[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 23, 2019)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E81]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    INTRODUCTION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 23, 2019

  Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I introduce the District of 
Columbia Paperwork Reduction Act to eliminate the wasteful 
congressional review process for legislation passed by the District of 
Columbia Council and to align longtime congressional practice and the 
law. The congressional review process for D.C. bills is almost entirely 
ignored by Congress, providing it no benefit, but imposes substantial 
costs (in time and money) on the District. Congress has almost always 
used the appropriations process, rather than the disapproval process, 
to block or nullify D.C. bills and entirely abandoned the congressional 
review process as its mechanism for nullifying D.C. bills 24 years ago, 
having only used it three times before then. Yet Congress still 
requires the D.C. Council to use Kafkaesque make-work procedures to 
comply with the abandoned congressional review process established by 
the D.C. Home Rule Act.
  Our bill would eliminate the congressional review process for bills 
passed by the D.C. Council. However, Congress would lose no authority 
it currently exercises because, even upon enactment of this bill, 
Congress would retain its authority under Clause 17 of Section 8 of 
Article I of the U.S. Constitution to amend or overturn any D.C. laws 
at any time.
  The congressional review process (30 days for civil bills and 60 days 
for criminal bills) includes those days when either house of Congress 
is in session, delaying D.C. bills from becoming law, often for many 
months. The delay forces the D.C. Council to pass most bills several 
times, using a cumbersome and complicated process to ensure that the 
operations of this large and rapidly changing city continue 
uninterrupted, avoiding a lapse of a bill before it becomes final. The 
congressional calendar means that a 30-day period usually lasts a 
couple of months and often much longer because of congressional 
recesses. For example, the congressional review period for a bill that 
changed the word ``handicap'' to ``disability'' lasted nine months. The 
Council estimates that 50 to 65 percent of the bills it passes could be 
eliminated if the review process did not exist. To ensure that a bill 
does not lapse, the Council often must pass the same bill in three 
forms: emergency (in effect for 90 days), temporary (in effect for 225 
days) and permanent. Moreover, the Council has to carefully track the 
days the House and Senate are in session for each D.C. bill it passes 
to avoid gaps and to determine when the bills have taken effect. The 
Council estimates that it could save 5,000 employee hours and 160,000 
sheets of paper per two-year Council period if the review process were 
eliminated. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy addressed the issue of 
saving such resources by eliminating the amount of paperwork sent to 
Congress when he proposed a cut in the number of reports that federal 
agencies are required to submit to Congress. Our bill is a perfect 
candidate because it eliminates a paperwork process that repeats itself 
without interruption.
  My bill would do no more than align the Home Rule Act with 
congressional practice over the last 24 years. Of the more than 5,000 
legislative acts transmitted to Congress since the Home Rule Act was 
passed in 1973, only three resolutions disapproving D.C. bills have 
been enacted (in 1979, 1981, and 1991) and two of those mistakenly 
involved federal interests--one in the Height Act and the other in the 
location of chanceries. Placing a congressional hold on more than 5,000 
D.C. bills has not only proven unnecessary, but has imposed costs on 
the D.C. government, residents and businesses. District residents and 
businesses are also placed on hold because they have no certainty when 
D.C. bills, from taxes to regulations, will take effect, making it 
difficult to plan. It is particularly unfair to require the D.C. 
Council to engage in this unnecessary, labor-intensive and costly 
process. My bill would only eliminate the automatic hold placed on D.C. 
bills and the need for the D.C. Council to comply with a process 
initially created for the convenience of Congress, but that is now 
almost never used. This bill would promote efficiency and cost savings 
for Congress, the District and D.C. residents and businesses without 
reducing congressional oversight, and would carry out the policy 
stressed by Congress of eliminating needless paperwork and make-work 
redundancy.
  I urge my colleagues to support this good-government measure.

                          ____________________