[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 111 (Wednesday, July 16, 2014)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1175-E1176]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2015

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. GERALD E. CONNOLLY

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, July 14, 2014

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5016) making 
     appropriations for financial services and general government 
     for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other 
     purposes:


[[Page E1176]]


  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chair, four of the seven appropriations bills 
considered by the House this year have passed with bipartisan support. 
Those votes harken back to the spirit of cooperation that brought an 
end to last year's reckless government shutdown and the subsequent 
Bipartisan Budget Agreement that restored some of the harmful cuts from 
sequestration. Unfortunately, this week's consideration of the 
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act for next 
year diverges sharply from that practice. I have multiple objections 
with the agenda House Republicans are advancing with this bill, and I 
want to highlight a few of them.
  For starters, this bill continues the Majority's assault on the 
mission and personnel of the Internal Revenue Service. The bill, as 
introduced, cuts $340 million from the IRS and comes on heels of $850 
million in cuts over the past four years. Making matters worse, an 
amendment was adopted during debate Monday night that would cut another 
$788 million or 10% from IRS enforcement activities. I remind my 
colleagues that the IRS plays a critical role in helping taxpayers to 
understand and comply with our nation's complex tax code and ensuring 
that those tax laws are enforced fairly.
  Unfortunately both of those activities have suffered in the last few 
years because of these punitive cuts. Basic assistance for taxpayers 
has dropped off sharply because of a reduction in workforce of 8,000 
positions, and training for those that remain has been cut 87% in the 
last four years. As a result, caller wait times have almost doubled and 
the number of unanswered calls has increased by half. It's no wonder 
public frustration has increased. Tax enforcement has also suffered. 
The amount of staff devoted to enforcing our tax laws has been cut by 
15% since 2010. As a result, revenue collected by enforcement actions 
has fallen off by $4 billion during that time.
  Yet, some of my colleagues have shown no shame in criticizing the IRS 
for not maintaining its email files when it is their actions that have 
left the agency stretched so thin. Rather than adequately fund the 
IRS--which generates nearly $6 in revenue for every $1 invested--House 
Republicans have starved the agency, crippling its ability to meet 
demands and leaving $300 billion to $400 billion per year in 
uncollected taxes. That's more than half of the projected deficit of 
$583 billion for this fiscal year.
  In addition to that contradiction, Mr. Chair, I would note that the 
conservative crowd that says, ``the level of government closest to the 
people governs best,'' is poised to overturn a decision by the local 
government right here in the District of Columbia. Twenty-three 
states--nearly 1/3rd of which have Republican governors--and the 
District have decriminalized the limited use of marijuana. In fact, the 
home state of this provision's sponsor is one of those states, but the 
reach of Congressional Republicans under this bill does not allow them 
to interfere with the decision of his home state or that of other 
states. They can, however, restrict the use of funds provided to DC, 
and so we're doing so simply because we can. There is no merit or 
consistency in this action, which is nothing more than a raw power grab 
by House Republicans, who continue to block attempt by the citizens of 
the District of Columbia to exercise local control.
  Finally, Mr. Chair, I take exception to the fact that this bill does 
not sufficiently support the Administration's Information Technology 
Oversight and Reform initiative, known as ITOR. That program is funded 
$11 million below the request of $20 million--a relatively modest 
amount in light of the considerable savings of $2.4 billion this office 
has already achieved in the last four years. Under the direction of the 
U.S. Chief Information Officer, ITOR is leading the Federal 
Government's efforts to improve the effectiveness of digital services 
to provide citizens and businesses with world class user experiences; 
reduce waste in Federal IT acquisitions; and identify savings that can 
be re-programmed to better serve taxpayers and optimize the use of 
scarce agency resources.
  In addition to these important activities, ITOR also supports 
recruiting and training the next generation of talented Federal IT 
personnel, and it supports the Office of Management and Budget's 
coordination of Federal cybersecurity programs. As the recent cyber 
breach at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management highlights, we must 
be vigilant in continuously monitoring Federal IT systems to safeguard 
sensitive information national security information.
  As the Committee notes, ITOR has notched commendable achievements in 
enabling agencies to more efficiently utilize cloud computing and begin 
optimizing and consolidating Federal data centers. Of course, much work 
remains to be done. I appreciate and share the Committee's concern over 
recent Federal IT failures. In recent decades, taxpayers have been 
forced to foot the bill for massive IT program failures that ring up 
staggeringly high costs but exhibit astonishingly poor performance. The 
deplorable rollout of the HealthCare.gov site last year is a symptom of 
a broader disease that ITOR is helping to address--the broken Federal 
IT acquisition process. The annual price tag of this wasteful spending 
on IT programs is estimated to be approximately $20 billion. That 
status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable.
  That is why I joined the Chairman of the Oversight and Government 
Reform Committee to develop a comprehensive, bipartisan, Federal IT 
acquisition reform legislative proposal--commonly referred to as the 
Issa-Connolly bill, or ``FITARA.'' Our bipartisan bill represents the 
most dramatic overhaul of Federal IT procurement policy since the 
seminal Clinger-Cohen Act was enacted nearly two decades ago, and it 
would directly support and complement the mission and aims of ITOR. It 
enhances CIO authorities, empowers CIOs to recruit and retain talented 
IT staff, and accelerates data center optimization and strengthens the 
accountability and transparency of Federal IT programs The Issa-
Connolly bill has now passed the House three times--twice as an 
amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act and once as a 
standalone bill. The Senate recently passed a similar version of the 
bill, and we are working with our Senate colleagues to harmonize the 
differences.
  While I am pleased that a bipartisan consensus is finally forming 
around the urgent need to streamline and strengthen how the Federal 
government acquires and deploys IT, this bill would actually under fund 
in those programs that are proven to save money over the long term.
  Mr. Chair, as I said at the outset, this bill veers sharply from the 
bipartisan model we had been working toward. By attempting to disinvest 
in the IRS, House Republicans are actually disinvesting in our 
taxpayers and undermining our efforts to enforce the law and reduce the 
deficit. They are further eroding the notion of local control by 
continuing to meddle in the local decision making of the District of 
Columbia. And they are making a shortsighted decision to not invest 
more in IT reforms that have proven to save money. For these reasons, I 
urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the bill before us today.

                          ____________________