that focuses on the legal and logistical issues presented by 
transitioning from a paper-based system to an electronic system for 
handling rulemaking comments, an examination into how international 
regulatory cooperation could be improved and lead to trade 
harmonization.
  Over the course of its existence, ACUS has promulgated approximately 
200 recommendations to improve the administrative process, many of 
which were implemented, which, in turn, helped save taxpayers many 
millions of dollars. ACUS is an invaluable instrument established by us 
that has resulted in significant improvements to federal administrative 
law.

                          ____________________